I am in a similar position and I was told today by customer service that the contract is for service to THIS address only and so if I no longer want the service at this address then I am terminating the contract. They are under no obligation to provide the service at another address - that would be a new contract. A quick glance over from a legal friend suggests that this sounds about right - if you contract a builder to repair roof and then move to another property, he/she is not obliged to repair the roof at your new address without charging you for the previously agreed work. I can see the logic in this - however, as many on here, I believe that there cancellation charges are unjust and their losses cannot be justified. I do not accept that 'Virgin do not make any money out of you until after 2 years'. If the new tenant at my property signs up for Virgin, they do not lose any money yet they only offer a £50 reduction in the cancellation fee if I manage to persuade the new tenant to take Virgin (not likely!). I have written to the CEO with my complaint and will keep you updated but I would be VERY interested on joining together to challenge the legality of their contract as unreasonable or to try and force them to justify their charge as mitigated losses in court.