What's wrong with mint.com?

One of the things I really need is personal finance software.  A number of industry friends have recommended mint.com.  I've looked at it several times and think it would be the right fit.  However, I'm skeptical about turning over all my personal financial information to another entity.  My major concern is not security, nor privacy (which I figure you just about give up when you sign up for any free service), but whether the company will stand behind its products.  To determine this, I looked at mint's Terms of Service.  Not surprisingly, it was disappointing.

As many of you who've seen me speak about "web 2.0" matters know, I believe that the Achilles heel of this new technology is how user's information will be used, disseminated and protected among the participants.  So in this case, will mint.com, and its sponsors protect my information once they're done using it, and will they stand behind these promises.  In the case of mint.com, it appears that the answer is "no."

The mint.com site contains significant information about how information is secured and protected, and how access and use of this information is restricted.  Indeed, the CEO points out that even if my credit card information is stolen, my liability is only $50.  However, in my view, my liability is much greater than that.  For example, let's say that one of mint.com's partners misuses my personal information and somehow damages my credit.  How will mint.com make me whole?

Looking at their Terms of Service, they won't.  Here's what their contract says:

MINT MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE CONTENT OR OPERATION OF MINT.COM OR OF THE SERVICE. YOU EXPRESSLY AGREE THAT YOUR USE OF THE SERVICE IS AT YOUR SOLE RISK.

Further:

MINT'S LIABILITY TO YOU FOR ANY CAUSE WHATEVER AND REGARDLESS OF THE FORM OF THE ACTION, WILL AT ALL TIMES BE LIMITED TO $500.00 (FIVE HUNDRED UNITED STATES DOLLARS).

So in other words, if something goes wrong, it's my burden to fix – mint.com isn't going to help – no matter what their CEO says on their website.

So what's my point?  I think that companies need to stand behind their products.  That often means thoughtfully considering requests from your customers to change the terms of your contract.  In many cases, you can stand behind your product by agreeing to broader indemnification provisions, or listing a major customer as an additional insured on your insurance policy.  Considering a carefully crafted warranty might also help.  For example in my case, a warranty from mint.com regarding onward data transfer might satisfy my concerns.

While in a consumer context it's unrealistic to assume that a company will amend their contract, in a business context, remaining flexible about contract terms may help differentiate you from your competitors, and lead to a deeper relationship with your customers.