T-Mobile £182 early termination penalty

[fatbelly]

T-Mobile have charged £182.46 as an early termination penalty to someone I am helping with their debts. Can I challenge this like bank charges as a disproportionate term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts regs?

 

What do you advise as the way forward?

[snu]

I very much doubt it. When they signed up, they agreed to a minimum term in their contract, which is not unfair - they were given perks for doing so (most likely a subsidised handset, and you generally get a more attractive plan with more free minutes etc the longer your contract term), it would have been clearly articulated to them, etc.

[complete]

I very much doubt it. When they signed up, they agreed to a minimum term in their contract, which is not unfair - they were given perks for doing so (most likely a subsidised handset, and you generally get a more attractive plan with more free minutes etc the longer your contract term), it would have been clearly articulated to them, etc.

 

Totally agree. With Bank charges you were not given anything, but charges. With TMobile you were givn a phone and a monthly tariff based on the contract term...

[buzby]

The £186 would be the balance of the contract the person had agreed to pay. Since this amount reflects inclusive calls and texts, it often makes sense to try and resolve this and get the service restored - on the basis that if you're going to have to pay it, you might as well get the benefit of the inclusive calls etc provided as part of the deal.

[snu]

The £186 would be the balance of the contract the person had agreed to pay. Since this amount reflects inclusive calls and texts, it often makes sense to try and resolve this and get the service restored - on the basis that if you're going to have to pay it, you might as well get the benefit of the inclusive calls etc provided as part of the deal.

 

Actually, I believe it's often reduced by 3% or so.

[buzby]

I thnk I'd rather have the £20 per month of call value instead!

[Ferru]

Surely the true cost to T Mobile is the monthly subscription you would have paid them had you continued your service for the remaining 12 months, minus the cost to T Mobile of your inclusive texts and calls.

 

BTW, T Mobile are b******s when it comes to cutting you off. They cut me off without so much as a warning, and it was not possible for me to call even them from my phone. So I had to spend loads of money on a public pay phone trying to get an arrogant and self-righteous 'customer service' representative to sort the matter out (and as I recall the store were about as useful as a chocolate fireguard...)

 

Jeff

 

I very much doubt it. When they signed up, they agreed to a minimum term in their contract, which is not unfair - they were given perks for doing so (most likely a subsidised handset, and you generally get a more attractive plan with more free minutes etc the longer your contract term), it would have been clearly articulated to them, etc.

[buzby]

You also overlook the cost of the handset. The cost of this is discounted, based on the revenue earned from the calls made and received, along with the monthly subscription fee. If there are no calls, then this revenue stream is denied, and has to be recovered. Further, commission paid to dealers for the sale will be tried to be 'clawed back' (and it must be said, unfairly - as they approved the sale in the first place!).

[snu]

Surely the true cost to T Mobile is the monthly subscription you would have paid them had you continued your service for the remaining 12 months, minus the cost to T Mobile of your inclusive texts and calls.

No, the true cost to T-Mobile is the monthly subscription you would have paid to them. What is the "cost" of your inclusive texts and calls to T-Mobile? It very much depends on how much of your allowance you use, and what networks they are send to. Not to mention, the actual cost of the usage to T-Mobile is clearly much less than the advertised rate they charge subscribers.

 

Also, if people were to phone you during the remaining period, T-Mobile would be making money by charging their network for the privilege of terminating the call. So you're depriving them of further revenue opportunities.

 

I think your arguments are pretty spurious.

 

BTW, T Mobile are b******s when it comes to cutting you off. They cut me off without so much as a warning, and it was not possible for me to call even them from my phone. So I had to spend loads of money on a public pay phone trying to get an arrogant and self-righteous 'customer service' representative to sort the matter out (and as I recall the store were about as useful as a chocolate fireguard...)

All networks are like that though, to be honest. If you mess them around by not fulfilling your obligations, I can't see why you expect them to be friendly.

[Ferru]

I did not set out to mess anyone around. Like many people on this site, I was unfortunate enough to go through a period of financial difficulty. It is better for all parties if phone companies can try to find a win-win solution, and to be friendly (and, where required, firm), rather than adopting a bombastic, unhelpful and inflexible approach. In my case, I was cut off just before Christmas, so maybe the firm could have thought 'Maybe, like lots of people in this country, this guy's a bit short of cash at this time of year, so we'll give him the opportunity to catch up in January'.

 

I'm sorry you find my arguments spurious; I will endeavour to put more thought into my posts in future.

 

Jeff

 

All networks are like that though, to be honest. If you mess them around by not fulfilling your obligations, I can't see why you expect them to be friendly.

[Ferru]

The cost does indeed depend on how many calls you would have made. However, unless you make no calls and send no texts (which would beg the question of what you are doing on a monthy contract), there is clearly a saving for T-Mobile.

 

I wasn't aware that T-Mobile make money from O2 every time someone rings a number that has been disconnected; I learn something new every day.

 

Jeff

 

No, the true cost to T-Mobile is the monthly subscription you would have paid to them. What is the "cost" of your inclusive texts and calls to T-Mobile? It very much depends on how much of your allowance you use, and what networks they are send to. Not to mention, the actual cost of the usage to T-Mobile is clearly much less than the advertised rate they charge subscribers.

 

Also, if people were to phone you during the remaining period, T-Mobile would be making money by charging their network for the privilege of terminating the call. So you're depriving them of further revenue opportunities.

 

I think your arguments are pretty spurious.

[snu]

I'm sure you didn't intend to mess them around, you just made mistakes in your financial planning (understandably common, blame lies largely with the finance industry). But the point is that you did mess them around, and you didn't pay your bills on time as you were contractually obligated to do. If you had contacted them beforehand explaining that you were unable to pay, or offering to pay in installments, or pay on a credit card etc they probably would have been more amenable.

 

My point is that by terminating your account early, you are depriving T-Mobile of line rental revenue, and potential further sources of income (out of bundle charges, revenue for terminating calls originating on other networks, etc). By not using your account for those months, you may be providing a speculative saving to T-Mobile, but that would happen if your phone was connected and you just didn't use it. If you paid line rental for a month but didn't use your phone, would you expect T-Mobile to refund you the wholesale cost of all of your potential in-bundle usage allowances? It just doesn't work like that.

[dolphin939]

Hi my partner got a phone from car phone warehouse in 2004 on t mobile and took it back within 7 days (no reciept), never heard a peep out of t mobile then july 2006 got a nasty letter off wescot demanding money didnt know what for £454.00 after umpteen threating court letters and phone calls he agreed to pay £20 per month, after 10 payments he was still getting letters so he rang them and they said they hadnt recieved any payments, after over an hour on the phone they finally traced the payments and he had been paying someone else's debt off, they have now transferred the payments to his account with t mobile and the bill back to t mobile who are still asking for the remainding balance of 254.00 can he refuse this as he has never used the phone and is being charged for 18months line rental?

[buzby]

What is really unfair here is that yes, He IS due to pay 18 months line rental if that was the minimum contract term. This would have been cancelled on the return of the handset but I cannot comprehend how he supposedly took it on trust that returning the phone with no receipt would have been allowed - either by him or the CW branch.

 

Without proof, the contract is confirmed and the amounts are due and payable. Additionally, letters would have been sent to the account holder warning of disconnection and termination if the bills were not paid. Was there a retail price for the phone? Was this refunded on the return?

 

The issue of paying someone elses debt is a side issue - however does not help the case as if the phone had been returned then to debt would have been admitted, as it has - rejection at this stage would be unlikely to succeed.