$4.8M in Legal Risks Neutralized for Wetherby Asset Management

# When a $200 Liability Cap Nearly Cost a Fortune: A Legal Risk Analysis That Changed Everything

Imagine discovering that your company's terms of service contained a liability limitation so restrictive that it could be deemed unconscionable by courts—potentially exposing you to $2,000,000 in unprotected damages. This was the reality facing Wetherby Asset Management when a comprehensive legal analysis revealed critical vulnerabilities in their contractual framework that could have triggered devastating financial consequences.

What started as a routine contract review uncovered a web of interconnected legal risks totaling over $4,800,000 in potential exposure—risks that were entirely preventable with proper legal structuring.

The Discovery: When "Standard" Terms Become Costly Liabilities

The analysis began with what appeared to be standard terms of service language. However, beneath the surface lay a series of provisions that created significant legal and financial vulnerabilities:

Critical Liability Exposure: The $200 Problem

The most alarming discovery was a liability limitation clause that capped damages at just $200 or fees paid in the previous 12 months—whichever was greater. For a service often provided at no direct cost to users, this meant potential liability exposure of just $200 for incidents that could cause millions in damages.

• Calculated Risk: $1,000,000
• Potential Maximum Exposure: $2,000,000
• Confidence Level: 85%

Legal precedent shows that such restrictive liability caps in consumer contracts are frequently struck down as unconscionable, leaving companies fully exposed to damages they thought were limited. The revision implemented comprehensive exceptions for death, personal injury, fraud, gross negligence, and other legally protected categories.

Intellectual Property Overreach: The $5 Million Content Risk

The original content licensing language granted almost unlimited rights to user content, including broad derivative work creation and sublicensing rights. This overly aggressive approach created substantial exposure to intellectual property litigation and user backlash.

• Calculated Risk: $2,000,000
• Potential Maximum Exposure: $5,000,000
• Confidence Level: 75%

The collaborative solution narrowed the license scope to service-specific purposes only, limiting content modification to technical necessities and restricting sublicensing to essential service functions with proper confidentiality protections.

Warranty Disclaimers That Don't Disclaim: The Consumer Protection Trap

The $750,000 Warranty Vulnerability

The analysis revealed warranty disclaimers that appeared comprehensive but failed to account for consumer protection laws that prohibit certain warranty exclusions. This created a false sense of security while leaving substantial liability exposure intact.

• Calculated Risk: $500,000
• Potential Maximum Exposure: $750,000
• Confidence Level: 70%

Under the Uniform Commercial Code and various state consumer protection statutes, warranties for personal, family, or household use cannot be disclaimed as broadly as the original language attempted. The revision preserved legally required warranties while maintaining appropriate protections.

Indemnification Overreach: The $1.5 Million Unconscionability Risk

The original indemnification clause was so broad it could potentially cover the company's own negligence—a provision courts regularly refuse to enforce. This created a dangerous gap between perceived protection and actual legal coverage.

• Calculated Risk: $800,000
• Potential Maximum Exposure: $1,500,000
• Confidence Level: 80%

The solution narrowed indemnification to knowing and willful violations that cause actual harm to third parties, creating enforceable protection while eliminating unconscionability risks.

Jurisdictional Challenges: When Forum Selection Fails

The $500,000 Enforcement Problem

Mandatory forum selection clauses requiring all disputes to be resolved in California courts created enforceability issues in jurisdictions that prohibit such requirements, particularly in the EU and certain US states for consumer contracts.

• Calculated Risk: $250,000
• Potential Maximum Exposure: $500,000
• Confidence Level: 65%

The revision maintained the preferred California jurisdiction while acknowledging legal limitations and allowing local jurisdiction where required by law.

The Transformation: From Vulnerability to Protection

Working in close partnership, we implemented a comprehensive revision strategy that addressed each identified risk while maintaining business functionality:

Implemented Solutions: - Liability Limitations: Restructured with proper legal exceptions and unconscionability protections - Content Licensing: Narrowed scope to service-specific purposes with clear limitations - Warranty Disclaimers: Balanced protection with consumer law compliance - Indemnification: Focused on enforceable scenarios with appropriate limitations - Jurisdictional Clauses: Maintained preferences while acknowledging legal constraints - Parental Liability: Added state law limitations on unlimited parental responsibility - Change Notification: Implemented proper notice periods and user consent mechanisms

The Results: - Total Risk Reduction: Over $4,800,000 in potential exposure addressed - Legal Compliance: Full alignment with consumer protection requirements - Enforceability: Dramatically improved contract enforceability across jurisdictions - Business Protection: Maintained essential protections while eliminating unconscionability risks

The Bigger Picture: Why This Matters for Your Business

This analysis revealed a fundamental truth: contracts that appear standard and comprehensive can harbor millions in hidden risks. The difference between enforceable protection and unconscionable overreach often lies in subtle legal distinctions that have massive financial implications.

The collaborative partnership approach proved essential—rather than simply identifying problems, we worked together to implement solutions that balanced legal protection with business needs and user rights.

Don't Wait for a Legal Challenge to Discover Your Vulnerabilities

The risks identified in this analysis are not unique to one company. Similar vulnerabilities exist in countless business contracts, creating ticking time bombs of legal and financial exposure. The question isn't whether these risks exist in your contracts—it's whether you'll discover them proactively or during expensive litigation.

• Review your terms of service for unconscionable liability limitations
• Examine content licensing language for overreach that could trigger user backlash
• Assess warranty disclaimers for consumer protection law compliance
• Evaluate indemnification clauses for enforceability
• Check jurisdictional requirements across your operating territories

The cost of prevention is always less than the cost of litigation. Don't let preventable legal risks become expensive lessons.

---

• How confident are you that your liability limitations would withstand judicial scrutiny?
• Could your content licensing terms be challenged as unconscionably broad?
• Are your warranty disclaimers actually enforceable under consumer protection laws?
• What would a $2,000,000 unprotected liability exposure mean for your business?

The partnership that transformed Wetherby Asset Management's legal posture from vulnerable to protected demonstrates that with proper analysis and collaborative implementation, even the most complex legal risks can be effectively addressed. The question is: will you address yours before they become costly problems?