Hello all,

since I live in Europe, it will be hard for me to organize something against the new price policy of Alabanza, but what if a number of Alabanza Hosts would sue them together?

I have emails from their sales department stating that I get CP for the end user at no extra cost, nameservers at no extra costs, and that from 2nd year on, I only pay 800$ with EVERYTHING included except of any traffic/IPs over the limit:

> I just want to point out a few things that most people don't
> realize when you look at *******, You have an offer
> of $275/month from them, however you don't get the Automated
> software that will automate your hosting business
> and a control panel for your clients,

> -- Automated End-User Control Panel enables customers
> to manage and upgrade their accounts in real time.

I can't take a look at my contract since Outlook Express messed up my emails but I have a backup on CD and will restore it. I still know, following is a part of the contract: First year lower price, from second year on higher price, but this price includes everything they want to charge now (CPs, Nameservers).

Any lawyer listening?


kosmo

Well, the prices wont affect you until your contract expires, which depends on the intervals you pay for your server!

HuH? Since when does the payment interval equal the contract length? that's plain stupidity!


How about a house loan? I pay monthly BUT it's a 5 year contract which can't be changed for 5 years, makes no difference that i pay monthly!!


How about if you lease a car for 5 years? You're signing a 5 year contract and pay monthly, it still makes it a 5 year contract that can't be changed for 5 years.


Since when does payment interval equal contract length! It DOESN'T.

Kunal, your actually trying to tell me that the payment interval equals the contract length? Is this your first contract? Payment intervals have nothing to do with the length of a contract!


Have you ever heard of a yearly contract were you agree to pay monthly? Are you trying to tell me there is no such thing?


So according to Kunal, there is no sense agreeing to the length of a contract for anything, including houses, cars, boats, etc. but it really depends on when you pay??!!

Well Greg, I agree with what you are saying, it doesnt make sense, but in the case of Alabanza, to what I gather, the contract expires according to how you pay. Some people have a month-to-month contract and some have a yearly contract, like you. So you can sue them, IF they bill you.

Greg, check your contract. Mine says this right in the first paragraph:

"effective upon signing for an initial term of three months and may be extended upon mutual agreement by the two parties."

Yours may say monthly instead, but it isn't a yearly contract. The payments don't determine the length of the contract, you're right. But that line right there does. Each payment you've made has just been extending the contract.

I don't like what they've done, but the way I read it, this is in accordance with the contract. I'm also not a lawyer, however, so if you still feel it is a violation then you should contact your lawyer.

By the way, on your example of a house mortagage, first of all that's an entirely different thing. You are buying the house, you aren't buying the server. And most mortgages can change as interest rates vary.

Originally posted by CFoxHost
Greg, check your contract. Mine says this right in the first paragraph:

"effective upon signing for an initial term of three months and may be extended upon mutual agreement by the two parties."

I may be very wrong in saying this, *but* I think one of the two parties has chosen NOT to extend the contract as is. Can you guess who?

I have exercised my option not to renew my contract. :) Everybody else has the same option. The bottom line is that Alabanza has not violated the contract (until/unless a judge says they have) and we each need to decide for ourselves if the service and server is worth the price increase or not. I seriously doubt that any amount of complaining will cause Alabanza to change their minds and drop these new charges.

Soo... accept it, make your decision, and get back to business! That's really the only options we have.

Originally posted by CFoxHost
"effective upon signing for an initial term of three months and may be extended upon mutual agreement by the two parties."

Yes... Alabanza hasn't violated the contract. According to the wording above, it would be difficult for any court to judge otherwise.

Besides, Alabanza may have inserted other sentences into the contract which could only make their case stronger. One standared clause in most commercial contracts is something to this effect (simply worded):

"We reserve the right to make changes in price, or nature of service, anytime with prior notification..."

Some companies could even insert the words "without prior notification"... like companies offering popular consumer services such as cellular services, paging services, etc.

So, Alabanza is fully within their legal rights in doing what they are doing.

~ Learner

Originally posted by Learner

Some companies could even insert the words "without prior notification"... like companies offering popular consumer services such as cellular services, paging services, etc.Yes, and in fact Alabanza did just that: "Changes notwithstanding, the terms and conditions as published upon the date of signing of this agreement shall apply through the initial term." That says that if they change their policies or terms those changes don't affect you during the "initial term" you've agreed to. That is, one month or three months.

Next sentence: "The terms and conditions as published upon each extension of this agreement shall be applied through the term of the extension." That means they can change and "publish" new terms and they apply if you extend the agreement beyond the initial term.

Their offer to extend beyond the initial term is in the form of their quarterly or monthly invoice: "The rendering of an invoice(s) by Alabanza shall be construed as an offer
to extend this agreement and the payment of such invoice(s) by Customer shall be construed as an acceptance."

The fact that the quarterly or monthly contracts go on to specify what the price will be beyond the term of the contract -- that is, they say that the extension will be at the price of $400/month for the first year and $800 after that -- doesn't change the fact that the term of the contract is explicity stated as either one month or three months (except, obviously, for those with annual contracts).

So I agree, they are within their rights in my not-a-lawyer opinion. I don't like that they're doing it or how they are going about it, but legally they seem pretty safe.


[Edited by JayC on 09-26-2000 at 04:04 PM]

:sickface:

Originally posted by Greg
Since when does payment interval equal contract length! It DOESN'T. Except, as in the case of Alabanza's contracts, when it says that it does.

It's very clear reading the discussions going on in various forums that a lot of people are commenting on Alabanza's contracts without having read them, or at least after having forgotten what they've read.

Clearly: Alabanza presents three types of contracts; that is, for three different terms. The simplest to understand is the annual contract. It states that it lasts for 12 months, it states a price for the 12 months (typically $4800), it states that the amount is due in one payment, and it states that the contract can be extended upon completion for a different price, typically $9600.

The quarterly and monthly contracts state that they last for either three month or one month, specify the price for that period, and state that the payment is due in one lump (typically $1200 for a "quarterly contract" or $400 for a "monthly"). Further, they state that upon expiration they can be extended at the same rate for either the next nine months (in the case of a quarterly contract) or the next 11 months (in the case of a monthly). And, they state that after that 12-month period they can be extended at a different rate, typically $2400 or $800.

So the term, or effective length, of the contract is one thing. The price that will be offered to you upon expiration of the contract is something else, and is specified seperately.

Now, a conspiracy theorist might guess that they've had this plan for a long time, and wrote the contract accordingly. A whatever-the-opposite-of-a-conspiracy-theorist-is might think that they just hired a good contract attorney and developed an agreement that gives themselves a lot of flexibility.

Originally posted by CFoxHost
I have exercised my option not to renew my contract. :)

The only thing a bit funny about that statement is, that I was talking about Alabanza being the one that chose not to renew the contract (in its present form). In this case, that'd be both parties :)


*did someone say party?*

In this particular case... the party's over!!!

Alabanza has already started losing clients. I hear that several more hosting companies are switching over to UltraspeedUSA.com ... and that Daniel is really gearing up very rapidly... software and hardware wise... to make sure nobody has a hard time when they shift.

It all started with the War of the Colas... you know... Coke Vs Pepsi...!!!!

Which is this one gonna be... the War of the Co-Lo's...??? :D

Learner

[Edited by Learner on 09-27-2000 at 01:59 AM]