3 ms·

In reverse I would expect that the bank would prevail. What I would expect would happen and what I believe to be the correct ruling and how the world should wo

In reverse I would expect that the bank would prevail. What I would expect would happen and what I believe to be the correct ruling and how the world should work in ideal circumstances are all different things, sadly. So just because I think the bank will prevail doesn't mean I think it's the correct ruling or morally right or the kind of world I want to live in. It just means that I don't think a judge would slow banking to a crawl for the sake of rendering the correct judgement on this case.

scotty79 13y ago
> slow banking to a crawl So making them read what they force everybody to read would be cruel? Besides. It has easy fix. Bank should sign the agreement first before sending it to the customer.
- msandford 13y ago
  Look I'm on the side of "the banks are assholes and they deserve to get slammed on this" 100%. But I also know that judges are a part of a big institution (government) and the banks are also big institutions. And historically we've seen that they're in cahoots outright or something close to it. But just because I want them to get slammed, or because they deserve to get slammed, or even that it is legally correct that they get slammed, none of those things means that they actually WILL get slammed. Trust me I want them to get hurt on this one and for it to reform the fine print bullshit and all of that. It would be so awesome if it did happen. But I'm definitely not optimistic that it will happen.
  - thepicard 13y ago
    Well also, a government has a responsibility to act in the best interests of its people. While shafting the banks with a gigantic legal dick would be kind of funny, it could hurt or inconvenience a lot of people. If this works, people all over Russia will likely try stuff like this. Banks will have to check every contract with every customer ridiculously carefully until they can roll out a global solution. While fine print is sub-optimal and irritating, forced mass reform has serious short-term repercussions.
    - mordae 13y ago
      So what? Changing laws all the time also inconveniences people every time government does that. People can adapt.

scotty79 13y ago

> slow banking to a crawl So making them read what they force everybody to read would be cruel? Besides. It has easy fix. Bank should sign the agreement first before sending it to the customer.

msandford 13y ago
Look I'm on the side of "the banks are assholes and they deserve to get slammed on this" 100%. But I also know that judges are a part of a big institution (government) and the banks are also big institutions. And historically we've seen that they're in cahoots outright or something close to it. But just because I want them to get slammed, or because they deserve to get slammed, or even that it is legally correct that they get slammed, none of those things means that they actually WILL get slammed. Trust me I want them to get hurt on this one and for it to reform the fine print bullshit and all of that. It would be so awesome if it did happen. But I'm definitely not optimistic that it will happen.
- thepicard 13y ago
  Well also, a government has a responsibility to act in the best interests of its people. While shafting the banks with a gigantic legal dick would be kind of funny, it could hurt or inconvenience a lot of people. If this works, people all over Russia will likely try stuff like this. Banks will have to check every contract with every customer ridiculously carefully until they can roll out a global solution. While fine print is sub-optimal and irritating, forced mass reform has serious short-term repercussions.
  - mordae 13y ago
    So what? Changing laws all the time also inconveniences people every time government does that. People can adapt.