On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 05:11:29PM -0700, Mark C. Ballew wrote: > From what I've seen in the forums, Caker is pretty good about refunds > and going beyond his TOS, but of course, he could always take your money > and run according to #5. Not to mention that there are no backups or
You know, what bothers me about it *isn't* the "take your money and run" issue. One might be able to construe that as a sunk cost. It's that, if there are charges that *shouldn't* be there (e.g. getting charged for two linodes instead of one), you might end up paying up to 9 times as much as the overcharge simply for disputing it--if they chose to enforce the provision. In addition, what if they kept doing it, even after you disputed it? Essentially, they're reserving the right to charge you ad-infinitum, whether it's valid or not, and punishing you if you disagree. I imagine a judge could toss that provision, if it got to court. But then you'd get socked with having to pay their court costs and attorney's fees (see #15), even if you won. Now, I'm not saying they'd actually do these sorts of things. Lord knows it would be terribly bad PR. But is *is* allowed by the TOS. -- Find my Techno-Geek Journal at http://www.codegnome.org/geeklog/ _______________________________________________ RLUG mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.rlug.org/mailman/listinfo/rlug
