I vaguely recall Swift came unstuck in a court case about the validity of terms & conditions attached to their rental credit agreements. Something to do with "12 months from" being different enough from "within 12 months of" for their agreement to fall outside some consumer protection rule by one day(?)
It came up on a BBC money programme. Maybe it was an isolated case and I am being unfair in reviving it. And presumably, if they lost the case, they will have corrected things. (And for all I know, it could have been an agreement form used by all players including ACE)