Another relevant aspect is regarding provision of goods and services in that there is an implied clause in the Sale of goods and services that the products or services sold are of satisfactory quality and shall be suitable for the purpose for which it has been purchased. Besides, in this case it is believed that the buyer, Abigail, had relied on the skill and knowledge of the seller, Cable Fast, but ultimately, the services could not meet the needs of the buyer. Further, she had also informed Cablefast that she actually needed superfast broadband because she was a movie buff and a busy film critic, and yet there has been lowered degree of service provision by the internet service provider, Cable Fast.
Further, in this case, it is important to note that Cable Fast owes the buyer, Abigail, a duty of care. In the 1964 landmark case of Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd  AC 465, this issue arouse, especially under circumstances under which one party placed trust and reliance on the pronouncements and actions of another. Although the bank had categorically disclaimed their responsibility in providing credential opinions, yet, the duty of care aspect was evident. In deciding this case, the judge observed, “I consider that it follows and that it should now be regarded as settled that if someone possessed of a special skill undertakes, quite irrespective of contract, to apply that skill for the assistance of another person who relies upon such skill, a duty of care will arise. The fact that the service is to be given by means of or by the instrumentality of words can make no difference.” (Hedley Byrne & Co Ltd v Heller & Partners Ltd: Judgment, 1964).
Thus, the additional payment may not be enforceable, at the option of the buyer. In the case of exclusion clauses in contracts, it is necessary that contracting parties are