Quotegate ffs I only did that coz my crappy stream was slow so I switched pages as I didn't want to see any **** post the result of the pens in the Chelsea game.
So HIAG's bet with G4E. He claims he misread G4E's final terms. In law, is that a valid excuse to release you from a contract ?
Dont get too technical with Hiag as he finds it difficult to read jargon. i clearly stated the terms of my bet in plain English but poor old Hiag having lost the bet is now claiming that he failed to understand what was clearly written #lawyermyarse
Well generally no but in fairness: a) The terms were stated differently by each party and then each set of terms was accepted. It didn't state, or highlight in any way, that it was an altered or amended version of events so probably it would be agreed that neither set can be adhered to. b) It depends on the relative bargaining power of the parties. If a big company put horrific terms in the small print then consumer law does protect the customers for having misread them (or ignored them entirely in my experience of consumers). Is that valid here? Well only if G4E or Hiag want to argue they are significantly disadvantaged over each other (perhaps mentally?) c) Most importantly, and i cannot stress this enough, I did my legal training 15 years ago and stopped working as a solicitor 10 years ago so fukc knows if you can trust anything i say any more...
I haven't gone back an re-read all the thread / comments to be honest only the snippets that Piskie and HIAG have reposted recently. To me it looks vague at best but keep needling him as it is indeed funny.
