3 ms·
> a TOS represents informed consent and is somehow a legally binding contract Not necessarily. If you bury surprising stuff like this in the TOS, it's likely n
by gridlockd 7y ago
> a TOS represents informed consent and is somehow a legally binding contract
Not necessarily. If you bury surprising stuff like this in the TOS, it's likely not enforceable. The court knows that nobody reads these endless TOS anyway and would likely rule the clause "unreasonable".
However, it can still work as a means of intimidation. Also, let's imagine Wag actually tried to collect those 1000$, some people may not even fight it.
I think this is a case of "there is no such thing as bad publicity". I don't use Wag, but like most "gig economy" platforms, I would expect it's already thoroughly despised.
- judge2020 7y agoMy understanding is that TOS clauses are only binding when they're things users generally know when they sign up, such as "don't hack our systems", "you dont own our stuff by using it" and other CYA clauses. The only thing I don't think this would work for is binding arbitration, but those are joined by a "this agreement contains a binding arbitration agreement you must read" line at the top of the TOS and is valid under case law.
- jasonjayr 7y agoPeople would fight $1000. If they wanted to hide a surprise fee like that, and hoped folks would let it slide, they should have kept it under $100.