Virgin Media, reclaiming late payment charges

[MickKane]

Has anyone done this with Virgin Media, the £10 they charge you for late payments.

 

Is it just the same process as reclaiming credit card charges as I have done this a few times and are they likely to dissconnect you if you are succesfull in reclaiming.

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[buzby]

As the fee is avoidable (by paying on time) and they have given much publicity to the fact they will do this, a challenge - especially if you plan to stay with them - will be problematic.

 

I have been able to challenge the fee on a few occasions because of their tightening of the 'window' in which to pay. Previously this was applied 5 weeks after the invoice date, it is now 3 weeks. Since the invoices are usually dated a week before you recieve them, this gives you only 10 days to pay. A challenge based on this would be successful - but if they payments are always late, then the £10 late fee matches that applied by CC's and this has been held to be the maximum amount a customer should be billed for a payment delay.

[Bookworm]

Has anyone done this with Virgin Media, the £10 they charge you for late payments.

 

Is it just the same process as reclaiming credit card charges as I have done this a few times and are they likely to dissconnect you if you are succesfull in reclaiming.

 

Thanks

 

Mick

Answer: yes, yes and no in that order. ;-)

[MARTIN3030]

Raymond -you have been able to challenge the fee on a few occasions not because of their windows ...or doors or even cupboards-but because they are simple a penalty which they have systematically refused to substantiate as being anything otherwise.

I have now done them twice (albeit one was Telewest) and I have noticed in my first claim they DID refund also the non DD fees as well-since I claimed both.

 

In the interim of them settling with me,and my latest bill,they added a further tenner.

However when I called to pay the bill,the CSA said-its £135.00....erm no.....sorry £125.

Looks to me theres a note on the screen telling them to credit it.

They know that if they dont I will simply claim again next Christmas-suppose in one respect it cuts out the hamper agent-and I can make my own hamper up with VMs charges-plus of course dont have to worry about the hamper agent going bust.

VM will keep my tenner safe with interest.

The best of both worlds I would say.

[MickKane]

Thanks for the reply's. I will send off my request for the list of charges and keep you all updated on how it go's.

 

Thanks again

[MARTIN3030]

Dont ask them for a "List of Charges" you are making a SAR for copy statements for your existing VM account,and also your previous Telewest account.

Make sure that you send the 10.00 fee.

If you are concerned about VM giving you any grief over this,then you can simply add something like this within the body of your SAR;

 

 

I should point out, that should it become apparant to me that any recent or historic charges, or fees applied to my account,can be construed as penalties under common law,then in the absence of you being able to properly substantiate them as fair and reasonable,I will be pursuing recovery of those charges/fees.

I am afforded protection from regulators,and consumer law and statute,and any hostile or adverse actions from Virgin Media,as a result of my communications in establishing openess and transparicy of fees and charges,will institute a complaint with a request for compensation under the Financial Services Authority Compensation scheme.

[MickKane]

Thanks Martin, I have copied this letter from the library but changed the parts where it mentioned banks. Is this the correct one. Thanks again.

 

[your address]

 

 

 

[their address]

 

 

[DATE]

 

 

 

 

Data Protection Act 1998

Subject Access Request

 

 

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

ACCOUNT NUMBER: xxxxxxxxx (or multiple numbers if more than one account)

 

 

Please supply me with a complete list of transactions and charges relating to my banking history with your organisation. Alternatively, a complete set of statements for that period will be acceptable.

 

Additionally, where there has been any event in my account history over this period which has required manual intervention by any member of your staff, or any other person, I require disclosure of any indication or notes which have either caused or resulted in that manual intervention, or other evidence of that manual intervention in relation to my banking business with you.

 

If you are unable to supply this data because there has been no such manual intervention, then please be so kind as to confirm this in your response.

 

I enclose the statutory maximum fee of £10. You have 40 days in which to comply. Furthermore, if I discover that you have levied disproportionate penalties against me, then I shall be reclaiming them, and also reclaiming the enclosed £10 Data Protection Act subject access request fee.

 

If there is specific information which you require in order to satisfy yourself as to my identity, please let me know by return. However, please note that the above address is the one which you normally use to communicate my private business to me and which you have hitherto found to be acceptable.

I would be happy to collect the Data from my local branch.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

[signature]

 

 

[name]

[MARTIN3030]

Yes thats it.

[MickKane]

Can I just ask is it just 6 years of charges you can claim back from Virgin.

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[buzby]

Yes - but that's not the issue here, as the charge was only implemented in 2007.

Edited January 27, 2009 by buzby

[MickKane]

Yes - but that's not the issue here, as the charge was only implemented in 2007.

 

Can you explain what you mean please as I have been getting charged a lot longer than 2007.

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[MickKane]

Anyone, is it just 6 years we claim the charges for?

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[havinastella]

Anyone, is it just 6 years we claim the charges for?

 

Thanks

 

Mick

 

 

Yes, unless you have your statements from before that and want to chance your arm if there are any penalty charges on them!

 

 

Jogs

[buzby]

I can't say what TW did before the rebranding and merger, but NTL did not make an additional charge for late payment. It was shortly after the rebranding to VM that the late payment charge joined the pre-existing non-DD fee, and more recently was applaid for accounts overdue by 14 days, from the original 30.

[MickKane]

Thanks for that, I was with TW before NTL and not Virgin so I take it they would of been charging me at the time for late payment.

[buzby]

Which prompts me to suggest that it might be worthwhile checking into the legalities of the current enterprise, as the 'new' VM most probably has no responsibilities to the old regimes, we've all got new account numbers, conditions of service - probably only the STB and remote is the same, so just as firms that replace their earlier reincarnations, you might find VM can legitimately argue they are not responsible for TW's charges or policies (even though their current ones are broadly similar!).

[MickKane]

Thanks Buzby.

 

Has anyone claimed there charges back from Virgin that included charges applied by Telewest?

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[Bookworm]

Yes, of course. The re-branding makes no difference, if it was that easy, companies would change their name and T&Cs every 6 mths so that they never have any liability/accountability.

[MARTIN3030]

I claimed for Telewest and NTL -I am putting together my 3rd one now for non DD fees for 25 months-plus the £30 they added in late charges while my last claim was going on.with interest I reckon its around £200.00

Then I will have had around £750 in total refunded.

[havinastella]

I have just re-started on my VM as Lloyds was taking up my time.

 

I am going straight in for the non DD and Late payment, about £600. If they contest the Non DD, I'll just amend my N1.

 

Martin, have you thought of the wording for the Non DD fees yet? I need to submitt N1 this week

 

Jogs

[MARTIN3030]

Hi Jogs,I dont see it needing any special POC.

Simply state that despite repeated requests to show you figures,which demonstrate the fee as being fair,and reflective of their actual costs,they have failed to do so.

Therefore you are of the opinion that the charges are an unfair penalty under common law.I am not so sure if there is not anything in the 2008 unfair terms to use either.I wanted to have a look to see if I could find anything on that-in particular stuff that may support it.

They will of course address it in their defence by saying its industry standard practices and has been agreed by the regulators bla bla bla as being ok.

But as with the £12 OFT credit card charge ceiling-its not statute-and so of course open to challenge.

The ace is to file for full disclosure-if they are ordered to do this,then its game over.

I will dig out their defence from my Telewest claim and see how they addressed it there.

[MARTIN3030]

Something maybe like this-you may need to alter some figures since the DD fees varied.

 

xxxx v Virgin media

 

Particulars of claim.

 

 

 

The claimant has an account for the provision of cable TV Telephone and Internet services.

Account number XXXXX operated within their standard terms and conditions.

During the periods XXXXX to XXXX,at regular monthly intervals,inclusive,the defendant has levied xxx charges of xxx to the claimants account for late payments to the account.Additionally,during the same periods,at regular monthly intervals,the defendant further levied xxx charges of xxx to the account as a fee because the claimant did not settle payments due,by the use of direct debit mandate.

The Claimant tried to negotiate with the defendant to have these charges refunded,or alternatively supply a breakdown of their costs which would demonstrate the said charges to be a genuine pre estimate of its costs or losses in relation to the charges.

Claimant wrote two letters one of which was a letter before action sent on xxxxx The Defendant has refused to refund the said charges or provide evidence to show that they are justified,or can be shown to be a reasonable assesment of their costs.

Claimant believes these charges to be a dissproportionate penalty,and therefore are unenforceable being contrary to common law.Additionally the claimant believes they are invalid under the unfair contract terms act 1977 s4

Also, that they are unfair under consumer contract terms regulations 1999 para B sch 2.1.e

In the event that they are not a penalty,they are unreasonable within the meaning of the supply of goods and services act 1982 s15.

The claimant recieved a telephone call from the defendants chief executives office on XXXXX which gave a final response that no charges would be refunded,and that no breakdown of its costs would be provided to me.

The claimant has given the defendant a further 28 days to reconsider,but unfortunately their position remains the same.

Reluctantly therefore,the claimant seeks no alternative than to file this claim in the county court.Claimant believes they have followed pre action protocols in this matter.A list of the charges is attatched,the defendants have previously been sent this list.

On judgement being awarded against defendant,claimant seeks statute section 69 interest from the earliest charge to judgement ,which is currently XXX and at a daily rate of xxxx Claimant accepts this is at the discretion of the court.Additionally the claimant seeks reasonable costs incurred by bringing this action.

 

 

I believe the facts stated in these particulars of claim are true.

 

Full name;

 

Signed Claimant

 

Date

[MickKane]

Yes, of course. The re-branding makes no difference, if it was that easy, companies would change their name and T&Cs every 6 mths so that they never have any liability/accountability.

 

So when I send of my SAR tomorrow do I not have to mention anything about Telewest, just send it to Virgin Media and they will send everything from the last 6 years. Is that right.

 

Thanks

 

Mick

[MARTIN3030]

Mick,A request has to be specific-this means that you have to say exactly what you want,otherwise a data controller can refuse if its what they term an "open ended request"

Therefore you should say that you want copy statements,call logs,and details of any manual intervention from the periods of XXXX to XXXX inclusive.

You dont have to mention Telewest-as Booky said,VM are liable for all the charges.

[buzby]

A rebranding does indeed make no differnece as it has no legal standing - indeed, the name is only 'hired' from a Branson company. (For example, Virgin Radio gave up paying and is now Absoute Radio). However, as individual companies, NTL and Teleerst ceased to operate as individual companies sometime in 2007.

 

My point remains, the company you are now dealing with is Virgin Media, this has a new Company Registration Number, and if you are pursuing them, thier liability only begins in 2007, so anything before then will be successfully rejected.