Abusive manipulation of 'time limits'.

[Avoi...@gmail.com]

There's a well informed anonymous US writer, here, who I
call "Timely", because all his posts feature the word "timely"
at least once. Since the US elections have been called a
"RACE", and it's 'run' like a sports event, I'm wondering if
their justice system too is also degenerating away from other
principles of justice besides timeliness. And how possible
and prevelant the abusive manipulation of 'time limits' is?

What's the principle/s in law which determines a Courts'
attitude to respondents who try to escape their obligations
by creating/finding extra hurdles for the claimants?

Insurance works by probabilities.
If you put client-hurdles, each of which is not illegal,
it's probable that some clients will fall - to your advantage.

How would this scenario work in your jurisdiction:
* client has 13 month fixed deposit with BANK,
and receives letter in Oct 2010 [details not on hand]
'your deposit matures next month'.
* client attends BANK in Dec 2010, with duplicated letter:
<close my account and pay out in US$-draft>.
* bank official says <you can't just take your money; didn't
you get our letter?>.
* client say: <OK: just sign and stamp my copy of my written
instructions, and we'll correspond by e-mail>
* client receives email: --- ...
> As per the Terms & Conditions which we have on file with your opening
> Documents for this Fixed Deposit Investment that you opened on the 5th
> of August 2008. Point 8.2 of the Terms & Conditions state that:
> The penalty fee shall be calculated by using the following formula: 1/10
> of the interest rate [ with a minimum of 1% (one percent)] x capital x
> the unexpired term to redemption.

> I hope you find this inorder.
------------------------------------
* the bank phoned and told that <they were not going to charge>
which phone call can NOT be proved, by the client.
* futher emails are:---
Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 2:35 PM
Your letter dated 28 December 2010 refers: -
Dorrieon confirmed via telephone that the funds were released
on 31 December 2010.
In term of your request for a draft and travellers cheques Henry did
request for you to come to the branch to complete the necessary forms.

This is a requirement when funds are being taken of the country.

We urge you to come to the branch to finalise your request and also
refer to the email that was send by Henry on the 6th of January 2011.
(see confirmation below)
-----
Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:06 PM
We could not process your request for a draft and traveller's cheques as
you could not be reached to set up an appointment to come to the
branch to allow you to sign the necessary documentation.
------------ end of record of evidence collected:---

I won't comment on my opinion, which might taint an outsider's
view.

== Thanks for any feedback.
> ====================
> IMO, the client should have waited until January.
> As most contracts like this end on the last day of the month.
> Not the first.
> The client assumed the letter meant the funds would be available at any
> time in December.
> This is why the bank now tries to explain to the client that penalties will
> be paid for early termination.
>
> Let's say you have a cell phone and you have a 2 year contract.
> You cancel the contract as soon as you make the 24th payment.
> The carrier charges you a fee for early termination.
> Because the end of the final month had not been reached.
> ====================
Is it not clear from:--
> * client has 13 month fixed deposit with BANK,
> and receives letter in Oct 2010 [details not on hand]
> <your deposit matures next month>.
that the client served the written order AFTER the investment
had matured?

We understand that the bank's position was " well we gave you notice
that the investment matured, so you should have
FETCHED YOUR MONEY THEN."

If I failed to explain THAT, then the further subtleties, would all be
lost.