🚀 go-pugleaf

"Defender of Enormous Manhood" <catwails@hotmale.com> wrote in message
news:oASC9.114798$YSz1.51087@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
>
> "Raymond J. Henry" <rayhenry@TROLLmts.net> wrote in message
> news:kzvC9.14444$b5.70510@news1.mts.net...
> Guess what? There is no law to make them provide you with service. They
> have the right to decide that due to the increased man-hours you create by
your
> antagonistic posting methods on newsgroups that it's not feasible to
> provide you with service at the specified costs. This is 100% legitimate.
> >
>
> Guess what? You are wrong, dead wrong!
> They had an option not to provide him service when he first signed up -
> BEFORE they entered into a contract to provide "said service for said
cost".
>
> The laws governing this are called "Torts", and it falls under civil
rather
> than criminal laws.
>
> But be clear, costing too much is not a legitimate reason to "break" the
> contract which both he and they are bound. You do understand a contract is
> valid as soon as there is "mens rhea" (sp?) or in layman's terms "a
meeting
> of the minds". No hand shake nor written paper is required.

Bzzzzt Wrong answer.... and besides real lawyers know how to spell:-)
http://www.duhaime.org/tort1.htm
a.. Tort law is the wrong place to turn for compensation for an
ill-performed duty owed to you as a result of a private agreement between
you and another. This latter situation would be governed under the law of
contract, and not tort law, and a whole different set of rules.

Go back and read the boiler plate on the TOS. (you might want to sharpen
your search pattern as well) The service is unregulated and un-warranted,
ergo there is no SLA to enforce, therefore most of your augment falls short.

Would guess that the letters he got were fully vetted through REAL lawyers
before they were sent. But as it seems you can't get a public defender to
plead your case in small claims court, it's unlikely that this case is going
anywhere.

Plead on Perry Mason....

TsTs