T & C's

Mike27

Purely out of cutiousity,but I read an article today that states that "if the average person were to read all the terms and conditions they sign in just one year,it would take them 76, 8-hour work days."
Given the huge impractibilty of this situation,are T&C's even binding anymore?
Could this be argued as some for of excuse for not abiding by T&C's on the consumer side?
Can't think of a specific example but just in a general sense is this not past the point of ridiculous?

Bepolite

There are arguments T&C aren't binding in certain circumstances. I can't think of any off hand.

Lord Denning has a great passage or two on exclusion clauses.

There is consumer legislation that protects your rights and makes certain terms invalid.

conorh91

There has been a fairly welcome clampdown on small print over the past few years, especially in terms of financial services products, which have the strictest rules on what is not allowed in small print.

And you'll occasionally come across situations where clauses and waivers in small print would be legally redundant, and are perhaps only intended to fob customers off.

I only occasionally read the small print. Same as most people. Partially for the above reasons.

But to answer your question, a prospective contracting party should assume terms and conditions to be binding.

Mike27

Yes I suppose it would be down to the situation ,but it could be interesting if someone actually argued the point in a court for whatever case that expecting someone to read "ALL" T&C's is unreasonable based on studies such as this.
Given that it woild mean having to quit your job and devote 76 days a year to do such.
How would that argument be recieved I wonder ;-)

brian_t

Mike27 wrote: »

Yes I suppose it would be down to the situation ,but it could be interesting if someone actually argued the point in a court for whatever case that expecting someone to read "ALL" T&C's is unreasonable based on studies such as this.
Given that it woild mean having to quit your job and devote 76 days a year to do such.
How would that argument be recieved I wonder ;-)

According to your first post the "76, 8-hour work days." covers the reading of "all the terms and conditions they sign in just one year".

Surely your court case would involve only one set of the T&C's.
How long it takes you to read all the others would be irrelevant.

Manach

I've also heard of the 76 day figure, offhand from a Carnige-Mellon study. My understanding is to give proper consent, then the subject must understand said T&C. Given the rather legalise language these are written in especially when it comes to Computer T&C, and that each time an update happens there is potentially a fresh presentation of said T&C then this might be an issue.

Mike27

brian_t wrote: »

According to your first post the "76, 8-hour work days." covers the reading of "all the terms and conditions they sign in just one year".

Surely your court case would involve only one set of the T&C's.
How long it takes you to read all the others would be irrelevant.

Surely there would be no way to know which T&C's you should read untill you have read them,which is a practical impossiblity for most people.So how could they logically be upheld?

Bepolite

Mike27 wrote: »

Surely there would be no way to know which T&C's you should read untill you have read them,which is a practical impossiblity for most people.So how could they logically be upheld?

Because you're expected to read the terms of a contract before entering into it. If you don't want to read the T&Cs then that's fine, it obviously wasn't that important to you and consumer, plus various other pieces of, legislation prevent you from contracting to a decade or servitude or signing over your house. It only ever becomes an issue where people are told they need to do X (such as give 30 days notice) and they don't want to. If you're that pernickety then read every T&C that's put in front of you. If it's genuinely unfair the regulator will normally take care of it.

It's like anything else, prioritise. Is it necessary to know Argos' T&Cs when on what jurisdiction a claim can be made under in relation to the purchase of a €15.99 toaster? On the other hand should you read, understand, and perhaps get someone else to read over every clause in a finance agreement for a €25,000 car? When it comes to the likes of things in the middle, Sky/UPC/Broadband/Mobile phone contract it's simply a case of judging the impact on your wallet. I of course make the exception in EULAs especially Apple's no one reads those fecking things, many of the clauses are unenforceable anyway, much like some parts of employment contracts.

Thoie

Now I'm wondering if I'm buying/hiring/installing less than everyone else. I do read all T&Cs before signing anything or clicking "I agree". However I don't read them each and every time I return to the same store - for example if I read Amazon's T&Cs already, I don't re-read them every time I buy a book. Though it may work out cheaper - all the contract reading would mean I'd have less time to go through books

I heard once that if a clause in a contract contains something against your rights (say there's a clause in your Apple EULA that allows them to kill you on a whim), then the whole contract is void. Can that be right?

234

Thoie wrote: »

I heard once that if a clause in a contract contains something against your rights (say there's a clause in your Apple EULA that allows them to kill you on a whim), then the whole contract is void. Can that be right?

No, most terms are severable so anything that isn't enforceable doesn't affect the rest of the contract.

my3cents

Another issue here with T&C's is that the T&C's that apply are not all in one document. For example a mobile phone company can have a main document containing its T&C's then there are additional documents that refer to the specific offer that applies when you sign up, conditions for new offers as they occur and a price plan which in itself is part of the T&C's so its not like you can read one document and be done with it.

Mike27

I think this will become more and more of an issue with software,we don't all read T&C's whenever Facebook etc. updates,and there are some serious questions with regard to the use of personal information,and with some software,information on peoples internet usage and even access to files on personal computors.
Allready legislation is falling behind in dealing with this rapidly evolving problem.

Mike27

I think this will become more and more of an issue with software,we don't all read T&C's whenever Facebook etc. updates,and there are some serious questions with regard to the use of personal information,and with some software,information on peoples internet usage and even access to files on personal computors.
Allready legislation is falling behind in dealing with this rapidly evolving problem.

Bepolite

Mike27 wrote: »

I think this will become more and more of an issue with software,we don't all read T&C's whenever Facebook etc. updates,and there are some serious questions with regard to the use of personal information,and with some software,information on peoples internet usage and even access to files on personal computors.
Allready legislation is falling behind in dealing with this rapidly evolving problem.

The complete paranoia that is prevelant in Ireland around personal information isn't reflected throughout Europe. Ireland could legislate for this but I'm not sure we want to p!ss off foriegn companies that come here for our corporation tax; but I digress.