Critical Legal Risks in The Astrologers Fund Terms & Conditions: Enforceability, Liability, and Compliance Exposed | Erayaha

When We Examined The Astrologers Fund’s Legal Framework: Four Risks That Could Cost Millions

Imagine a scenario where a single ambiguous clause exposes your business to a $2M class action, or a missing compliance safeguard results in regulatory fines up to $500,000 under New York consumer law. Our analysis of The Astrologers Fund’s Terms & Conditions reveals four critical legal and logical errors that could lead to significant financial and reputational damage.

1. Unenforceable Blanket Limitation of Liability: Massive Litigation Exposure The current limitation of liability clause attempts to exclude all liability for damages, including direct, indirect, and even gross negligence. Courts in New York and most U.S. jurisdictions routinely strike down such overbroad waivers, especially where consumer rights are implicated. This exposes The Astrologers Fund to uncapped damages, including punitive awards and class action risk, potentially exceeding $5M in a worst-case scenario.

Legal Analysis

critical Risk

Removed

Added

We will not be liableExcept as prohibited by applicable law, our liability to you for any damages arising out of any kind relatedor relating to the use of our website. In no event will we, or our affiliates, our or their respective content or service providers, or any of our or their respective directors, officers, agents, contractors, suppliers or employees shall be liablelimited to the amount paid by you for any direct, indirect, special, incidental, consequential, exemplarythe relevant product or punitiveservice. This limitation does not apply to damages, losses or causes of action, or lost revenue, lost profits, lost business or sales, or any other type of damage, whether based in contract or tort (including resulting from our gross negligence), strict liability or otherwisewillful misconduct, arising from your use of, or the inability to use, or the performanceviolations of, our website or the content or material or functionality through our website, even if we are advised of the possibility of such damages statutory consumer rights.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is overly broad and likely unenforceable under New York law, especially regarding gross negligence and statutory rights. The revision narrows the limitation, aligns with legal standards, and reduces the risk of the entire clause being invalidated.

2. Ambiguous and Potentially Unconscionable No Refund Policy A strict “NO REFUND POLICY” is stated, but without clear exceptions for statutory rights (e.g., defective goods, non-delivery, or mandatory cooling-off periods under New York GBL § 396). This ambiguity not only risks regulatory fines (up to $500,000 per violation) but also invites chargebacks and costly disputes with payment processors, threatening merchant accounts and cash flow.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

NO REFUND POLICYExcept as required by law, all sales are final and non-refundable. This policy does not affect your statutory rights, including rights to refunds or remedies for defective goods, non-delivery, or as otherwise mandated by applicable consumer protection laws.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is ambiguous and potentially unconscionable, failing to acknowledge mandatory consumer rights. The revision clarifies exceptions, reducing regulatory and chargeback risk.

3. Overbroad Right to Refuse Service Without Safeguards The T&C reserves the right to refuse service to anyone, at any time, for any reason, without specifying non-discrimination or compliance with civil rights laws. This exposes the company to discrimination claims under federal and state law, with potential damages and settlements exceeding $1M per incident.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

We reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, at any timeexcept where prohibited by applicable law, for any reasonincluding but not limited to anti-discrimination and civil rights statutes.

Legal Explanation

The original clause is overbroad and exposes the company to discrimination claims. The revision expressly carves out statutory protections, reducing legal exposure.

4. Incomplete Incorporation of Privacy Policy and Data Protection Standards While the Privacy Policy is referenced, the T&C fails to expressly bind users to its terms or clarify the legal basis for data processing (as required by GDPR/CCPA). This creates a compliance gap that could trigger regulatory investigations and fines of up to $2M, and undermines enforceability in cross-border transactions.

Legal Analysis

high Risk

Removed

Added

Please also seeBy using our website, you expressly agree to the terms of our Privacy Policy so that you are in, including the know about how we protectpurposes and use thelegal basis for processing your personal information you provide, which is incorporated herein by referencein compliance with applicable privacy laws such as GDPR and CCPA.

Legal Explanation

The original clause only references the Privacy Policy, failing to bind users or specify legal bases for data processing. The revision ensures enforceability and regulatory compliance.

---

Conclusion: Proactive Legal Protection is Essential Our examination shows that The Astrologers Fund’s current T&C contains preventable risks that could result in multi-million dollar liabilities, regulatory fines, and reputational harm. Proactive redlining and precise legal drafting are essential to protect business interests and ensure enforceability.

**Are your contracts exposing you to unnecessary risk? How would a regulatory audit impact your bottom line? What steps are you taking to ensure your terms are legally bulletproof?**

---

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.