4 ms·
Err, plenty of these agencies have enforced against their customers. They won't end up in court, but binding arbitration. They will make an example of a few pe
by DannyBee 7y ago
Err, plenty of these agencies have enforced against their customers.
They won't end up in court, but binding arbitration.
They will make an example of a few people and the rest will fall in line or run away, as per usual.
They are more likely to enforce against the dog walkers than random customers.
The customers will not care about that enforcement, it will be relatively effective in achieving their goal, etc.
In practice, they will most likely use this clause to prevent organized abuse, etc.
Remember also that you agree upfront to let them charge you.
So it is going to be you who has to try to get the money back.
(You will not likely win a CC dispute here)
- ggm 7y agothe rest will fall in line or run away Not a lawyer, not an economist, but this feels like the law of unintended consequences writ large: Sue your customers and they run away means you have no future customer and your business tanks.
- manfredo 7y agoA customer blocks all charges to their credit card from Wags and cancels their service. Wags issues a fine to a customer. The customer doesn't pay. Wags tries to bring the customer to arbitration. The customer gives no response. What happens then? Wags could use a collections agency, but they'll only get a fraction of that money back. Not to mention arbitration usually costs hundreds of dollars per hour, with usually one hour (or longer) minimum, so I'm dubious they'll even bother going to arbitration.