A reason, not a legal one, but one I teach at some length, in fact I'm still not out of this one yet, not to legally fight corporate practices is that litigation is expensive and time consuming.
Also I bet your credit card agreement has a mandatory arbitration clause, ruled enforceable by the S.Ct., consumers lose 95%+ of arbitrated disputes -- doubtless many of them are genuinely unmeritious -- and a fee shifting agreement by which the loser (you) pays the winner's fees and costs) (maybe a big law firm), plus a big chunk of the arbitrators' fees -- say half. Sort like having to pay the half the judges's salary for the trial if you lose, in addition to the full "reasonable" attorneys' fees and other litigation costs.
And yeah, if the agreement provides for a change of interest rate on an existing balance in event of default, say a late payment, it's likely to be enforceable.
--- On Fri, 9/5/08, Wojtek Sokolowski <swsokolowski at yahoo.com> wrote:
> From: Wojtek Sokolowski <swsokolowski at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] legal question
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 2:55 PM
> --- On Fri, 9/5/08, andie nachgeborenen
> <andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> > you'd have to look at the contract. If, as its
> likely,
> > it provides for the telecom to change the terms of the
> > contract unilaterally, a citizen of the State of
> Confusion
> > would have an uphill climb to make out a case that
> such a
> > unilateral rate change was a "material
> breach" of
> > the sort that offered the basis for early termination.
> Of
> > course a term in a contract might be illegal, waived,
> or
> > otherwise unenforceable for some reason or other, and
> this
> > might be such a term.
>
> [WS:] Below is what the contract actually says. Basically,
> I can terminate without penalty in response to their
> "material changes" in the contract. The question
> is whether an extra $10 per month -without prior
> notification _ resulting from changing the employer discount
> rate (they claim it was my employer) or $40 for the
> remaining durration of the contract qualify as
> "material."
>
> I mean 40 bucks is not a big deal - I can cancel the
> service in 4 month witjout any fuss, and I am not going on
> limb to fight that. I am more concenrend with the principle
> here - if I can legally resist corporate practices, why not?
>
> PS. This not asking for a proper legal advice, of course.
>
>
> Wojtek
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk