Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

m.bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 167 posts

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#101

Post by [deleted] »

icebraining wrote: post #75
acabrahams wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Also, the sooner "pull" payments become a rare exception, the better." Credit card charges that are pull-based are generally a bad thing, but not all pull-based payments are bad for consumers. For example, the Direct Debit scheme in the UK requires the consumer to be notified 5 working days before payment is taken, and the consumer has the right to get a refund from the bank without dispute; it is then the bank's jo…

I don't see how is that direct debit system better for consumers than what we have here in Portugal, where the consumer is the one initiating the debit authorization (using a code provided by the merchant).

[deleted]

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#102

Post by rayiner »

binarymax wrote: post #57
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

We live in a culture of liability and a culture of blame. This is a symptom of legal liability running the governments and corporate world. Change the culture and this problem will go away. Not an easy task.

Complaining about a "culture of liability" makes no sense in this context. The legal system doesn't create liability for posting a bad review--it just enforces the voluntary contract you made with someone agreeing to that restriction.

What you're actually asking for is the legal system to intervene and invalidate certain types involuntary agreements. Which I would agree with. What we live in is in fact a culture of excessive insulation from legal liability! 99% of all those "contracts designed not to be read" that the parent poster complains of, those TOS you have to agree to just to use hardware you paid for, those are designed to make you to sign away rights you have under tort law.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#103

Post by moron4hire »

netcan wrote: post #87
moron4hire wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Statements like "we need new laws" are problematic, because they boil down to "we need completely new people". Laws are written by people--specific, finite, real people. If you tossed out every law book today, you would end up with the same laws tomorrow. And that isn't an endictment of congress critters and judges. They are of us, selected by us. To say, "we need a new legislature" is to say "we need completely new…

I disagree, if you tossed out the law books you would get a very different set of laws. Laws have a long tradition inherited over thousands of years. Contracts is one of those traditions. It's a good tradition. It's just taken a bad turn, being applied badly to the wrong kinds of things.

Good point, we would end up with different laws. Probably wholly worse laws. They'd certain pay lip service to concepts of liberty, but there'd be so many disclaimers and emergency provisos that it wouldn't mean anything.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#104

Post by justincormack »

rmc wrote: post #64
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

The EU has the "Unfair Contract Terms Directive", which means contracts which are just presented to you as a consumer are not always valid. It lists things are "unfair" and hence not binding. e.g. enablying the seller to alter the terms. When deciding if a contract term is fair, it must be decided on the side of the consumer. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/consumer-marketing/rights-contra... http://eur-lex.europa.eu/leg…

Businesses on the other hand have few protections, and bullshit contract terms seem fairly common, eg I saw a contract that required 6 months notice in writing or it would auto renew.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#105

Post by coldtea »

mimog wrote: post #37
coldtea wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it was posted and the HN community voted it up. Which is pretty much "community bookmarking site 101".

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

What part of "If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." didn't you understand?

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#106

Post by coldtea »

rmc wrote: post #74
coldtea wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe you'll have to find another hotel That's refusing you service and extortion. The "another hotel" might be 100 miles away, in which case it also costs you money.

This happened in UK. In Europe 100 miles is a long way. There is another country 80 miles away from where this happened, and a different country 111 miles away.

Even something like 20 miles is still an incovenience and can be costly (or even troubling: imagine bad weather conditions outside, etc).

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#107

Post by coldtea »

mimog wrote: post #77
coldtea wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the last time, it's a community bookmark site! Whatever the HN community votes up, HN is "the place for it".

You are thinking of reddit. HN has submission guidelines.

Which amount to "whatever piques one's intellectual curiocity" and "whatever good hackers like". Apparently this piqued HN users intellectual curiosity and they like it.

Besides an intelligent person can have an intelligent discussion about any topic, even Kim Kardassian. And the post is in final analysis about policy, freedom of speech, adapting to the digital age, etc.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#108

Post by sjehay »

madaxe_again wrote: post #98
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

On the note of bullshit contracts... We are about to shell out ~£15k to a recruiter who sent us the CV of someone (completely cold, without the person's consent, or us having any relationship with them) we hired via another recruiter, but a year down the line are pressing a claim, as in their contract, receiving an email from them is deemed acceptance. This is apparently perfectly legal in the UK, and I'm considering…

I am not a lawyer, but have had a similar argument with a recruiter in the past (their claim sounds like it was rather more concrete than this one). We sent them a firm letter from a lawyer, and never heard from them again. It might be worth taking advice before paying the £15k.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#109

Post by mimog »

coldtea wrote: post #105
mimog wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

What part of "If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity." didn't you understand?

This part apparently: "Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports ... If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."

But forgive me, I am, unlike you, not the type of person who finds a story about a Hotel manager behaving badly particularly intellectually gratifying.

Re: Couple 'fined' £100 for leaving a bad review

#110

Post by JonnieCache »

madaxe_again wrote: post #98
netcan wrote: post #47

I think this is an example of contracts being broken, often online but elsewhere too. You can't rent a hotel room without a credit card which helps hotels avoid you running off without paying for minibar peanuts or rock star damage to a room. OTOH, the fact that you can't update your iphone, rent a hotel room or do a lot of other things without agreeing to a "contract" or policy so long that it's impractical to read…

On the note of bullshit contracts... We are about to shell out ~£15k to a recruiter who sent us the CV of someone (completely cold, without the person's consent, or us having any relationship with them) we hired via another recruiter, but a year down the line are pressing a claim, as in their contract, receiving an email from them is deemed acceptance. This is apparently perfectly legal in the UK, and I'm considering…

Really? A judge is actually ordering you to cough up? Can you share any more details?
Post reply on HN