<Fee once paid will not be refunded> is this condition legally valid?

Question

what is the Legal position in all countries

Answer 1

In India "Fee once paid will not be refunded" this condition is in what context? This condition on itself is very vague & it has to be attached further with some reasons regarding its non fulfillment or relief so it doesn’t appear one sided for example if this condition is regarding a fee to be paid for appearing in any examination & such examination is cancelled for some reason not due to the fault of the candidate but the authorities conducting this examination then non refunding of such examination fee will be unreasonable & unjust but if the candidate himself fails to appear in the said examination then he can not seek complete refund of this examination fee as the maxim Nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria — “No man can take advantage of his own wrong.” “It is a maxim of law, recognized and established, that no man shall take advantage of his own wrong; and this maxim, which is based on elementary principles, is fully recognized in courts of law and of equity, and, indeed, admits of illustration from every branch of legal procedure.”
It is closely allied to the maxim ex dolo malo non oritur actio, that is, a right of action cannot arise out of fraud, and ex turpi causa non oritur actio, which in effect means the same thing.
In this regard I would like to bring to you notice with regards to such a condition that was challenged in Delhi Consumer forum in the Apeejay School V/S M.K.Sangal, 1993CCJ423 case that was regarding conditions printed in the prospectus of the school was that in case a student leaves the school within a month of his/her admission he/she will be refunded half of annual dues & the registration fee, tution fee & admission fee & bus charges. It was held by the only a deduction of Rs500/- out of Rs2990/- was reasonable & fair enough to fully compensate the school for any expenses incurred by them for conducting the admission process & rest the amount was to be refunded back to the student as the conditions printed in the prospectus of the school were one sided conditions & were made operative on the students who have not yet started availing the actual services to be offered by the school at a prospective date. Now here the condition of even half refund of the fee was held as illegal. Hence we can conclude that such conditions have to be based on some reasonable & just agreement between the parties & should not be one-sided in affair that cause harm to the person who pays for it & is not provided services for which such fee is paid. The validity of any such condition depend on the services that will be availed on the payment of such fee if that service is not availed at all for some reasons the refund of the fee after deduction of the cost incurred to the service provider in arranging the service must mentioned in the condition itself, if such clause is not provided in the condition itself the courts can infer it to give relief to the person paid for such services.

Answer 2

It depends on what you are buying. You have to receive some kind of product for it to not be refundable. This applies in varying extent in all 50 states. Some states will allow full refund, others allow the merchant to keep a portion. Here are two examples:
1 -- You buy a car part for $100 from an on-line dealer. They send you the right part, but for the wrong year car. You send it back and want your money. They refund you $85 because they have a $15 restocking fee. This is perfectly legal only if it is posted on the web site, or if they told you at the time of purchase. If not posted, and not stated, you get all the money back.
2 -- You hire a painter to redecorate inside your home for $100. The painter flings paint all over the walls and calls it done. You refuse to pay; he brings you to court. You have to prove to the judge a) you discussed prior to the job what you were looking for in redecorating, and b) what he did was no where near what you discussed (i.e. his interpretation). He has to prove that he put sufficient effort into his work and that what he did was exactly what he thought you wanted. If you both sound plausible, the painter gets partial pay. If it's plain ridiculous, the painter gets zero and you get your money back.

Answer 3

Prima facie, it is illegal, provided the party may refuse to refund if he has altered his position in the light of the implied "contract" so entered and it shall cause him losses monetary or otherwise. This is common law based on Equity, Justice And good Conscience, acceptable in every Civilised society and Nation.

Answer 4

it is legally accepted provided if u accept and pay the fee. it is a contract between two parties. if the service provider explains in writing about this condition and if u accept that and complice it bnds on both parties. conses ad idem which means identical minds are necesary to a contract. if u accept and py the fees it is valid.

Answer 5

i do no longer think of so. i think of too a lot of human beings blame it on a psychological condition. If I blamed all my psychological situations then i'd be committed. So as a exchange, I even have exciting with it. of course this is not any longer healthful to sleep with lots of diverse human beings, yet who am I to choose.

Answer 6

It IS possible in the USA. This usually happens where a seller disclaims all possible warranties. That isn't possible in all states of the USA, but it is possible in some.

Answer 7

leagally valid. but morally ?