We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Cash back retailer changing T&Cs mid contract
GeoThermal
Posts: 682 Forumite
in Mobiles
Hi
Just had a phonecall from a friend who has a cashback deal with an online phone shop.
He faxed off his first due phone bill to them in January and they promptly replied saying he was too late and as such did not qualify for the cashback.
However in his T&Cs there is no time period specified for when the bill has to be sent to them, just that it has to be bill number seven, ten and twelve. When he pointed this out they backtracked and it looks like they will pay the first cashback. However they then said over the phone words to the effect "take this as notice that we are changing your T&Cs to say that bills must be sent to us within 28 days." When my friend said he did not agree to the T&C change they pointed out they have a right to change T&Cs as stated in the T&Cs. He said he did not have to agree to a contract change and that if they went ahead he could cancel the contract with them. That is my understanding too.
Can anyone shed any light on his rights with regard to this?
Just had a phonecall from a friend who has a cashback deal with an online phone shop.
He faxed off his first due phone bill to them in January and they promptly replied saying he was too late and as such did not qualify for the cashback.
However in his T&Cs there is no time period specified for when the bill has to be sent to them, just that it has to be bill number seven, ten and twelve. When he pointed this out they backtracked and it looks like they will pay the first cashback. However they then said over the phone words to the effect "take this as notice that we are changing your T&Cs to say that bills must be sent to us within 28 days." When my friend said he did not agree to the T&C change they pointed out they have a right to change T&Cs as stated in the T&Cs. He said he did not have to agree to a contract change and that if they went ahead he could cancel the contract with them. That is my understanding too.
Can anyone shed any light on his rights with regard to this?
0
Comments
-
Why not just send the bills in with the 28 days?
It seems ample time to get organised and you might as well apply for your cashback as soon as possible.
Scounger0 -
He should just be glad he got the cashback, and send the next ones within the 28 days. Not really worth arguing the point IMHO0
-
He's forgetful and as such this contract suited. Cashback phone companies count on people like him being forgetful to get out of paying so one with no time limit is excellent and worth trying to hold on to. In my opinion that is completely irrelevant though and the point is what legal recourse does he have when a company tries to alter a contract without the customer's agreement?0
-
GeoThermal wrote:He's forgetful and as such this contract suited. Cashback phone companies count on people like him being forgetful to get out of paying
28 days is appropriate (and more generous than many online retailers). He is of course free to cancel his contract with them ... but that will only mean he does not get any cashback! The contract on the mobile itself is actually with the network and as such, he cannot cancel that due to this particular agreement or change in agreement (no matter how unjust it may seem).
Tell him to make notes in his diary, in the kitchen or wherever and use Martin's tart alert (on the red bar above) to send a text message reminding him when to send (do multiple ones to coincide with his bill date).
Also suggest that they if they are changing the t&cs this should be confirmed in writing. If they had introduced this and then refused to pay out, he may have a case as it would be breach of contract (threat or instigating proceedings in the small claims court, discussed elsewhere in the forum, would solve most issues there!).
Anon0 -
I disagree. As far as I understand it if a retailer changes the terms of a contract, you have a right to cancel with no loss to yourself. As such I think he can cancel and then claim the loss from them, while paying the network the normal fee. Whether he wants to go that route is another thing.0
-
Anon wrote:28 days is appropriate (and more generous than many online retailers).
28 days "seems" appropriate to you but if something is bought with different terms, then those terms should be honoured and the customer not be out of pocket if they change. Just becuse the change is to something similar to other companies is not the point. If you bought a sports car and when you went to pick it up they said we've changed the agreement you signed, here's a lesser model but it's still better than other companies are doing, would you say thanks and drive off?
You need to see beyond the 28 days and just see that it is a contract change to the customer's detriment and while the change might be suitable for you, it is not suitable for him and is not what he agreed to.0 -
phones2udirect give half that amount of time0
-
MrGreen wrote:28 days does not sound very good/generous to me, so who are the online retailers that give you less than 28 days?
I think pretty much all cashback retailers say within 30 days to claim. Check each sites T&C's to make usre but given that every single cashback deal is sold explicitly hoping the person breaks the T&C's by even a day to make the retailer a profit, I doubt any are going to let bills be sent in after an unspecified time.0 -
A contract is an agreement to adhere to a set of conditions made between two or more parties, usually in return for a pecuniary advantage.
Either side cannot substantially alter that contract without the consent of the other. If the contract is substantially altered after it has been set, then this in itself might cause a breach of the contract.
In this particular case it seems that the company concerned has introduced an onerous condition after the contract was set. It did not communicate this important variation to the individual.
Therefore, I believe that if this was to result in a court action, that the individual would win. The company would be said to have introduced an unfair condition into the contract and the company would be forced to pay up. The courts would look unfavourably on any company employing these obvious cashback avoidance tactics.
Trading Standards will also take an interest in issues of this nature.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 353.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.2K Spending & Discounts
- 247K Work, Benefits & Business
- 603.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.3K Life & Family
- 261.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards