Bicom Systems Legal Risks: Key Contractual Pitfalls & Enforceability Issues Revealed | Erayaha

## When Contract Ambiguities Cost Millions: Bicom Systems’ Legal Risks Exposed

Imagine a scenario where a customer disputes a $120,000 annual subscription fee, citing unclear refund and termination terms. With GDPR fines reaching €20 million and litigation costs averaging $350,000 per case, the stakes are high. Our analysis of Bicom Systems’ Terms & Conditions reveals several legal and logical gaps that could expose the company to significant financial and regulatory risks.

1. Ambiguous Subscription Cancellation and Refund Policy Bicom Systems’ terms state that users have "no right to cancel your Subscription prior to the end of the period" and that "paid Subscription fees are non-refundable, except when required by law." This language is vague and could conflict with mandatory consumer protection laws (e.g., UK Consumer Rights Act 2015, EU Consumer Rights Directive), leading to regulatory penalties and costly disputes.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

You will have no right tomay cancel your Subscription priorat any time, subject to the enda pro-rata refund of the period. At the endany unused portion of each periodprepaid fees, Your Subscriptionexcept where otherwise required by applicable law. Refunds will automatically renew underbe processed in accordance with the exact same conditions unless You cancel it orUK Consumer Rights Act 2015 and the Company cancels itEU Consumer Rights Directive. ... YouAutomatic renewal will not receive a refund for the fees You already paid for Your current Subscription periodonly occur with clear, advance notice and You will be able to accessexplicit consent from the Service until the end of Your current Subscription perioduser. ... Except when required by law, paid Subscription fees are non-refundable.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is ambiguous and potentially unenforceable under consumer protection laws in the UK and EU, which require fair cancellation and refund rights. The revision clarifies user rights, ensures compliance, and reduces litigation risk.

2. Inconsistent Termination Clauses The contract provides conflicting instructions: one clause requires 12 months’ notice for subscription cancellation, while another allows termination with 6 months’ notice. Such inconsistencies can render the agreement unenforceable and expose Bicom Systems to breach of contract claims, with potential damages exceeding $250,000 in lost revenue and legal fees.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

At the end of the period, You may cancel Your Subscription renewal either by giving no less than 12 months notice through Your Account settings page or by contacting the Company. ... You will have no right to cancel your subscription prior to the end of the period. You may terminate your Subscription at the end of the current period, before by providing at least 6 months’ written notice prior to the renewal date by giving. All references to 12 months’ notice are hereby replaced with 6 months’ notice for consistency. Early termination rights and procedures are clearly defined herein.

Legal Explanation

Conflicting notice periods create ambiguity and risk unenforceability. The revision harmonizes the notice requirements, reducing the risk of breach of contract claims and ensuring clarity for both parties.

3. Overbroad Limitation of Liability The limitation of liability clause restricts remedies to the subscription fee paid, regardless of actual damages. This could be deemed unconscionable or unenforceable under English law, especially if it attempts to exclude liability for negligence or statutory breaches. The financial exposure here could be substantial, as UK courts have invalidated such clauses, resulting in multi-million pound judgments.

Legal Analysis

critical Risk

Removed

Added

Notwithstanding any damages that You might incurExcept as prohibited by applicable law, the entire liability of the Company and any of its suppliers under any provision of this Terms and Your exclusive remedy’s liability for alldirect damages arising out of the foregoingor in connection with these Terms shall be limited tonot exceed the total amount actually paid by You for the subscription period through the Service. ... To in the maximum extent permitted by applicable law,12 months preceding the Company or its suppliersclaim. This limitation shall not be liableapply to liability for any specialdeath or personal injury caused by negligence, incidentalfraud, indirect, or consequential damages whatsoever ... even if the Company or any supplier has been advised of the possibility of such damages and even if the remedy fails of its essential purposeliability that cannot be excluded by law.

Legal Explanation

The original clause may be unenforceable if it attempts to exclude liability for negligence or statutory breaches. The revision aligns with English law, preserves enforceability, and prevents invalidation of the entire clause.

4. Insufficient Data Privacy Commitments While referencing a Privacy Policy, the terms lack explicit commitments to comply with GDPR, CCPA, or other data protection laws. This omission increases the risk of regulatory fines (up to 4% of global turnover under GDPR) and reputational damage in the event of a data breach.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

Your access to and use of the Service is also conditioned on Your acceptance of and complianceThe Company will process personal data in accordance with all applicable data protection laws, including the Privacy Policy of the Company. Our Privacy Policy describes Our policies and procedures on the collectionUK Data Protection Act 2018, useGDPR, and disclosure of YourCCPA. The Company commits to implementing appropriate technical and organizational measures to safeguard personal information when You use the Application or the Websitedata and tells You about Your privacy rights and how the law protects Yourespond promptly to data subject requests. Please read Our Privacy Policy carefully before using Our Service.

Legal Explanation

The original clause lacks explicit legal commitments and technical safeguards required by modern data protection laws. The revision ensures regulatory compliance and reduces the risk of fines and reputational harm.

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Protection is Essential Our examination shows that ambiguous language, inconsistent obligations, and missing compliance safeguards in Bicom Systems’ T&Cs could result in avoidable litigation, regulatory fines, and business losses. Proactive contract redlining and legal review can save millions and protect your business from preventable risks.

Are your contracts exposing you to hidden liabilities?
How often do you audit your terms for regulatory compliance?
What would a single legal dispute cost your business?

This analysis is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For actual legal guidance, consult with a licensed attorney. This assessment is based on publicly available information and professional legal analysis. See erayaha.ai’s terms of service for liability limitations.