I recently applied for a part-time job and because I don't have a lot of specialist knowledge, I asked an online coaching company to help me. It is about Amazon FBA. Because I was so naive, I agreed and arranged everything with them by phone and laptop I agreed to the contract by saying that I should pay an amount of 350 euro for the services every month for 2 years. I got a training program from them which are videos where they explain everything to me step by step how to put a product on I can call the experts there twice a week if I need help. Now I have completed the training program and have damnly noticed that it is not worth 350 euro a month and have heard from other providers that 700 ask euro for a training program once. I felt completely screwed, and wrote to them that I wanted to get out of the contract but they said that this was not possible because it was a product and no membership. The services that are provided by them are immoral and ridiculous. I ask for your advice as I damn get out of there. I've already considered getting a lawyer.
Pacta servanda sunt
you have booked your great performance for 350 a month over 2 years and you want that
and you are a trader, you will no longer receive an idiot bonus from the judge
you are a commercial person, you have to know what you are doing
So as long as they can afford it, they will be able to settle it
how can you get 8400 euro out of it?
it was clear that this was garbage
What should be immoral? You got what you want 🤷♂️ That it does not seem to be good enough for you is not the problem of the provider. I don't see any immorality here
I can only think of the Distance Selling Act. Have you received a cancellation notice and if so, has the cancellation period already expired?
If immoral, then void applies anyway, then he can even reclaim what has already been paid, whether or not consumers don't care. The limit of immorality here is likely to be higher than that of a consumer.
The question does not tell whether the 8,400 euro are completely out of proportion to the performance.
He is not a consumer and contractually they have no agreed right of withdrawal.
The contract would be immoral, e.g. If the service was out of all proportion to the consideration.
Example: I'm selling you these great Spanish apples that have enjoyed the most beautiful Spanish sun for only 10,000 euro each. (Minimum order quantity 100 pieces)
Even if he were a consumer, he would have already used services, so there's no longer a revocation.
Only if the right of withdrawal has been effectively waived.
Since this is more like a purchase on installments, one can argue here whether a waiver would be effective at all or whether the right of withdrawal is indispensable as with a purchase.
Then one would have to consider logically an analogous application of § 312g Abs. 2 Nr. 6 BGB.
This is not immoral, it is stupid and the law does not protect the stupid 🤷♂️
Of course, you are right. I assumed effective exclusion, the people are already armed. Buy in installments? I'm not quite sure. However, I don't quite understand the question: Was there a product and does he pay for it every month? Or does he always get something?
And yes, I also see Section 312g (2) No. 6 BGB here.
Yes, it is immoral.
And so far the stupid is already protected. (Theologically makes sense, because the stupid is more worthy of protection than the rip-off)
But only if the special conditions for usury are met, which is probably not the case here. Besides, where should the rip-off be? Such products are not comparable and there's no bad performance for services such as telephone calls.
Not necessarily usury, usury is again a step above pure immorality.
I can't judge from the question whether the remuneration for the service offered is completely disproportionate (and the contract would therefore be immoral), but I would not completely rule it out.
Bad or no performance is a completely different topic, but the performance seems to be in accordance with the contract anyway.
Yes, but since it is a service, you can't say objectively where the value is, so you can't say mmN is too much and therefore immoral welcher From what norm if not 138 II do you want immorality to construct?
