There is a high degree of irony casting aspersions against a contract by calling it gibberish while citing specific clauses to back up the accusation (if it wer

There is a high degree of irony casting aspersions against a contract by calling it gibberish while citing specific clauses to back up the accusation (if it were truly gibberish, wouldn't the complaint be 'the contract could mean anything, it's unclear.' Not: 'these 3 clauses are problematic because of ...'. The specific complaints were exceptions taken with very clear aspects of the contract, not vague terms difficult to decipher. If common law still rules English law, vague terms would be interpreted against the drafter. I would guess that the contracts are crystal clear. Better critical terms could be: * one-sided / imbalanced * onerous * too long, too specific, too technical The complaints against the moveroo contract with regard to challenging your independent status are a different issue.