[SEMW]

English law student here. This isn't legal advice.

Generally, in common law countries, if you're not paying Google for the services, the legal system won't help you. Since you gave no consideration for the services you got, there's no legal contract, so you can't even enforce their own terms of service against them.

(In theory, an action in tort for negligent provision of services can succeed against a provider you didn't pay - but in practice, that'd fail for a number of reasons in this situation (in England anyway)).

As soon as you're paying for services, the whole thing changes. You've suddenly got the contract law at your back, and with that comes whatever laws govern unfair terms in consumer contracts, and the supply of services to consumers, in your jurisdiction. You're in a vastly better position, legally.

[RawData]

Consideraion doesn't necessarily have to be money...

[SEMW]

I'm guessing you mean that having adverts shown to you might be good consideration?

I guess it's possible that it might be held to be, but it's by no means a given. (I don't know any English cases on that, but there may be US ones I'm not familiar with. All the cases of website terms I know are ones where the website owner wants to enforce against the user, so don't help, as AFAICS the courts only care whether the party seeking to enforce gave consideration (which they have: the service)).

But even if you succeed in that, it still might not help you. Seems to me that the effect of that would be to make the service a standing offer on Google's part. Analogy: a sign on a shack saying "Come in and take a biscuit if you view the advert on the wall". The consideration isn't in return for a promise to continue to provide services. If the shack owner removed the shack one day, you couldn't sue him for breach of contract.

Wheras if you've paid money for a service and they don't provide it, they're in breach, full stop. (Even if they claim you're in breach, they have to notify you and give you a reasonable time to cure it).

IANAL, and my consideration analysis might be completely wrong. But even if it is, I still strongly suspect it's not going to be easy to convince a court to hold Google in breach for stopping giving you a service you weren't paying for. If you're paying for a service, you're in a much more secure position.

[RawData]

If I offer to let you park your car in my garage for free, and then one day lock the door and take your car...I'm not allowed to do that just because I had been letting you park there for free. The car still belongs to you.

Likewise, google shouldnt be able to close a free account and keep all my email, my stored files, etc. it's ludicrous.

Yet thats exactly what they do..time and again...and people just bend over and take it.