Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

But contact law also strikes down contact provisions all the time.

Generally speaking, contracts between two parties who know what they're doing, with lawyers, are pretty iron-clad.

But TOS with consumers are not. Unreasonable/abusive TOS clauses are struck down quite frequently. Things like consumer protection laws supersede anything in a TOS.

And consumer protection laws are precisely the kind of thing meant to stop companies from playing bait-and-switch with consumers like this.



A lot of these older plans were marketed as no contract plans. That was tmobiles whole thing for a while. No more contracts. Obviously there still is via terms and such but it’s a pretty gray area I’m sure lawyers would be willing to argue in court. They also claimed prices would never go up (on your plan).


"No contract" in the telco world means no minimum length clauses (as opposed to something like a "12 month contract" plan, where you legally agree to stay on the plan for at least one year), it doesn't literally mean there isn't a contract.


Right but in the same way I can end the contract and walk away at any time, I would imagine it's totally kosher for T-Mobile to do the same. It's not like either party is locked in.


Sure, but "end the contract" doesn't mean "upgrade to a higher paying plan without consent".


I mean I can change to a more or less expensive plan by giving the carrier notice, I assume its fair for the carrier to do the same to me no? If you want to guarantee a price plan, sign a term contract.

Feels like customers want to have their cake and eat it: lock the carrier in, but have no obligations of their own.


> I can change to a more or less expensive plan by giving the carrier notice, I assume its fair for the carrier to do the same to me no?

No.

Would you feel the same if the landlord of your month-to-month rental upgraded you to a more expensive house?

Sure they can increase the rent, and you can move somewhere else, but there is baseline a expectation that the house you rented will not change.


> Would you feel the same if the landlord of your month-to-month rental upgraded you to a more expensive house?

I mean, if they renovated my unit or even the common areas, and told me I could stay at a higher rent I'd think that was just fine. It happened to me at least once already, come to think of it.

But yeah, they raised the rent on people without term commitments effective immediately, and anyone on a term contract could keep their old rate until it expired.

Again if you don't like the risk of this changing out from under you, sign a term contract, right?


I'm not saying they raise the rent on your current place (which is perfectly fine), I'm saying they move/upgrade you to a more expensive address that you've never seen before.


I mean we know this but do you think the average consumer knows this? They’re still locking people in two two year plans by use of the whole “free phone” or “upgrade” offers.


Absolutely agree re: abusive TOS clauses. My question is this: if you were on a panel evaluating whether it's more abusive to a) migrate customers to a plan that's $10 more or b) end their service because the vendor no longer offers that service, which would you vote for?

Note that consumer panels will have less ability to force a vendor to set prices or provide specific services, so there will not be the third option of c) force the vendor to continue providing the service at the contracted price.


That's why in Europe abusive and surprising (to an informed party) terms and condiations are invalid. Quite aome legal disputes around those so.


Curious -- how do services raise prices? Is the presumption that a carrier has to give notice, then the user has to opt in or their service automatically terminates?

> in Europe abusive and surprising (to an informed party) terms and condiations

It can't be surprising to any informed party that prices change. Especially right now, it cannot be argued in good faith that a price increase was surprising to anyone.

Does the user have to opt in each time the service changes (for ex if 2G service gets dropped)? Who decides what changes require a user's approval?


In the EU they send a letter informing of price change and give you the right of cancellation except for rate rises in line with the retail price index or inflation which are included in the contract. Truly fixed price contracts are advertised as such, I have one for my broadband, can only be withdrawn by the vendor.


Can you share cases where TOS with consumers was struck down? Thanks very much.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: