|
|
#28
07-07-2005, 09:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Is Any of This Realistically Subject To Litigation?
Hi guys,
Thank you all for your in-depth discussion of this matter. I have refrained from commenting in a public forum such as this due to the universality of my internet handle, and my contention that I have done nothing wrong. That being said... I don't know that a legal point may have been missed here. Whether or not Party Gaming believes I am a cheater and decides to confiscate my funds is irrelevant. I remember a tidbit about contracts that goes something like: [ QUOTE ] If a part of a contract is illegal based on the laws of the land...that part of the contract is not binding. [/ QUOTE ] Think of the situation where someone signs a contract that states somewhere in its body: [ QUOTE ] I will be working for less than the federal minimum wage. [/ QUOTE ] Based on the laws of the United States...no one can work for less than the federal minimum wage(I'll leave the immigrants out of this). A contract cannot be signed in which one of its clauses breaks a law of the land. I believe there's a law in Britain against theft. If this contract law idea applies in Britain, I can't see how they are able to enforce this particular clause of their T&C. 2. Even if you can rationalize their T&C legally...They have a giant conflict of interest on their hands. They are the ones who decide who is in violation of their T&C...and they are the ones who benefit from the closure of accounts. It would seem someone else should decide if a customer is "cheating" and then the money should not go to PartyPoker's coffers but somewhere else...ANYWHERE ELSE. I'm about a half a bottle of wine in right now so some of this may not have any bearing on the matter whatsoever... Again thanks for the discussion... Thanks -J 
|
|
|
Threaded Mode