UK Retailer Assumes Those Over 70 Are Too Senile To Understand Internet Contracts
from the covering-for-stupidity-with-ageism dept
Carphone Warehouse, the popular retailer in the UK, apparently had some problems last year where some people felt the retailer had taken advantage of elderly customers, who didn't quite understand the details of contracts they had signed for internet access. In response, it appears they've gone in the other direction, telling staff that they might want to refuse to sell internet access to those over 70, unless they have a younger relative in tow to help explain the nasty details of the contract. Of course, in practice, this means the young whippersnappers who work at Carphone Warehouse are refusing to sell internet access to anyone over 70. While Carphone Warehouse tries to defend itself by saying the new policy was just to protect more elderly customers from being taken advantage of, they seem to ignore the slightly more reasonable solution: making their contracts more reasonable so that no one, no matter how old, gets taken advantage of in signing them.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
contracts
all that really small writing using as many confusing terms as possible is there for a reason.
and its not 'accuracy' either, since two lawyers will tell you two different things about what half of it means.
but it does provide 'wiggle' room for the company.
nothing new here, move along.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Aha' - But Do We REALLY Know the ENTIRE Story?
But no one knows what preceded this policy.
There may have been horror stories that was not told to that store's customers.
In terms of the contracts being complex,
The contracts MUST be technically accurate - because of the litigeous society we live in.
These are a classic examples of social darwism versus business inertia, making the difference between surviving versus thriving!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Aha' - But Do We REALLY Know the ENTIRE Story?
But no one knows what preceded this policy.
There may have been horror stories that was not told to that store's customers.
In terms of the contracts being complex,
The contracts MUST be technically accurate - because of the litigeous society we live in.
These are a classic examples of social darwism versus business inertia, making the difference between surviving versus thriving!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rule #1
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Liability
BTW, I'm not responcible for you reading this post... or its content... as clearly stated in section 5.21.354 of the below aggreement in small print..
------------
------------
------------
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
contracts.. its not the lawyers fault... honest gu
The contracts MUST be technically accurate - because of the litigeous society we live in.
And therein lies the problem... to coin a phrase
Its not my fault
or
look what you made me do now
Contracts like this are madness, theres something to be said for plain english and the courts applying a test of What would the man in the street think this means? to remove some of this garbage, make it clear, make it simple.
but of course then many of the nasty stings wouldn't be quite so well hidden, can't have that
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Puh-leeze
And if they do own a PC, let them use dial-up. Its not like they have anything better to do with their time.
Of course, the reality is that the Senior Citizen is the prime target for all hard-sells, and the legal system is quick to side with them in most consumer actions and disputes even in legitimate traqnsactions. The question will soon arise to whether or not this action will lead to other retailers taking similiar actions on sales to seniors... (like cell phone contracts -- have you ever read the microprint on one of those?)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: contracts.. its not the lawyers fault... hones
I work in compliance for a large insurance company and do agree that there is plenty of language that can be confusing to the less educated population. I also know, however, that with certain wording in place, nobody can play the ignorance card, which is much more of a problem in society, in my opinion (I'm sorry, officer... I didn't know I wasn't allowed to do that.")
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Those over 70 are more savvy than you think
Senior citizens aren't stupid. Many of them have adapted to the computer age and are thriving. For example, my dad has made a successful retirement business out of selling on Ebay. He makes more now than when he was CEO of his company for 40 years. He turned 75 this year and has more tech gadgets than I do. And, while he does call from time to time asking for tech support, his questions are thoughtful and precise.
The point: Don't shove all people over 70 into the invalid and helpless category. Carphone is making a mistake by removing a lucrative segment of the market from their customer base.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Errr
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Those over 70 probably aren't as savvy as you thin
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: contracts.. its not the lawyers fault... h
it *is* perfectly possible to write these things in plain english, it just requires the effort to do it.
having a contract the peron writing it cannot really understand, especially given the legal industries habit of adjusting what words actually mean compaired to what the general population think they mean cannot be in the best interests of anybody in the long run.
if you get screwed by small print do you go back to that company? and yes i know everyone is as bad, but lowest common denominator as customer service sucks.
its the long winded and confusing stuff in these contracts that puts people off reading them, print them in 10 or 12 point, use plain english and it suddenly becomes a hell of alot harder to argue over the meaning or intention.
also people are more likely to read them if they can understand what they are reading.
plus it makes it a bit harder to offer say 'Unlimited x' in the advert and then have 10 pages of 7 point text explaining that the word 'unlimited' means *as defined by the company, and liable to change at any time* etc. thus these things become a little bit more honest.
B2B is a different world to B2C, compaines have legal teams, when I buy something personally I don't have a legal team, and I don't see why I should *need* one either.
playing ignorance is one thing, when say you are arguing over a speeding ticket, for doing say 30 in a 30 zone. not having realised that a local bylaw means that 30 means 'only during daylight, 28 at night' etc.
or as a wonderful example near my former home states "no parking on match days", *nowhere* does it define a matchday, or provide a list of such days. its very easy to park their early in the morning, and get ticketed cus theres a 'match' that evening for example.
my mobile phone contract forbids 'obscene matieral to be transmitted' verbally or otherwise, but doesn't state what is meant by 'obscene' anywhere.
the examples are endless, and yes i know compaines have to cover themselves as well, which is also doable in a plain english contract.
theres a difference between 'dumbing down' and making the thing readable by the people they are given to and are expceted to be bound by. I'm not saying make it understandable by a 7 year old, but 'the man in the street' should have a fighting chance of at least getting the point.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Blown out of proportion
CPW responds to the bad press about an elderly customer not realising what he/she was really signing up to by informing sales staff to be more considerate when explaining the ins and outs of the offer.
One sales staff takes this to mean "dont sell broadband to old people unless someone younger is there to explain it all to"
Lets face it, you dont need a decent level of education or even common sense in some cases to be a salesperson, you just need the ability to sell
[ link to this | view in thread ]
let the old people use the internet
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Yes it is.
Lawyers are loath to write contracts in plain English because it makes onerous terms and conditions detrimental to the interests of the signer way too obvious.
The simple fact is, sales contracts are designed to protect the interests of the seller and buyer rights rarely exceed what is required by law. In many cases the contract will even require the buyer to waive rights granted by law.
Unfortunately the average person doesn't know enough to adequately review a contract and most won't pay a lawyer to do it unless it involves significant amounts of money.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Reverse Discrimination
Those Over 70 Probably Assume That Carphone Warehouse is Too Stupid to Make Their Contracts Understandable.
(Or they purposely wrote them that way, like many contracts are written, to take advantage of those who don't read them or look up all the big words.)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Puh-leeze
many young guys i know are morons. there's more to intelligence than being able to format a hard drive.
old people are just like young people.. some smart..some not so smart...you can't lump them all together...like young people, you never know, until one makes it obvious how fucking dumb he is... by making some stupid remark like you just made.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: contracts
Contracts in general are essential for any company's survival in a world full of litigious jack-asses. The reason contracts are so 'wordy' is more often than not a direct result of an attempt to make them interpretable in only one possible way; that's the whole point of a contract. They exist to provide all parties a way to understand an agreement without multiple interpretations so everybody knows exactly what the agreement is without doubt.
That being said I have no idea how this particular company writes their contracts or what their intentions are. True, contracts can be used to screw people by making them so completely convoluted that nobody can understand them - but that's what courts are for. Generalizing like this is why our system is full of idiots who actually believe this crap.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Bullshit!
I know people in their 70s and some are sharper than any kid.
Sure they have alot of miles on their bodies...i.e. hard of hearing, difficulty seeing, and the frustrations involved with those shortcomings.
How is it fair to use a huge, fat brush to paint over such fine details? It's easy, we'll just use age discrimination. That way you simply blame certain customers for your own shortcomings. It's easier, and you don't have to rehire the same attorneys who wrote up these insane, illogical, contracts in the first place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Puh-leeze
You can't ban elderly from the internet, it's just stupid. Good luck trying to pass that one, I doubt you'd get much support from anyone.
Not all old people are bad drivers, nor are they all computer-illiterate. My grandparents know more about computers & the internet than my 13-yr old sister. She knows just enough to turn the PC on and log on to AIM.
Get over yourselves and find something better to do than make generalizations and whine that "they shouldn't be allowed to do this."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Puh-leeze
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: contracts
In any case, well written contratcs are not magical or alien technology. Well written contracts use plain and simple English and is understood by most who read them.
Poorly written ones are usually written in legalese, that reference paragraphs upon clauses which, themselves, are also poorly written.
In the end, no one can understand a poorly written contract except the attorney who wrote it up in the first place. In fact some contracts are so crappy, it takes an entire team of attorneys to disect their meaning.
All attorneys are schooled in contract writing/interpretation. Some are good at it, others aren't.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
"Its not *my* fault".
and I agree with you 100% as to your comments
:-)
[ link to this | view in thread ]