I don't practice law and have never been in court for a contract dispute but based on my Business Law class, the contract isn't the only consideration. Its been a while but I believe its called the Theory of Objective Intent (when the offerer misleads you) & the Theory of Constructive Knowledge (when there are unreasonable stipulations hidden in contract).
The problem here is that there's only TS's word that he was misled. TS claims that Jimmy misled him on the nature of the trial, but the point is moot because TS also claims to have cancelled not once, but twice within the 3 day period...even though he says he didn't know he needed to do so.
The conditions of the contract were not hidden, nor unreasonable. In fact, they're pretty standard among fitness clubs. If you don't cancel within the trial, you're on the hook for the full contract. Even if you don't use it, those contracts are for
access to the facility and classes.
The real accusation here is that Jimmy deliberately processed the contracts even after TS cancelled them (twice) within the 3 day period. That's the part that strikes me as a little hard to swallow, because TS didn't just cancel twice...he says he cancelled twice
by speaking directly to Jimmy. TS also states that Jimmy told them in no uncertain terms that they had cancelled and would not be billed. Which means either Jimmy has some
Memento-quality memory issues, someone else in the office submitted the paperwork by mistake, or Jimmy is both ethically bankrupt and stupid enough to submit the paperwork anyway in the hopes that TS and his roommate wouldn't notice a monthly charge for $110 on their cards.
The part that has me scratching my head is motive. Jimmy can't make much of a commission on 2 sales that total under $2800 in revenue, if he even works on commission at all. Clearly he would realize he's putting his job in jeopardy, and exposing his employer (and possibly himself) to a lawsuit and/or criminal investigation. It just doesn't make sense....why would someone risk so much for so little? Particularly in a scenario where he'd be virtually guaranteed to get caught?
And again, the alternate theory is
"oh crap, I meant to cancel that but I forgot". At what point does Occam's Razor come into play?
Carry on fellas.
