BTand XLN

[JOSH_IOU]

Hi.

I am with a broadband compant called XLN.

They claim they have a contract duty to charge me £109 for canceling the line as it is a industry standard practice.

I am a sole trader and I trade from home so I am more than protected from consumer law as the contract is under £250,000.

This is a business line but I am told from BERR that I have protection.

Terms Of Business For Phone Call And Broadband Packages At XLN Telecom

This is there website can someone find for me this charge on there toc's?

I cant seem to find it.

[buzby]

I'm not sure what your question is - Consumer Law does not apply to trading customers, whether supplied to business or private addresses. Your terms would be stipulated under contract law, and the terms you agreed with your provider at the time of connection (assuming it was a business service).

Is the issue of concallation arising because you haven't completed a minimum term? Again, this would apply regardless of whether you were a business or consumer customer. If BERR are suggesting that the contract is invalid, I'd take that advice with a big pinch of salt.

[JOSH_IOU]

The service that was provided is in the link above bizby.

The relation the the relavant law as stated above was found listed at this link from business link who are part of the BERR.

Changes in the rules for consumer credit and hire agreements | Business Link

[JOSH_IOU]

I canceled the contract within the first month I think.

[buzby]

Ah - they're right then. You owe them for premature termination - this would appear to justify their charge for the remainder of the contract you agreed. As for 'consumer law', it does bot apply in your case so would be irrelevant. That said, a consumer would still be bound to comply also. As Telcos go, they mostly all report their customers conduct to credit reference agencies, so you may find as a sole trader, they've also defaulted you for breaking your agreement.

[JOSH_IOU]

Where dose it say that a £109 can be levied?

[buzby]

When you agreed to take out the iriginal service. The amount would be calculated baed on the remaining time you had left on the minimum period of service agreed.

[JOSH_IOU]

this Isthe email I got in response to my cancelation email.

========================= ====================


Good morning,

When a customer vacates their business premises or requests account closure there are three options available to the account.

The initial option is to move the telephone line to a separate XLN Telecom account under the name of New Tenant to allow any possible new tenants on site access to the telephone line and the opportunity to sign up with XLN Telecom.

The second option is to have the telephone line cancelled in full. This option will see the telephone line stopped altogether which will render the line inoperable and the telephone number itself may be lost. To reverse this action will cost 109.99 + VAT. Neither of the above options will see a cancellation fee applicable to the account.

The last option is to transfer the telephone line from XLN Telecom to an alternate service provider. XLN Telecom is unable to initiate a transfer away from our billing base. This request will need to be submitted to the supplier of your choice who will ensure that a transfer order is submitted on your behalf. This order will take between 10-12 days to complete. All billing that generates during your stay on our billing base will be chargeable.

So as not to complete a request without you being aware of the consequences, we await your further instruction in this regard and confirmation of the date you plan to vacate the premises if required.

Should you need to raise further concerns regarding this matter in the future your query reference number to quote alongside your XLN Telecom account number is: .

Thank you for bringing your requirements to our attention. Should you require any further assistance please feel free to contact us on the numbers listed above. Our opening hours are 8:30am to 5:30pm Monday to Friday. We look forward to being of service to you in the future.
Sincerely

[buzby]

You might want to edit out your A/c number!

Well, their fee would not have to be specified, only that there would be one. If it is being used as a 'lock in' mechanism, I believe they cannot do this under Consumer Law, but it is allowable for business terms. How kong had they provided you with service, and how long was the minimum term?

[JOSH_IOU]

there is a link to the terms and cons above buzby.

The business link url i was talking about is here

The Unfair Contract Terms Act | Business Link

[buzby]

Originally Posted by JOSH_IOU

there is a link to the terms and cons above buzby.

The business link url i was talking about is here

The Unfair Contract Terms Act | Business Link

Before any of that becomes relevant, can you answer my questons;

How long had they provided you with service, and how long was the minimum term?

[JOSH_IOU]

I did not sign a contract buzby

[buzby]

You do not HAVE to 'sign' a contract. Making use of the service and making a payment (even just one) is all that it takes. The rules on this have been largley negated by that of convenience. For example, you don;t have to sign a Direct Debit for a bank to pay it - that's the way it is. I'm assuming you don't want to answer my repeated questions for clarification.

[JOSH_IOU]

I havent answerd it because i cant find the info.

[buzby]

I'm only aware of BT allowing less than 12 months (6, I believe) for a customer who takes over a working line, all others are a minimum of 12 months. If you're service duration is LESS than 12 months, it'll be fair to assume this is why the charge is being made.

[JOSH_IOU]

Thanks for the reply Yes would be the fair answer. But this is the real world.

I have found this in the consumer credit act 2006

Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14)

Agreements regulated under the 1974 Act etc.

1 Definition of “individual”

In section 189(1) of the 1974 Act (definitions) for the definition of “individual” substitute—
“‘individual’ includes—
(a) a partnership consisting of two or three persons not all of whom are bodies corporate; and
(b) an unincorporated body of persons which does not consist entirely of bodies corporate and is not a partnership;”.



Would you say Sole Traders are coverd when they are not the suplier?

[buzby]

You've lost track of the argument I'm afraid. It's a bit like fiddling while Rome burns.... attempting to seek definitions that will suit your purpose are fine if they are remotely relevant, but quoting the CCA is about as much use as the Lowestoft Tide Tables.... your arrangement had nothing to do with the CCA, you've said you're a business (trader) so there is no relevance whatsoever to this definition in an Act that has no bearing on your circumstance or problem.