The Idea that a verbal contract is un-enforceable is a fallacy. The requirements for a binding contract are these : An agreement between parties for the supply of goods or a service for a consideration. The intention that the parties to the contract be legally bound by it. The exchange of consideration or the promise of future consideration. Consideration from switch2 is the supply of telephone services. Your consideration is the promise to pay the bills as they fall due. There is no need for a contract to be in writing to be legally binding other than a contract the sale or lease of land. However it is not possible for them to rely on terms and conditions of a contract not made known to you prior to the formation of the contract.

Its complicated but basically if they don't have a copy of the agreement they can't prove an agreement ever exsisted. If there was no agreement then you could not have agreed to their using or processing the data. By using the Phone after receiving a copy of the amended T&C's it can be held that those new T&C's have been accepted. I will bet my left ******* that there is a statement to that effect in those same T&C's. You should make an application under the DPA for copies of all data and documents they hold about you this should reveal a copy of any agreement made and it has to be in a legible format. It can also be useful to request a copy of their DPA registration as this will detail which data they collect and the purposes for which it is used, they can and probably will make a charge but it cannot exceed the actual cost of providing the information usually the charge is about a tenner.

interesting but it would be helpful if you cited the section as well as the subsection. Please also bear in mind that legislation does not stand alone it is amended by case law and Statutory Instuments, which are often not included unless the source you are using is the latest updated and annotated version. It is always important to take this into consideration, usually case law tends to clarify the provisions of an Act which is often in the claimants favour but not allways.

I think you will find that the contract to provide the service is made under the terms of the Consumer Credit Act if it is a 'contract' 'Phone much like the telewest and NTL service supply agreements. If at the time you took out the 'contract' for the 'phone you physicaly signed a document you will find that on the reverse of the form there will be the terms and conditions usually in small light coloured print. If this is not the case than the terms and conditions cannot be relied on by the provider, as terms of a contact cannot be added after the contract has been made (except in employment contracts) there is plenty of case law on this. The contract is made at the time your offer is accepted and consideration or the promise of future consideration has been exchanged. This is basicaly when you go into a mobile phone shop offer to take a phone on a contract, sign the agreement and and a standing order form. The consideration is the company supplies you with the phone usually on the spot and you provide future consideration by making the standing order in their favour. You will also often find a clause somewhere on the conditions stating that only the terms and conditions printed on the form will apply and stating that no employee has the authority to add to or amend the terms of the agreement or contract.

Hi All, I have been considering having a go at the banks that have screwed me for years but have been too lazy to do anything about it. No excuse when I hold the degree LL.B (Hons.) and Pg.Dip Legal Practice. Though I have no particular desire to practice I do like to play with the sharks now and then to alleviate the boredom and this time it's the banks. The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation who seem to want me to pay for the stupidity of the Midland Bank in the 80's when they bought a debt ridden US Bank making them vulnerable to the HSBC takeover. I have closed that account but they still owe me and I want it. Of course my current bank, the lovely Nat West do like to charge me for unauthorised borrowing when my account goes overdrawn two days before they know my salary will be paid into the account. Well I now have the time and the inclination to play with them so I will.