Indeed a very, very grey area!

[Surfer01]

It seems that the mobile phone communication networks operate in a very grey area as no one seems certain where you stand legally and I think they take advantage of this and take us to the cleaners.

They do not have to supply copies of contracts, they do not have to notify you of a default notice, in fact they just do as it pleases them. I wonder if any one has challenged them in court yet? A pity none of us understand the laws governing the network suppliers.

Your views and thoughts!

[buzby]

No more than any other industry that uses contracts (BT, Virgin, ISP's) I'm not sure which grey area(s) you are specifically addressing - where you stand legally is is where the Terms & Conditions you agreed to take precedence. I dislike the idea that you can be held to agree to something without written confirmation (say a signature of acceptance) but you have to thank the Banks for driving this one through. Direct Debits being a case in point. Any firm who has the capability to use BACS to administer their debit system only has to enter a Sort Code and an account number to take money from you. You then have to prove you didn't. Because of the ease in which this is policed, any firm can do what they like and you have to fight your corner.

 

It is the courts who held that a customer giving his bank details to support a mobile contract and making payments in this way confirmed that the contract existed and would be bound by those terms. Nothing grey about that.

 

As to the defaults - this is the dictionary definition, you've failed to pay when you said you would. It is the Credit Reference agencies who perpetrate this, making a late payment default assume the status of a CCJ, all without you having the chance to go to court and defend the case.

 

For the 'copy contracts', the customer will have received the a copy at the time, for the rest, the T&Cs are on line. I've had a BT line for 20 odd years. I've lost my original contract but the terms are on line should I wish to look for them.

 

The laws regarding these contracts are enshrined in Contract Law. If we don't understand them, surely the answer is either take the time to learn the ramifications, or take a no-contract PAYG route? At the end of the day we do have to be responsible for our actions, not try and find someone to blame for our mistakes?

 

If we start by ensuring that DDM's and Phone Contracts have to be physically SIGNED and witnessed as in the days of old, that should stop many of the problems dead in their tracks!

[globalart4u]

i asked my mobile company for a copy of my contract last year - but it is a business account - and they sent me a copy i had signed two years previously when i took out a business contract with them and an updated terms and conditions.

[Surfer01]

No more than any other industry that uses contracts (BT, Virgin, ISP's) I'm not sure which grey area(s) you are specifically addressing - where you stand legally is is where the Terms & Conditions you agreed to take precedence. I dislike the idea that you can be held to agree to something without written confirmation (say a signature of acceptance) but you have to thank the Banks for driving this one through. Direct Debits being a case in point. Any firm who has the capability to use BACS to administer their debit system only has to enter a Sort Code and an account number to take money from you. You then have to prove you didn't. Because of the ease in which this is policed, any firm can do what they like and you have to fight your corner. Agreed!

 

It is the courts who held that a customer giving his bank details to support a mobile contract and making payments in this way confirmed that the contract existed and would be bound by those terms. Nothing grey about that. So if you agreed to a 12 month contract at "x" rate per unit and they state that you are on a 18 month contract at "y", they are right?

 

As to the defaults - this is the dictionary definition, you've failed to pay when you said you would. It is the Credit Reference agencies who perpetrate this, making a late payment default assume the status of a CCJ, all without you having the chance to go to court and defend the case. So if you default as a result of their misleading statements togh luck on you?

 

For the 'copy contracts', the customer will have received the a copy at the time, for the rest, the T&Cs are on line. I've had a BT line for 20 odd years. I've lost my original contract but the terms are on line should I wish to look for them. I have never have received a copy contract for any long term mobile contract despite requesting it at the time.

 

The laws regarding these contracts are enshrined in Contract Law. If we don't understand them, surely the answer is either take the time to learn the ramifications, or take a no-contract PAYG route? At the end of the day we do have to be responsible for our actions, not try and find someone to blame for our mistakes? I am not trying to find any one to blame, just information which hopefully will be obtained on this site at some point.

 

If we start by ensuring that DDM's and Phone Contracts have to be physically SIGNED and witnessed as in the days of old, that should stop many of the problems dead in their tracks!

Agreed

[lawbunny]

Can I just add a point to the people who claim not to know what contract they are on (until they finally notice they're paying more than expected like 6 months later); on your bills (with one network anyway) it actually states what price plan you are being billed for, how much it is, and what your allowance is. I therefore do not understand people who say that they were unaware they were on a different price plan to what htey thought. Obviously, this is irrelevant to people who notice straight away that a network has put them on the wrong price plan, but a large number of people simply just do not read their terms and conditions or their bills.

[buzby]

Have to agree - but what sticks in my throat is when the networks are allowed to claim a phone comes with a HALF-PRICE promise. In it, you'll be charged £15 instead of £30. So far so good, but the small print then says you only get it half price for 3 or 6 months, whilst the contract duration is !8 months, so the 'half-price' come-on may have been factually correct, but is still misleading.

 

I'd love to see the ASA insist that any price promotion should be for a limited period, if a minimum contract of service is required, then that discount must run for that period also.

[Surfer01]

Can I just add a point to the people who claim not to know what contract they are on (until they finally notice they're paying more than expected like 6 months later); on your bills (with one network anyway) it actually states what price plan you are being billed for, how much it is, and what your allowance is. I therefore do not understand people who say that they were unaware they were on a different price plan to what htey thought. Obviously, this is irrelevant to people who notice straight away that a network has put them on the wrong price plan, but a large number of people simply just do not read their terms and conditions or their bills.

I agree but if something changes you will not know about it until after you receive the bill as in my case. As it was through an agent I have no comeback.

[buzby]

I agree but if something changes you will not know about it until after you receive the bill as in my case. As it was through an agent I have no comeback.

 

How will you not know? Both Virgin and BT have advised customers of the changes to their contract prior to the implementation. In BTs case, the Late Payment charge was snuck in a revised list of T&Cs in minuscule print, as part of their BT Update bill stuffer.

 

Since hardly anybody reads it (but I did and reported on the changes here) it is difficult to challenge when you don't object until after the items appears on your bill. In BT's case, we had 3 month's notice - but only if you read the info. They say they must give you 30 days notice, so they managed that!

[lawbunny]

To be fair, if something other than T&Cs were to change ie a price plan or promotion, and a customer did not notice until their first bill after the change (which is understandable) then I personally would go to my manager and argue the customer's case to try to correct the error if there seemed to be one.

 

I do not, however, have much sympathy for people who have either (1) had 3 months notice T&Cs are changing and do not do anything until like 6 months later, or (2) had a price plan change / bundle removed/added / discount ended - which shows on every single bill - yet the customer does not bother actually reading the bill so does not notice until like 6 months later and then wants a complete refund. I have had customers actually admit to me that they just simply did not read their bills, yet somehow it is still my fault.

 

Customers have to take some of the responsibility in these situations. But like I said at the start of this post, if someone calls me after the first bill then I will pull out all the stops trying to solve the problem.

[Surfer01]

In my case I was assured in writing that once the free period had expired I would be charged £4 per gigabyte download and it was for this specific reason that I agreed to the Orange contract as I could have subscribed to Vodafone for a datacard as I did not really need the phones.

It the turned out that the agent had mislead me on download costs however I was stuck in a 12 month contract with over £700 of downlaod charges accummalated in the period of two months. It turns out it should have been £4 per megabyte and if i had know that there is no ways that I would have taken out the Oranger subscription as Vodafone at £43 for 1GB would have been cheaper.

Because I never had a contract from Orange stating costs once the freebie period ended I never had a leg to stand on and subsequnently got defaulted as there was no ways I could fork out £700 in two months. The only thing I had in writing was the email from the agent and although I sent a copy to Orange they were not interested.

Now that I want to pursue it to get the default removed I am finding that no one is very clear on what network suppliers can do and what they can't do, even professional people as everything seems to almost but not quite skirt around the outside of the consumer law, i.e. as there is no CCA covering this, is there any point in doing a SAR etc. Besides Ofcom who are not interested, is there any one else you cna turn to for clarification of the rules and regulations governing sale and use of mobile phones.

Thanks for your view lawbunny and Buzby.

[lawbunny]

Ah ha! This is a different issue. The network told you one thing yet are doing something else. Did the email mention the price which the Orange person had quoted you? As if it does, I don't think Orange would have a leg to stand on. Although, they would probably just point you towards their online T&Cs and say you should have read those.

[Surfer01]

The email received from the agent stated the price per gigabyte but it was only 3 months later I found out that I had been misquoted. Although I can probably claim back the excess paid I am more interested in getting the default removed and as such I haven't got anything I cna quote at them except to say that in a way the contractwas not really valid and if it was not really valid then the T & Cs would fall away. yeah i know I am grasping at straws but my "contract" knowledge is sparse especially when dealing with companies like Orange.

Hopefully lawbunny you may be able to come up with something because it the "normal" world as the promise of goods at a certain price was nto forthcoming the contract should be null & void. Thanks for taking the trouble to respond.

Why can't a supplier be held liable to actions of their agents? Would stop a lot of crap dead in its tracks as the supplier will rap the agent.

[lawbunny]

Bearing in mind that I do not work for Orange, I have to say if I had a customer in your situation who could actually fax me a copy of the email etc (to be honest, most of our outgoing emails are recorded on the customer's account anyway so I would probably be able to see it already) then my manager and I would credit you back for the extra charges and pass the default issue up to be dealt with. I don't really see how Orange could possibly argue otherwise - you have written correspondence from Orange stating the price (admittedly, they got it wrong, but that's not your problem).

[boo_kitty10]

hi surfer,

i was in the same position as you yesterday i viewed my bill online and saw 5.00 credited on for some weekend thing so obviously i called them up and said whats this im 3 months into my contract i spoke to a very rude man who said you signed up to this contract and agreed to the contract-you never cancelled the download offer hence you will be charged for the remainder of your contract-i was mad and said noone mentioned this to me and therefore i wil not be paying for that i siggned up for the phone,the minutes the texts and the contract for 24 months but not that bit,if i had done so i would pay for it,the man then got aggresive and even ruder saying well i tell you what we'll charge you for the phone and all the calls you've made and keep on billing you-how you gonna like that so u told him i am not stupid i know what i signed upto and can prove it as when i registered the handset i recorded the call and there was no mention of this download thing they're charging me for, i said i can prove i did not - can you prove i did as i always record calls i make to use when people try to lie (obviously he pooped himself as he'd been unprofessional,rude and ended my call) no doubt about it im fuming now rang back explained the situation to a lady who said yes he wasnt comfortable about being recorded i have the notes here i said i bet he wasnt after how he just spoke to me-she cancelled all charges for not paying by direct debit,ended the extra thing i was supposedly going to be continouly charged for and it will be credited back to my account

(and guys i didnt record him isnt it so funny though the result you get when you say you can show their incompetance..........)

[lawbunny]

Hey, I'm sorry to hear that you had such a bad experience, I'm glad you got a competent csa who could sort the problem out for you, although I have to point out that if near the end of one of my calls a customer then said she had been recording the call but had never advised me of this I would be rather annoyed also - even if you were faking it, you should have told him that to start with. It's possible this gentleman has arranged for a notification to be put on your account now that you record calls and do not inform anyone, so all future csa's will not be a bit edgy when talking to you.

[Cattolica]

...although I have to point out that if near the end of one of my calls a customer then said she had been recording the call but had never advised me of this I would be rather annoyed also - even if you were faking it, you should have told him that to start with. It's possible this gentleman has arranged for a notification to be put on your account now that you record calls and do not inform anyone, so all future csa's will not be a bit edgy when talking to you.

 

Why should any 'honest' CSA be worried if a call is recorded? As most companies now record incoming calls what is the problem? As long as BOTH parties are not telling any 'porky pies' or giving bull***t, as with the companies copy, the recording would be kept as a clear memo of the conversation and all point made regarding the problem in question.

 

If you are doing your job correctly and honestly why, as a CSA, are you in fear of your conversation being recorded? :?

[lawbunny]

I'm honest. It wouldn't make any difference to my advice, but it's just courtesy. The network advises you that they might record your calls, it's only polite to do the same thing. If I was helping a customer and building good rapport with them I would be unhappy if they then turned round later in the call and said "oh, by the way, I'm recording you". Just like you wouldn't be happy if a person phoned your home and then at teh end of your conversation said they had just been recording you. It's kinda weird.

[Cattolica]

Don't get me wrong, this was not personal. It was just a general comment. No insult meant, I'm sure that you are honest.

 

When a call is recieved from, for example your bank, mobile phone network or utility supplier, these are all recorded. The receiver of the call is not told at the begining of the conversation that it is being recorded or monitored. You can't have it both ways. Sadly consumers do not make use of a recorder often enough to cover themselves.

[noimagination]

.

[lawbunny]

Actually, it's kinda ironic, but I was in the whole customer recording me and not telling me til the end situation today, and I have to say I found it kinda creepy. You need to remember that when a company calls you it is kept on a company database, but when a person records you from their own home the recording is simply sitting on their computer etc at home.

 

Also, whilst I appreciate you say it is nothing personal (and I do not take it as such), it is also nothing personal that I think it is nice to ask the csa if they mind being recorded (if they don't want to be their manager takes over the call, they don't just tell you to go away!) as there is no way for me to be sure that a person does not fiddle with a recording of me on their computer to try to get me into trouble (I have had really vindictive customers who ask to speak to a manager when they are not happy with what I've told them and then blatantly lie and say I swore at them etc). Whilst I appreciate the vast majority of customers are not like this, I stand to lose my job and future as a lawyer because of their recording; the most that can happen to them is that they lose their complaint case etc.

 

Anyhoo, that was massively offtopic, so back to the topic at hand...