Hacker News .hnnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What I do not understand, is how do you just accept that a major company managing people's (potentially) life savings in a regulated market has no responsibility to pick up the phone? I would accept it if RH did not communicate with the customer at all because they were overwhelmed or something. But they did communicate, they sent out an email demanding money.

Do they have no process to talk to a customer who has lost a lot of money? This is not a rare freak event, it's key part of the business they are in. You'd think about this within the first 10 minutes of even entertaining the idea of starting a trading firm. Even the WSB reddit had a link to a suicide prevention hotline, how is RH more irresponsible than a random web forum.

We as a society don't need to bend over backwards to accomodate these zero-support business models - and especially not as the bedrock of our economy.

Lastly, I want to share a court case from Russia: for a few years it was common for banks to mass send out loan contracts in the post to random Tom, Dick and Harry. It would just appear in your postbox randomly, and if you countersign it you would get the money. One bloke scanned the document and amended it, he really went to town: increased the borrowing limit, put in a negative interest rate, etc. The bank signed it without realising. Obviously the bank sued, argued that their business model made it impossible to read every contract and the that the guy knew that.

The judge held up the contract, saying it wasn't the customers problem their business model involves spamming people and signing things without reading.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: