“They are so one-sided and benefit the banks to such a degree that there is no way that I would call these bargained agreements,” said Anthony Daimsis, a professor of contract law at the University of Ottawa.
“These are take it or leave it — where the taker [customer] really has no option.”
Daimsis says there’s such a “huge imbalance of power” that Ottawa should create better protections to give customers a fighting chance when something goes wrong with their online banking.
The article goes on to highlight serious issues with contracts from each of the big-5 banks. I found these two to be particularly egregious:
Daimsis says it took him the longest to go through Scotiabank’s online agreement, which was updated last May.
Most of the terms in Scotia’s agreement aren’t numbered, and one part refers to consumer protections being “subject to Section 13” — but Daimsis couldn’t find Section 13 anywhere.
“Scotia’s agreement is so bad, it’s shocking,” he said.
When RBC introduced its new terms last May, it required customers to accept the agreement before they could continue accessing their online banking.
One clause says the bank can’t be held responsible for loss of data or damages “even if we are negligent.”
Statistics: Posted by bylo — Feb 9th, 2020 10:13 pm