Telewest T&C

mnrbig · 5th January 2007, 15:31

Does anybody think that a term in the Telewest contract allowing them to hold you to the minimum contract period when they can no longer supply you with the service is fair?

buzby · 5th January 2007, 15:43

Er no, although I understnad that it is NTL's version of the customer contract that now prevails. If you move to a non-cabled area (or within an area and they cannot provide service) then the cable company invariably terminate the contract, as it is not the consumer's fault that there is no cable abailable at their new address.

The way to move this along is to give plenty of notice of your impending move, and request service at your new address. They will attempt to reprovide, and if they cannot, usually apologise and arrange for the contract to be cancelled on your moving date.

mnrbig · 5th January 2007, 15:51

Actually in my case, Telewest could not supply the service but still insisted on the contract balance. I have now been defaulted for it, but I am considering going to court as I feel that term is unfair.

buzby · 5th January 2007, 15:57

Shame it came to that. Martin3030 has experience of the customer 'service' and am sure will be along shortly. Am I correct in assuming you've been sent an invoice for early temrination of the contract, and it is this amount they're pursuing?

If so, make sure you send a notice of dispute, stating that you had no wish for the contract to be temrinated, and that it was TW's inability to provide service at your new address that caused the problem. Also tell them that you will fully challenge any court action, along with any unjustified entries on your credit record.

mnrbig · 5th January 2007, 16:02

This all happened a year ago. They are no longer pursuing me for the amount as they are aware it is in dispute, however the default was registered "just for the fun of it". I want them to remove it.

buzby · 5th January 2007, 16:12

Diffcult at this late stage in the game. You need to get thne to look at the issue of non-provision, rather than non payment, as this will only disappear when the non provision matter is agreed.

meagain · 6th January 2007, 06:24

When I moved in June, rather than hit me for a balance for the remaining months, they just kept charging me the monthly bill. I told them I'd moved. I gave them the new address. They said "Oh, there's cable there. We'll move it for you." I told them there was a TalkTalk phone line installed which was not mine to change, and I wasn't going to pay for 2 months of service not received or receivable. They backed down.

The funniest part: when I signed up again in October, the rep told me "we're not doing the 9-month contracts any more, when you move, just tell them there's no cable, or someone else owns the phone, or something".

mnrbig · 6th January 2007, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzby

Diffcult at this late stage in the game. You need to get thne to look at the issue of non-provision, rather than non payment, as this will only disappear when the non provision matter is agreed.

I was thinking of challenging the fairness of the clause. That way I could get them to right of the money owed and det them to remove the default. I suppose I could ask them nicely, however this has not worked in the past.

buzby · 7th January 2007, 15:30

Difficult on fairness, as if the judge accepts that you freely entered into the agreement, it might be said that this would effectively preclude you from moving until the anniversary of the contract, failing this, you'd be compelled to make a payment that represented the cable co's loss because of your inability to complete the agreement entered.

For what it's worth, I had an ISDN line from BT, and they introduced ISDN2, but they scaled the quarterly payments based on the minimum contract I signed, a 12 month contract was £225 per quarter, but a 5 year one was £120 - quite a saving. I took the second option and after 3 years moved. My new exchange had no ISDN capacity so an order could not be processed, I then got hit with a recalculation of 3 years at the original (undiscounted) rate. I only got out of paying after I appealed that I STILL required ISDN2, but it was their inability to provide it, not my unwillingness to enter into a new contract that was the problem.

They eventually relented.

That's why I always advise shift the burden to them to provide, not say a pre-existing contract condition was unfair....

mnrbig · 10th January 2007, 12:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by buzby

That's why I always advise shift the burden to them to provide, not say a pre-existing contract condition was unfair....

So do I write and ask them to supply me with the service for the remainder of the contract?

buzby · 10th January 2007, 14:32

To my mind that would be the easiest course of action, because that means it is not you breaking the contract by virtue of moving, but their inability to offer service at your new address. Since we have 1 cable company covering the UK, it is not an unreasonable to expect your new address to be serviced by them. If they cannot, it is their failure, not yours. If they expected you to stay with them and not move, then that should have been a contract condition. (But it wasn't!).

mnrbig · 10th January 2007, 14:37

Even though it's been more than a year since I have moved?

buzby · 10th January 2007, 15:08

For all they knew you already asked them to transfer the service to your new address...? I thought it was their inability to provide service at your new address that caused the problem, therefore you didn't refuse to continue with their package, they didn't install it to let you transfer. What does it say on their website when you try to become a customer using your new postcode? If the website says no service is available, thae a screen grab of this, and use this as your supporting documentation that the balance they are asking is unreasonable.

mnrbig · 10th January 2007, 15:16

That's the whole problem. Their service is not available in my area, however their T&C say that even though they cannot provide the service, I am liable for the duration of the contract. That is why I originally went down the route of the term being unfair. I did ask them to supply the new address but was told it was not possible, but I still have a contract for 12 months which I need to pay in full. I of course refused siting the fact that I can't pay for something I can't use.

buzby · 10th January 2007, 15:23

My point entirely. If you have evidence of their inability to provide the service, their demand for payment for services you cannot use are unfair - irrespective of what they claim in their T&C. As long as you are sure they will not say you did not request service at your new address, send them a letter before action and advise you will sue them for the amount claimed.

mnrbig · 10th January 2007, 15:32

Exactly my point. The fact that they are unable to supply the service and still expect you to pay is unfair. Hence that clause is unfair.

CAG Products - We think that these will help you to make your claim or Reclaim your Right These sales also help us to keep helping YOU and keeps this site free of third party adverts!

Small Claims Kit	Small Claims Court Guide New Edition	CallBurner - Skype CallRecorder Review	Last Will & Testament Kit	Fight a Motoring Ticket

Alternatively you could purchase a CAG email address here, or maybe you'd prefer our address labels here
UPDATE: Consumer Forums ConsumerWiki is now LIVE - click here: ConsumerWiki N.B. Please note - due to postage costs these products are only available in the U.K.