British Telecom introduces new surcharge on its bills

NickIrons · 11-02-2007, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by g hall

Zak Zzygote

Quote:

Wrong! An unlawful clause in a contract will be set aside by any judge.

In this country and until the EU decide otherwise law is interpreted by the judge and then becomes the judgement that lawyers reference - not to say it cannot be overuled.
Big problem some judges do give perverse rulings so your assertion that any judge would set it aside is not accurate I would suggest most would be so inclined BUT there is always the odd sod

Judges often make huge ****-ups agreed, but I would tend to
go along with ZZ on this one, if a clause has no basis in law,
then a Court IMHO would have no powers to uphold it, having
said that I'm no solicitor either, be interesting to know exactly
what the nuts and bolts of this really are.

Zak64 · 11-02-2007, 02:28 PM

I have been thinking about this a bit more. An unlawful penalty arises when a party tries to make a profit from the other partys breech of contract. So trying to get this cheque/cash surcharge overturned as a penalty may not work because there has been no breech of contract.

However, to quote from the Telegraph article

Quote:

The changes will affect five million customers. BT will also raise its late payment fees to £7.50.

That would fall as a penalty charge unless BT can prove your late payment really did cost them £7.50. Does it really cost BT £7.50 to send you two or three letters ?

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode