Unicom Complaints

Marktheshark

macman wrote: »

Yes-a verbal contract is just as valid as a written one. A signature is irrelevant.
The point about verbal contracts is proving that one exists.

Absolute and utter Codswallop.

Chris.Marsh

Marktheshark wrote: »

Absolute and utter Codswallop.

Mark,

Can you explain your statement please?

Pixarstem

Macman is correct and a verbal contract is as legally binding as a written and signed contract. If anyone is in any doubt, click on this CAB link. http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/consumer_w/consumer_protection_for_the_consumer_e/consumer_contracts_e/consumer_contracts_must_the_contract_be_in_writing.htm

Pixarstem

I have noticed that several posting on this thread were recently ‘EDITED by MSE INVESTIGATORS’ or have had [TEXT DELETED BY FORUM TEAM]. It is a long time since Unicom found it necessary to intervene with the postings on this thread (see first few pages) and in doing so, they are preventing people from seeing the full picture to allow them to make an informed decision.

John Healey MP raised an adjournment debate in Parliament about Unicom Telecom on Wed 26th Nov 2014 naming them as a ‘shameful company that was ripping off an elderly vulnerable constituent for £3,500 in termination fees’. Mr Healey also criticised the Ombudsman Services for failing to protect his constituent. Mr Jones had battled with Unicom for two and a half years but within 48 hours of this matter being raised in Parliament, Unicom had released Mr Jones from the contract and waived all the termination fees. Details can be seen by clicking on this link http://www.johnhealeymp.co.uk/news/December/telecoms-bill-dropped-after-john-s-debate-over-shameful-mis-selling/

Mr_Trick

Having a recording of the contract didn't help me to deal with Unicom. Their first response was that there was nothing I could do about it. When I changed to a new supplier they carried on with the claim that I had agreed to three lines for three years instead of the real (recorded) contract for two lines for one year. Ombudsman Services later reduced the bogus contract from three years to one year but still claimed it was a contract for three lines instead of two. Six months later, by way of explanation, Ombudsman Daniel pointed out that Ofcom General Condition 9.6 (which restricts changes to existing contracts) doesn't apply to new contracts - leaving Unicom free to (literally) make up 'new' contracts.

Preparing a case for Ombudsman Services had already wasted so much of my time that I chose to pay Unicom and write off the loss to the fraudulant activities of a company which I am pleased to say I no longer deal with.

Mr_Trick

Unicom seems to be a Telecoms Company set up by Simon Clarke:-
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-1578810/Timeshare-fraud-pair-jailed.html
Apparently Unicom is now owned by Vitruvian Partners.
Another Vitruvian Partners enterprise can be viewed here:-
http://nhsfightback.org/2014/06/10/nhs-patients-left-without-medications-by-private-contractor-healthcare-at-home/

Pixarstem

OFCOM ARE CURRENTLY INVESTIGATING UNICOM TELECOM AND THE ADVICE FROM OFCOM IS AS FOLLOWS
Ofcom suggests that all consumers/businesses that have experienced problems with their communications provider call our contact centre and make a formal record of their complaint. Our contact centre advisors can also provide specific advice on the appropriate next steps. The relevant numbers are 0300 123 3333 or 020 7981 3040 and we are open Monday to Friday from 9.00am to 5.00pm.

LL67

I entered into a contract with Unicom in 2008, after being told by the salesman that they could get me out of my BT contract - which of course they didn't. So I was paying for the same service twice until my business ceased trading later that year. Then I got a bill from Unicom for cancellation fees. After appealing to Oftel I heard nothing, until this week when I received a Notice of CCJ for 1200 hundred pounds .Is this debt still valid? If I agree to a nominal fee does this count as liability? What are my options? I feel like I am being bullied into paying an extortionate amount of money for receiving absolutely nothing. Surely this cannot be legal - or at least moral?

Pixarstem

Does the' Court Notice' have an official Court Stamp, an Issue Date & Claim No? If NOT, then it is a BOGUS Court document. Does it have DRAFT printed down the middle? Then it is a bogus Court document.
In addition, the debt is probably statute barred after 6 years and no longer valid. Check with CAB
Check out TEXT DELETED BY FORUM TEAM] for information and support

Mr_Trick

Nothing changes. It looks like Ofcom should have been monitoring Unicom in the early part of 2008.
See http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/enforcement/competition-bulletins/closed-cases/all-closed-cases/cw_941/