Business

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

CBS’ “Kid Nation” Contract: We’re Not Responsible If Your Kid Dies

Kid Nation logoThis fall, CBS is debuting a new reality series called Kid Nation. In it, 40 kids aged eight to 15 go off to a remote, deserted location to have a Survivor-like adventure for 40 days without adult supervision.

Controversy has sprung up about injuries some of the kids sustained, and the one-sided nature (in CBS’ favor) of a 22-page release that parents had to sign as a condition of their kids’ participation in the show should they be selected. (Here is the New York Times story.)

Mouse Print* has found and reviewed what is purported to be a copy of that release. The producers and CBS left nothing to chance in protecting themselves, while getting parents to give up their rights in protecting their children.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Kid Nation 1

Translation: I accept the risk if a wolf eats my kid, if he drowns during a competition, or any other terrible thing happens.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Kid Nation 2

Translation: If my kid dies, CBS and the producers are not responsible.

Some other provisions of the agreement include (1) that the producers can film the children 24 hours a day anywhere (but not in the bathroom if they are really doing their business in there); (2) that the kids will not have sex with the producers,  and if they have sex with other participants they will not hold the producers liable for STDs or pregnancy; (3) that neither the parents nor the kids will reveal anything about the show for three years, and if they do, they will pay CBS $5 million as liquidated damages; and (4) they will not sue CBS or the producers for anything but instead will take any disputes to arbitration.

It seems there must have been no shortage of stage mothers and fathers who were willing to bite the bullet and sign away their rights as the price for their kid to become a television star. This is no doubt the reason that CBS and the producers could get away with such a one-sided agreement.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

Preconstruction Home Floor Plans: Your Square Footage May Vary

When buying a condominium, co-op, or new house that has not been built yet, the homebuyer has to do a lot of imagining of what his or her finished home will actually look like. To help, developers show prospective buyers floor plans and maybe even a sample kitchen.

What you actually get may be substantially different from what you were shown. It may have fewer square feet than represented, room sizes and layout may vary, and finishes may not be what you expected. Here is a story about some homebuyers who got less than they paid for.

How do developers get away with that?

*MOUSE PRINT:  Buried in your contract may be language such as:

“The gross square footage of a unit is greater than the approximate square footage of a unit measured by using the legal definition of the unit. … As is customary in New York City, these gross square footages exceed the usable floor area of each unit.”

Or, there may be a fine print disclaimer on the floor plan itself, such as this:

floor plan

How in the world could this be legal?  It is going to depend on what was represented to the buyer and how conspicuous the disclaimers are.

In New York, for example, there is a law governing developers’ plans for renovations and new housing. In part, it says graphics in advertisements must be accurate depictions:

“An artist’s rendering of a property in an advertisement must be marked as an artist’s rendering and must accurately and realistically depict the dimensions, …” [See New York regulations.]

The bottomline is that you need to read the developer’s plan thoroughly, and not rely on oral representations of salespeople. Better yet, have your lawyer review all the documents to find the weasel clauses.

Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

JetBlue’s Customer Bill of Rights: The Big Loophole

jet blue rightsThe past two weeks have been a publicity disaster for Jet Blue and a travel nightmare for passengers after hundreds of flights were still being cancelled days after a snowstorm passed.

To its credit, the company quickly admitted its errors and embarrassment, and pledged to do better in the future. Rather than a hollow promise to improve, the company put its money where its mouth is, and unveiled a “Customer Bill of Rights.”  It will pay people rather generously for their inconvenience when flights are delayed or cancelled — up to the price they paid for their ticket. Compensation increases as the time of the delay increases.

However, the airline will generally only provide these benefits when the cancellation or departure delay is a result of a “controllable irregularity.”  Nowhere in the policy is that term defined. So, our trusty mouse went to work, and ferretted out the definition from the company:

*MOUSE PRINT:

“A controllable irregularity is something that is within the control of JetBlue, such as staffing issues, technology issues, maintenance issues, etc. It essentially includes most everything except weather, air traffic control constraints, or airport conditions beyond the control of JetBlue.”

So, potentially the thousands of passengers stranded in airport lobbies around the country over Presidents Day weekend would not have been compensated a penny had the new policy been in effect at that time. No doubt arguments would have broken out over whether the problem was the weather or mismanagement.

Only passengers held captive on airplanes on the runway would clearly be covered because the “controllable irregularity” language does not apply to the “ground delays” section of the policy.