'Reasonable', ah yes the lawyers favourite word, as it can be defined and argued over for so many billable $1000/hr hours... that is all perfectly reasonable of course!Beeroclock wrote:True, although I've said the same previously, and been rebutted that contracts need to be reasonable, and serve the core intention/purpose, to be enforceable. If you recall when we debated the tenant early lease break issue, your thinking seemed quite the opposite there.... I would have pegged you as more of a consumer advocate.
I'm not quite sure how you would define reasonable. Is the interest charged by pawn-brokers reasonable, or the tax on a car, or a beer? Or how about having to show/record your ID to buy a SIM card, or prescription medication?
How can it be reasonable to require full payment of say a 24-month mobile or broadband contract, that somone HAS to break early? Does the loss to the provider directly equal the sum you're obliged to pay in compensation? No. Is that reasonable: Clearly not.
Your line seems to be much more European than local. In Europe consumer protection is reaching perverse levels, where the provider is obliged to seek to help protect the consumer from themselves. You can guess where the end-cost of all of that is - the consumer. Yes, you as an intelligent person are obliged to subsidise the folly of a fool. Don't confuse Europe with Asia.