82,891
edits
Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc: Difference between revisions
Greenclose v National Westminster Bank plc (view source)
Revision as of 13:14, 18 May 2016
, 18 May 2016no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
Now discarding for a moment the fact that the plaintiff was a little old lady, let's be clear here: this is fair enough. NatWest had priced this so it wasn't taking this risk. But it still managed to look like a big, bad bank. | Now discarding for a moment the fact that the plaintiff was a little old lady, let's be clear here: this is fair enough. NatWest had priced this so it wasn't taking this risk. But it still managed to look like a big, bad bank. | ||
=====The errors===== | |||
Schoolboy error no.1 by NatWest was to agree a notice deadline which expired when Greenclose was highly likelihood to be out of the office. But that's as may be. | Schoolboy error no.1 by NatWest was to agree a notice deadline which expired when Greenclose was highly likelihood to be out of the office. But that's as may be. | ||
{{Box | {{Box||'''Learning Number 1''': Don't set an option expiry period that obliges you to serve notice in the Grundle.}} | ||
Error no. 2 - less of a schoolboy one, in this reviewer's opinion, was to assume that an email - being, after all, an '''electronic''' mail sent over a computer '''system''' (so sayeth [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email Wikipedia]) fell within the meaning of an "electronic messaging system". | Error no. 2 - less of a schoolboy one, in this reviewer's opinion, was to assume that an email - being, after all, an '''electronic''' mail sent over a computer '''system''' (so sayeth [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email Wikipedia]) fell within the meaning of an "electronic messaging system". | ||