Help needed to take legal action!!

Mikeinho

Hi,

I'm a long-standing customer of 3 (HG3). I took out a new 18-month contract with them back in March which included 150 video-calling minutes as part of the inclusive package.

A couple of months later I got a bill through saying that I was being charged for making video-calls. I hadn’t made any other video-calls within that billing period, and the calls were unsuccessful in any case.

I was a bit puzzled about this, so I decided to give their customer services a call to ask why I had been charged for video-calls within my allowance. The chap who I spoke to explained that the inclusive video-calling minutes were for 3-to-3 video-calls only. To say the least, I was quite bemused by his answer to my query, and he referred me to the terms & conditions of the contract.

So, off I went to trawl through the terms & conditions looking for the text where it stated that only 3-to-3 video-calls were applicable. I found nothing of this nature in the information received with the phone and contract, so I called them back to discuss the matter further. When I did so, they referred me to the terms & conditions on their website.

Finally, I found something resembling what I had been told, but all it said was video-calling was ‘dependant on the handset and network’. So, with this information, I called them back to state that this was pretty vague to say the least, and that I would like to change my package.

After an extremely lengthy chat with their customer services (and not before I was professionally insulted), I insisted that I should be put through to someone in either the Marketing or Legal division to look at the meaning of their ‘dependant on the handset and network’ claim.

My argument is simply this…

Instead of putting ‘dependant on the handset and network’, why didn’t they just say ‘for 3-to-3 calls only’?

I have a number of problems with how 3 have treaded me as a customer:

• This information is not made clear at the point-of-sale
• The information contained in the terms & conditions is unnecessarily vague
• How am I supposed to know what network another person is on before making a video-call?
• Why am I being charged for unsuccessful video-calls?
• Why am I not allowed to change my plan to something more suitable?

This whole sorry affair has annoyed me for several reasons, and I have since written twice to their customer services to request a more dignified answer to my questions; and of course, I've received NOTHING in reply.

I understand the basics of contract law, and I consider myself to be a savvy consumer. However, I think I’ll need someone’s advice on how I can take this forward. All I really want is to exchange the cost of the ‘inclusive video-calling' part of my plan in favour of something more useful (such as mobile mail or an internet package), but 3 are not playing ball on the issue.

Basically, this seems to me like an adventure in mis-selling. All I want to get is a plan more suitable for my money. Simply put, if I'd known about this before choosing the plan, then I would have chosen differently. Can anyone help me?

Incidentally, I suspect 3 have been taking a few calls about the same issue, as they have just published (Oct-08) new terms & conditions on their price plans, which now CLEARLY state that inclusive video-call minutes are for 3-to-3 calls only. Hmmmmm... makes you think!!!

loup67

If you can find a copy of the t & c's from March when you took out the contract you will have a case with Otelo,as I'm sure you'll find thaty the Oct 08 ones have changed in their favour,along with all the other t&c's they're trying to screw people over with!

Cavey

Indeed. It doesn't matter what it says on their website, what matters is the contract you signed and/or came with the phone. Any amendments to this contract should then be sent to you in writing. If you have not received written notice of these changes in line with the initial contract, the changes are not enforceable.

If they claim to have notified you of these changes, I would point out that you did not receive them (and I doubt they will be able to prove otherwise).

The only other problem is that not everyone else will have access to the contract you signed, which makes it hard to comment further.

lawbunny

The section in their T&Cs simply refers to the ability to make video calls. It means that you can only make video calls if you are using a hansdet which is compatible with this feature and if you are within 3G coverage.

The specifics of what you can use your allowance for is within the price plan information, not the T&Cs. T&Cs stay the same throughout your whole contract, they will simply refer you to your price plan information to find out what your allowance can be used for, as you can change price plan throughout your contract. For example, some price plans may include video calling between all networks, some between just 3 and 3, and others may include no video calling minutes at all. You need to check the price plan information which you have been given, rather than the T&Cs.

Mikeinho

My thanks to loup67, Cavey, and lawbunny for your replies.

loup67 & Cavey: yes... that's what I thought. An agreement is an agreement unless both parties agree at some point to change it. My understanding is a little simplistic perhaps, but I think that’s the general understanding of a ‘contract’.

lawbunny: very incisive of you… in fact, 3 stated to me that they have NEVER offered a cross-network video-calling service with inclusive minutes packages. Ergo, they could even have put ‘3-to-3 video-calls only’ in the T&Cs, as it applied to ALL the contracts they sell. So, what you've said is even more applicable than I first thought (well seeing your Scottish you smart cookie!!).

Well, I’m going to give them a few days more to reply, then I’m off to see the Wizard of Otelo about this.

Thanks - will let you know if I get anywhere with these chumps. :T

jasonwatkins

i think the more you look behind the scenes at 3, you see what a bunch of cowboys they actually are.

they abitrarily introduce charges that breach their own T's & C's, so they just re-write the T's & C's after the fact, and then tell you you're talking out of your backside (for want of a better phrase!).

TREVORCOLMAN

jasonwatkins wrote: »

i think the more you look behind the scenes at 3, you see what a bunch of cowboys they actually are.

they abitrarily introduce charges that breach their own T's & C's, so they just re-write the T's & C's after the fact, and then tell you you're talking out of your backside (for want of a better phrase!).

What a bum organisation!

:rotfl:

lawbunny

Mikeinho wrote: »

lawbunny: very incisive of you… in fact, 3 stated to me that they have NEVER offered a cross-network video-calling service with inclusive minutes packages. Ergo, they could even have put ‘3-to-3 video-calls only’ in the T&Cs, as it applied to ALL the contracts they sell. So, what you've said is even more applicable than I first thought (well seeing your Scottish you smart cookie!!).

Lol thanks!

So they don't actually state what you can use video calls for anywhere then? Hmm... sounds like they're kinda shooting themselves in the foot there as if it's not actually stated anywhere then you're kinda free to so what you want I suppose.

Good luck!!!

Mikeinho

Update:

Many months on, and after numerous and lengthy conversations with H3G's Executive Office in Glasgow, I am no further forward with a solution to the problem.

Even though they could not provide evidence to confirm I was correctly informed about the full T&C's, the only offer they made in the final 'deadlock letter' was for a 50% reduction on the video-calls (only) section of the package.

Considering the amount of money I've already given them for a useless service, and of my time and energy put in to seeking a resolution, this offer is a relative pittance. Not only that, but they weren't even willing to back-date the offer to the beginning of the complaint (never mind the start of the contract).

Considering the negative response I received, at least I can now say that I hold the necessary paperwork to send the complaint to OTELO for investigation. I've kept a full record throughout the duration of the contract and complaint, so at least H3G won't be able to hide any of their actions over the past year.

Time to spin the bottle!!

robt_2

I am also of the belief that 3 have NEVER offered cross network inclusive video minutes. Not sure why, but it is stuck in the back of my head.

Mikeinho

So folks, here's the final chapter in the story...

I was about to reach the end of the contract when I sent a final letter to them, explaining that their offer was unacceptable. I enclosed a draft copy of my complaint to OTELO, and stated that they had 10 days to reply before I pushed the complaint through.

That very week, I received a call from them offering a full refund of the ENTIRE contract costs (less any extra costs not include in the contract). I had never gone over my allowances, nor called any 08 or 09 numbers using my mobile. Basically, I had never spent a penny more than the contract cost in any one month for the period of the entire contract, so I accepted their offer.

I received a full refund paid directly to my bank account. However, this was not the last thing that happened...

I called to cancel my contract, as it was drawing to a close. After being made to listen to a young lady trying to retain my business by offering all kinds of deals (for nearly 20 minutes), I eventually ran out of patience and was forced in to telling her about the WHOLE complaint and the reason why I was NEVER accepting another contract from them, to which she replied, "oh... I see... I have now cancelled your contract".

Alas, as could be predicted, this was not the end. For the following 3 months, I was sent bills asking for the full monthly contract amount. After many calls to complain about this, it turns out that they had not completed the cancellation process on ALL of their systems, and so bills were still being generated. Yet another example of how completely amateurish they really are.

However, it turns out that I won a watch here. I had asked to have my phone unlocked so that I could use it with another SIM, which they did for the sum of £12, but when they finally got round to reversing the 3 months of bills generated AFTER I had cancelled, they refunded the phone unlock charge too.

But the final chapter was when the display on my phone adopted a fault. By this time, the phone was nearly 2 years old, but because they had made me go through every word of the T&Cs in the process of the complaint, I had picked up that the phone was under warranty for a period of 2 years (normally 12 months for electronic goods), so I was able to send it back to them for a brand new replacement.

In conclusion, in the space of less than 2 years, I've had 2 free phones (expensive ones at that), free calls, free texts, and a free unlock... and all because they didn't treat my complaint seriously from the first time I called.

You might think I'd be happy with the outcome, but the truth is that the hassle of having to deal with that company for so such a long time really wasn't worth it. You might even like to think that if it was you, then that outcome would have put a big smile on your face. In reality, the amount of time I had to put in against the net gain means my time was worth LESS than the minimum wage rate in this country.

I'm now on a SIM only rolling month-to-month contract with O2, and they haven't put a foot wrong. Good times!!