Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • hey your doing fine, stop sweating, it's really no big deal, you need to understand you are what is classed as 'a litigant in person' - meaning joe public against what can be seen as a somewhat daunting judicial system, that is too your advantage.   IMHO thats just a reprint of your defence, it might be better to structure around something like this, whos basis is around the WS in the thread i pointed too.         WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT XXXXXXXXXXXX CLAIM NO. XXXXXXXX                                                                                                                                   Defendant: XXXXXXX                                                                                                                               Date XX/XXX2019 IN THE COUNTY COURT AT                                                                               CLAIM NO:XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     BETWEEN     XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      CLAIMANT     AND XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     DEFENDANT    1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed ...10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Idem Capital securities issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.    2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   I accept I have in the past had financial dealings with {insert original creditor name]. That being a Loan Agreement . I do not recall the precise details of the agreement but do recall it was on or about the year xxxx.   After seeking advice this led me to check all paperwork I held with creditors, from this I could not find any Credit Agreement relating to the account the claimant is referring to.   I have therefore sought clarification and requested copies of the agreements from the claimant by way of a section 77 request    exhibits   (DOC 1) A CPR 31.14 request pursuant to sec 61 B of the CCA1974 was sent xx/xx/xxxx via Royal Mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxxx. Request for the following :   1.a copy of the default notice served under section 87 of the consumer credit act 3. Notice of assignment 4. A statement of account   (DOC 1A) To date NO default notice been produced.    (DOC 2) A Section 77 request was sent on xx/xx/xxxx via royal mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxx. The claimant to date has failed to comply to my Section 77 request.   the defendant has failed to produce a copy of the Default notice issued by the original creditor,  as far as I can recall any breach with the original creditor would have been on or around xxxx.   The claimant as an assignee would not be able to legally issue a Default Notice as the debt would have already been terminated before assignment.   (DOC 3) I sort clarity of any Default Notice by the way of a CPR 31.14 request, sent via Royal mail signed for on xx/xx/xxxx and shows as received signed for xx/xx/xxxx   The claimant has still yet to comply to my CPR 31.14 request with regard to clarity of any valid default notice issued, as yet I have never received an original or seen a copy of a valid default notice from the defendant.   Conclusion   I contest that the documents I have received do not meet the requirements and prescribed terms of a legal binding credit agreement, and that the claimant has acknowledged that they are unable to produce an agreement and are unable to enforce litigation action.     I also state NO VALID Default has been produced from the claimant.   I believe that the that the facts stated in the witness state are true   ..................   have you received the claimants witness statement yet...   the above is just musings...    
    • A shortage of drivers has disrupted supply chains and fuel deliveries, with vehicles queuing for petrol.View the full article
    • Hannah Peel wore a sustainable dress to the Mercury Awards - but is the fashion industry changing?View the full article
    • Hi I know you are a busy site but I have posted the last few very important messages as I will be in court in the next few weeks   as you can see time is of essence and I have had few cryptic replies of look for your self messages which I have tried to work out about new guidance on statement of truths but this is not something that I am familiar with   yes I understand this site is not here to spoon feed everyone but sometimes it feels like a cap in hand approach. I have not had any feedback as to whether my statement is going to stand or if it will be thrown away by the judge?   I wish I had the knowledge of all you guys that assist everyone in their time of need who ask for the guidance that is readily available here but unfortunately it’s not the case sorry.   If anyone could advise on my post it will be very much appreciated.   Thanks G
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

BT TV price increase, no longer a full right to cancel services?


Andy111
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 824 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Surprised this has not been directly addressed any were that I can see (except merely mentioned in an article elsewhere) but is BT (and assumingly other providers now) trying to circumnavigate what has previously been a right to walk away from mid contract services when they rise prices?.  

 

Because I had the email a couple of days ago telling me about a £4 price rise for the TV part of our package (TV, broadband & phone line).  Great I thought, the right to walk away from contract penalty free or negotiate a better deal.  The email even mentions about being able to leave penalty free and in the past, as its a package this has meant being able to walk away from the entire package penalty free.  But now I've seen mentioned that as BT have only increased the TV service this time (by £4per month) instead of everything that people can only cancel the TV element and are still liable for the other elements for the contract duration despite everything being a package in a single contract!.

 

If this is true surely this is wrong and a blatant attempt to circumnavigate the right to leave mid contract clause by putting the entire rise onto a single element?.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you have 3 separate contracts within the bundle or just one ......I doubt it.....the one contract covers all the services. 

 

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-6007065/How-leave-broadband-TV-phone-mobile-provider-WITHOUT-paying-penalty.html

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's what I thought, but the wording of the email and from what's been mentioned in an article in an email from money saving expert, is suggesting because BT is only increasing the TV element of the 3 element package (which is within a single contract) this time that BT can still keep customers tied to the other 2 elements (broadband & phone line) as the prices for those have not been touched.  Meaning they would let's customers cancel the TV part penalty free but not the rest.

 

Surely this can be right, because said a single contract for all 3.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your monthly bill shows one amount as total for the months services...you cant single out one element of the bundle.The total package increases and therefore the terms and conditions of the total package has changed mid contract ...this is BT surely you dont expect them to get anything correct.:biggrin:

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andyorch said:

Your monthly bill shows one amount as total for the months services...you cant single out one element of the bundle.The total package increases and therefore the terms and conditions of the total package has changed mid contract ...this is BT surely you dont expect them to get anything correct.:biggrin:

Nope, they are all as bad as each other trying to give false information & impressions when they want to rise prices.  Though the small print of the email states "separate contracts apply".  Think I aught to ask BT for those 3 separate contracts & bills then lol.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes ask them to explain and provide details of the three separate contracts...and if there are three separate contracts...why do they accept one payment to cover the three? 

 

Also if you were to default on payment...which contract would you be in default of and which service would they terminate ?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, BT look to to indicating the broadband and phone line is the main contracted service and the TV package is more an add-on!.  Well that's the feeling I'm getting from there response, and thus altering the price of the add-on does not affect the main core contract.  Though they still insist that each service is covered by an individual agreement.  

 

Even if this was the case, begs the question why are providers only trying this trick now when previously its been a 100% service right to walk penalty free, and what happens to the remaining elements (broadband & phone line) that are priced at a discounted fee due to being part of a package?.  Hence why surely BT's explanation is contradictive as remove the add-on that causes a single multi service package discount and the remainder will likely cause a price rise due to lack of multi service?. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only advise from my experience with Virgin Media Bundles..if you try to take away an element of the bundle the total package increases because you have reduced the supposedly discounted package.Still as far as VM are concerned its one contract and one price increase for the package.

 

I suppose its how you entered the contract...did you sign for a bundle and if so what did that bundle contain or did you add the TV later.....if so then its not really a bundle deal.

It all really needs reviewing by the  Ombudsman as I also detect unfair trading and confusing billing.

 

https://www.ombudsman-services.org/sectors/communications

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Andyorch said:

I can only advise from my experience with Virgin Media Bundles..if you try to take away an element of the bundle the total package increases because you have reduced the supposedly discounted package.Still as far as VM are concerned its one contract and one price increase for the package.

 

I suppose its how you entered the contract...did you sign for a bundle and if so what did that bundle contain or did you add the TV later.....if so then its not really a bundle deal.

It all really needs reviewing by the  Ombudsman as I also detect unfair trading and confusing billing.

 

https://www.ombudsman-services.org/sectors/communications

 

As I recall at the time of sign up (90% certain) it was a single multi service offer (which also included the pre paid credit card) covered by a single price & single contract.  At no point did we ever sign for just broadband and phone line and then add the TV as an extra service during sign up.  6 months in (June 2018) the usual price rise notification and confirmation we could quit our entire contract penalty free due to said price rise period.  We called, BT reduced the cost by £0.50 in return for resetting the minimum term, all content and conditions remained the same.

 

This is about principle & rights than anything & not being told I signed up for or each element is covered by individual contracts like seems to be the blanket BT response when asked about and challenged over cancellation rights than allowing the total cancellation as has always been the norm with price rises.

 

Edited by Andy111
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...