Foreign Debt

[soma]

I signed up for Web Hosting with a company in Denmark, and used them for about 3 years. You would normally pay 12 months in advance. But last Jan I decided I didn't really need it anymore so let the domain name lapse. I forgot all about it, but now the company have sent me a letter demanding payment for the next year, charging interest and threatening legal action by their solicitors in Copenhagen.

 

The sum for the year is £22, but I am reluctant to pay it because

 

1) without a domain name it is useless so for the whole period they are charging the account is unable to be used. Their T&C's are therefore unfair as they are not actually providing any service at all for the whole year.

 

2) They want payment to their bank account in Denmark which will cost probably £20 in bank fees and then there is the hassle of filling out the paperwork in person at the bank, it is not actually very easy for me to travel from work to a bank.

 

I have asked them to write the amount off, but they say their terms and conditions specify you have to give at least 45 days notice before the start of the next yearly period (May to April) and that they are not responsible for Domain names.

 

Do you think if I ignore them they will go away, I mean surely its not worth pursing an international debt for £22? Their T&Cs state the agreement is covered by the laws of Denmark.

Edited October 13, 2008 by soma

[joe45]

I am having a simular scenario with 1&1 domain hosting so far the billis only £15 but they are threatening court action which will increase the sum to nearly £100, will have to see where they take it next.

Joe

[sleepz]

Their T&C's are therefore unfair as they are not actually providing any service at all for the whole year.

 

Sorry, this is a bit pedantic, and im not arguing wether what they're doing is right or wrong but technically they are providing the service, you are just choosing to not use it, or do not need it any longer.

It'd be a bit like me buying a gallon of Petrol, when I don't have a car.

[soma]

Sorry, this is a bit pedantic, and im not arguing wether what they're doing is right or wrong but technically they are providing the service, you are just choosing to not use it, or do not need it any longer.

It'd be a bit like me buying a gallon of Petrol, when I don't have a car.

 

In practical terms they are not providing a service, they are not using any bandwidth, they are not using any disk space, it costs them nothing to provide but even if I wanted to use it I cannot access it without a domain name.

 

I have been a good customer for 3 years, I have recommended the hosts to my friends who are now using them as well. They lose more by trying to enforce the agreement as now I would not use them again and I would not recommend them to anyone. The hire car company just puts your money in the bank safe in the knowledge they will never have to pay out.

 

Companies that have unfair cancellation requirements really annoy me. Why do they need 45 days written notice? The only reason is they hope you forget.

 

An analogy I see would be if you rent a Car (domain name) for a year, after a year you crush the car as you decide it is of no use to you anymore. so the Car is gone, but they still want you to pay for the insurance (hosting) for the next year as you have not told the hire company you no longer require cover. So you have no Car but you have Insurance for a year that covers a Car that no longer exists. You cannot claim under the insurance so gain no benefit for having it for another year.

Edited October 14, 2008 by soma

[soma]

Ok there are 3 things to clear up.

 

Would Scottish law apply because I live in Scotland?

If so can I ask for a Credit Agreement to be produced?

 

If not would they take it to court in Denmark and could a Danish Court enforce a judgement as I have no assets in Denmark?

 

Debt collecting in Denmark

 

 

Brussels Regime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article 2 prescribes that a person (legal or natural) may only be sued in the member state in which he or she is domiciled.

 

Where the Brussels Regulation or Lugano Convention applies, consumer contracts (as defined in the Regulation and the Convention) are different. Under the Regulation and the Convention, jurisdiction clauses can only add to consumers’ rights to litigate, not subtract from them. So, if a consumer has a right to bring proceedings against a supplier under the rules discussed above, that right cannot be removed by means of a contractual jurisdiction clause. Similarly, where a supplier is obliged to bring proceedings against a consumer in the consumer’s jurisdiction of domicile, then that obligation cannot be altered by a choice of jurisdiction clause.

Edited October 14, 2008 by soma

[dx100uk]

like the other poster says

on both accounts i'm not being pedantic, but, you agreed to the T&C when you signed up with them.

 

might it not just be an easier course of action for both of you tto pay the sums by internet banking? it costs nowt to do and the matter would be resolved.

then p'haps write to the co's involved and pointout you both feel unhappy about the clauses and ask for a small refund in good faith?

 

dx

[sleepz]

There's a bit of a difference here ... a domain name and domain hosting are two completely different things.

 

===Brief reply ===

Domain name - you buy it for 2 years (for example) it expires and becomes available to anyone else to buy.

Domain Hosting - the place where you store your files (your website). If the domain name expires, the files are still on their server taking space untill you tell them to remove it, ie you'll still be charged for it untill you tell them to stop.

 

 

== Longer reply ==

"I signed up for Web Hosting with a company in Denmark, and used them for about 3 years. You would normally pay 12 months in advance. But last Jan I decided I didn't really need it anymore so let the domain name lapse."

 

Sorry, I work in this field, but it's not really clear ... Your argument is with Web Hosting, which would refer to the hard drive space ( or server space) where you upload and store your files, and your website.

 

The Domain name is a seperate entity, such as www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk, which is simply an internet protocol that sends people to the files you have stored on your web hosting.

 

I assume your not talking about the domain name because you say ". But last Jan I decided I didn't really need it anymore so let the domain name lapse.".

 

The domain name, you buy it for two years (for example) and then it expires, allowing other people to buy that domain name, you won't ever be recharged for that, you pay for it for 2 years, or whatever at the start, it expires and becomes available to others to buy (unless you renew it before it expires, and they would tell you when it's about to expire, giving you the chance to renew before it becomes available to anyone else).

 

Soooo, I assume your talking about web hosting.

The problem with web space (web hosting) is that if you let your domain name expire, it doesn't particularly matter to the web server people, they are charging you for storing your files on their server ... wether your domain name has expired or not is irrelevant to them, the domain name is a seperate entity, and wether or not people can access your website, they're still holding your website and your files on their servers, and that's what they are charging you for.

If you bought your domain name and web hosting at the same time, ie with the same company, you can let the domain name expire, but the server (hard disk space holding your website) is still being used untill you cancel it, as it's very easy to buy a new domain namev(from a different provider) and get your new domain directed (pointed) to the files (website) you have on the server your claiming against.

 

Sorry if that doesn't make much sense, or sounds a bit patronising, but a bit drunk and trying to say it in non technical words.

 

 

In your Analagy

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

"An analogy I see would be if you rent a Car (domain name) for a year, after a year you crush the car as you decide it is of no use to you anymore." ... "but they still want you to pay for the insurance (hosting) for the next year as you have not told the hire company you no longer require cover."

 

Yeah, that kinda works. After a year you decide to crush the car ( domain name ), you need to tell the insurance people that you have crushed the car, so you don't need insurance anymore (hosting), if you don't tell them you've crushed the car, of course they are going to keep asking for payments, how do they know if you've still got the car or not?"

 

 

Bit off topic, but if you crush a hire car, they won't be too happy with you, and that'll be an entirely different thread on here

 

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

 

Sorry, it's probably not what you wanna hear, I doubt because of the money, more for the principle ... but I'd just pay them the £22 and be done with it. You can pay them by credit card, or by switch / debit card, and you won't get charged.

Edited October 15, 2008 by sleepz

[soma]

Thanks but I know exactly the difference between a domain name and web hosting as I too work in this field. If they were actually storing my files I would agree with you but as I have never used it as a website there are no files to store. Therefore I am not and have never been affecting their resources. That was my point.

 

I have taken hosting for 3 years at £10 a year, on a rolling 12 month contract, as it is cheap it does not really matter whether or not I take advantage of their hosting, I was really only interested in securing the Domain Name (for personal reasons).

 

For them to ask for another £30 (the current rate after they have added 'fees' for the year) seems unfair as this represents a further 3 years of use. As a matter of customer goodwill and since I have never taken advantage of their hosting service I would expect them to be happy to have received £30 for nothing over the last 3 years and not letters of demand for another £30? They have the ability to use their discretion but would rather try and minimise their costs and take as much money as possible.

 

They are just another example of a company which promises you something at a low price then when you come to leave they make it as difficult as possible to try and extract more money - similar to Gym Memberships, Mobile Phone Contracts.

 

[RANT]

Why if I had my way contracts for a consumer product could not last longer than 1 month and you would be able to cancel in writing with at most 1 months notice. :evil:At the very least after a 12 month contract the company should have to write to you and ask if you would like to continue using the service. The presumption should not be that you are happy to continue.

[/RANT]

 

Yes, Yes I'm probably being completely unreasonable as writing T&C's blatantly in your favour then hiding them on a small link off of your website always trumps fairness or common sense.

 

Sigh so if I pay them the original fee of £12 + £10 late payment fee they will not keep pursing the added charges of £10 for their DCA to write me a letter? They do not take payment by C/C only by IBAN Bank Transfer so thats another £16 and a trip to the bank. So either £38 or £48 (nearly five years service!). My bank tells me that I cannot use online banking to make international transfers.

Edited October 15, 2008 by soma

[Hopeful1]

I would be trying to clarify how they an take you to court if they are based in Denmark.