for and to receive cable services. Alternatively, plaintiff maintains that even if defendant’s decision to charge for the cable guide was a contract modification, the modification was invalid because it was not supported by consideration. Defendant contends that the trial court properly granted summary judgment on this issue because defendant’s actions constituted a valid contract modification that plaintiff ratified by paying for and receiving defendant’s services. A contract without a specified duration is terminable at will by either party. Alderman Drugs, Inc. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co., 161 Ill. App. 3d 783, 515 N.E.2d 689 (1987). A terminable-at-will contract may be unilaterally modified. Garber v. Harris Trust & Savings Bank, 104 Ill. App. 3d 675, 432 N.E.2d 1309 (1982) (<HOLDING>); see also Langendorf v. Irving Trust Co., 244
holding arbitration clause in credit card agreement unconscionable recognizing statutory credit holding that a credit issuing bank did not breach a credit agreement when it unilaterally modified the terms holding that  1823e does not apply to a claim relating to a letter of credit a letter of credit is a liability not an asset holding in the context of a fcra violation that a jury could find that a consumers credit score was negatively influenced by the failure to list a debt as disputed because evidence was presented that when a credit reporting agency received notice of a dispute it records the dispute in the credit report and does not include the derogatory information in assessing the credit score