Once upon a time, contracts were formed with full disclosure of terms and a mutual agreement signed by the parties.  We then evolved to signed documents with the unfavorable terms buried in fine print so you, the consumer, wouldn't notice.  Now credit card banks and cell phone providers frequently hide even the fine print.  They just send you something that looks like junk mail, and if you use the card or the cell phone after that, you have "agreed" to a new contract with God only knows what for terms. 

Gateway took this a step further, sending the contract terms in the box with your new computer.  If you didn't kick your kids off the computer, unhook it and send it back, you agreed to the contract terms you later found stuffed in the box.

Think about how this all works.  Your cellular service provider sends you junk mail with new, unfavorable contract terms.  Then, your 13 year old text messages in her vote for American Idol and, presto ... you have a new cell phone contract.

As consumers, we have pretty much accepted the fact corporations dictate the terms of all agreements.  We just pay the bills.  A few brave souls with a high tolerance for torture will occasionally venture into phone tree hell seeking out  a customer service rep in India to lodge a complaint.  Most of us have far less tolerance for pain and suffering.  We just accept our plight and pay whatever is demanded, paying our fair share of some corporate executive's golden parachute.

Over the years, I have taken great pleasure in assisting a few gutsy consumers in turning the tables on contract formation abuse.  They responded to junk mail contract formation offers with their own counter-offers.  (Yes, it is possible for a consumer having the audacity to attempt contract negotiation to avoid prison--it is not illegal).  It goes something like this:

The consumer receives a junk mail contract modification notice: use your credit card again and you now have a contract with our brand spanking new higher interest rates, a really bad arbitration clause, and a lot of other unfavorable terms the lawyers in our legal department worked overtime to write, and are quite proud of.  These changes will make our shareholders millions of dollars.

The consumer's counter-offer: I reject your offer but if you, Mr. Credit Card Bank, cash this check you now have a contract with me that is more to my liking and incorporates the enclosed consumer friendly terms. 

You will generally find that credit card banks cash checks just as freely as your 13 year old text messages. Does it work?  Sometimes.  It depends on the situation and the contract being modified. 

But you should hear them squeal when it does.  It really is a thing of beauty.  You would think the consumer committed some form of grand theft auto.  The audacity of a consumer actually negotiating a contract.  And contract formation by mail with no signed written agreement?  Who ever heard of something so absurd?  How can we, Big Credit Card Bank, be expected to read and respond to our mail?  Unlike the consumers we dupe who undoubtedly all have a staff of lawyers at home to scour, read and interpret the legalese and fine print in the junk mail contracts we send out, our vast corporate legal departments are far too busy with take-overs, drafting all that fine print in our own one-sided contracts and the like to deal with consumers wanting to negotiate contracts.  We are busy; have things to do; can't be bothered; no fair; waa, waa, waa ...  

Which reminds me of an old saying.  What's good for the goose, is good for the gander.

Dateline NBC with Chris Hanson did a story last night on insurance agents misleading the elderly during the sale of equity indexed annuities.  Undercover cameras caught insurance agents failing to disclose there were severe penalties for early withdrawal of funds.  Consumers were losing a substantial percentage of their investments while the perpetrators received thousands of dollars in commissions.  

At least in other sates, elderly consumers have the right to sue to recover their losses. Defrauded Iowan aren't so lucky. AARP has worked to change that, but not enough legislators in Iowa are getting the message.

Another legislative session is winding to a close.  Once again, the Iowa House killed off consumer rights legislation that would have allowed Iowa to join the other 49 states giving consumers the right to bring actions against merchants of fraud and deception. 

Apparently a half dozen Democrats refused to support the legislation and Republican support was pretty much non-existent.  One would think the fact the country is entering a recession caused by deceptive sales and lending practices might have spurred action--but it didn't. 

This all brings a little AC/DC to mind--"C'mon, C'mon, listen to the money talk."

In the Iowa Legislature, out-of-state campaign money still talks louder than the needs of Iowa consumers.