MSE News: Three to raise mobile prices

GChan

KTF wrote: »

This rise is equal to the RPI figure over a 12 month period so is within the boundaries of iii.
As the price rise is within definition 4.1.b.iii then this is not your 'material detriment' and the above does not apply so you cant cancel it due to the price rise.

KTF, your logic is fundamentally wrong. I can demonstrate why. From the terms:

4.1 We may vary any of the terms of your agreement, including our Price Plans, on the following basis:
...
(b) if you are a Pay Monthly Customer, we will let you know at least one month in advance if we decide to:
(i) discontinue your Price Plan; or
(ii) make any variations to your agreement which are likely to be of detriment to you; or
(iii) increase the fixed periodic charges for your Price Plan (if applicable) by an amount which is more than the percentage increase in the Retail Prices Index Figure (or any future equivalent) in any twelve month period.
You can end the agreement for such variations as explained in Section 10. Subject to the above, you will not be able to end the agreement if such variation or increase..."

Let us inspect this. The following is logically identical in form:

4.1 John may order any soup, including the daily special, on the following basis:
...
(b) John will give notification at least 15 minutes in advance if John decides to:
(i) order a speciality soup; or
(ii) order a winter soup; or
(iii) order a French soup.

John can be refused such orders as explained in Section 10. Subject to the above, you will not be able to refuse John's order if such order..."

By your logic:
1) Unless John orders a French soup, he cannot be refused an order (which is what you imply, by analogy)
2) Winter soups are defined as French soups.

Both of these conclusions are simply egregious - they are logically invalid.
The error in your logic is pretty blatant when you think of it in any other - logically identical - scenario.


Perhaps though, people think that "You can end the agreement for such variations as explained in section 10" only refers to the variations mentioned in b(i), b(ii) or b(iii)? This is demonstrably false also, and quite apparent upon reading Section 10, as the implications would be utterly absurd for not just the customer, but for Three themselves.

For example, under Section 10 Three may end the agreement in the "event of your bankruptcy, insolvency or death". Yet if Section 10 only applied in the event of the variations listed under 4.1b, then Three would be unable to terminate your pay monthly agreement in the event of your death unless they first:

"(i) discontinue your Price Plan; or
(ii) make any variations to your agreement which are likely to be of detriment to you; or
(iii) increase the fixed periodic charges for your Price Plan (if applicable) by an amount which is more than the percentage increase in the Retail Prices Index Figure ..."

This is obviously absurd. Read through Section 10 and you'll find all sorts of clauses that have nothing to do with variations - Three's right to end the agreement based on your conduct, your right to end the agreement outside the minimum term, it even refers to their Returns Policy - so obviously these clauses are in no way dependent on the variations listed under 4.1b occuring.

In conclusion, you simply have the contractual right to invoke Section 10 if they make a variation.

completelyterrified

Here's a quick flowchart explanation of 4.1…

4.1 - They can vary terms of agreement, including prices, as long as they do the following:

a - they put it on the website
b - they give at least one month's notice if…
1 - they discontinue my package
2 - they make a change which is likely to be detrimental to me
3 - they increase my monthly package fee to an amount which is more than a percentage increase in RPI in any 12 month period.

It applies as follows

4.1 - Are the varying the terms of my agreement?
Answer - yes. Go to 4.1 a

a - have they put it on the website
Answer - yes. Continue to 4.1 b

b - is the change detrimental to me
Answer - yes - I'm paying more for exactly the same service - see clause 10.1d

c - have they increased prices by more than an amount equivalent to a percentage rise in RPI?
Answer - no - subclauses i,ii,iii can be ignored

Clause 10

Section 10.1(d) Within one month of a detrimental variation to your agreement.
 You can end the agreement within one month of us telling you about a variation to your agreement (which includes your Package) which is likely to be of detriment to you. You must give notice to Three Customer Services within that month and your agreement will finish at the end of that month once we receive your notice. (A Cancellation Fee will not be
charged.)

EDITED - Just noticed GChan has published something better than this above - well played sir.

KTF

Ok, I get the flowchart explanation better than the soup one.

richardjames73

Three gave me a £1 a month goodwill gesture discount last month, as my Phone still wont support tethering on the One Plan.. They today have sent me a text advising they are increasing my tarrif by £1.32.. I have sent them an email saying I am not happy.....

Duncster_50

We have 3 IPhone contracts with 3 taken out in the last 7 months and over the last 2 weeks I have received notice of an 'in line with inflation' 3.6% price increase.
Now, they say that they know price rises are never welcome, but do also point out that it states in your contract small print that they are allowed to do this and that you are not permitted to terminate your contract as a result.
We are obviously not happy with this - in my many years of having multiple phone contracts across all networks, I have never heard of anyone increasing prices mid-term.
Yes, it's only 3.6%, but could be the thin end of the wedge!
Just to add insult to injury, they phoned me a couple of days ago to offer me another free phone and 'lots of minutes' for my loyalty as a customer!
I believe they should use the 'loyalty bonus' to look after their 'loyal' customers by not increasing their contracts mid - term!
Think we need a little consumer power here to persuade 3 this is not a great idea!

MarkBargain

If you scroll down this forum, there are two or three lengthy discussion threads on this topic as a lot of people are not happy, especially as most of the contracts have reduced in cost to new customers since people took theirs out. From what I read, businesses with lots of handsets have got out of the increase, but not individuals.

del76

I feel your sense of unfairness.
We always believd a fixed term contract at a fixed price would last for the duration of the contract.
I was a victim of Oranges 4.34% increase applied in January based on Novembers record 5.2% RPI figure.
I went through all the arguments with Orange.

1.Their contract was wrong, they refered to a figure published by the Central Statistical Office which was closed in 1996 and replaced by the ONS

2.Their Contract was unfair and allowed them to choose when to vary the terms, after all during a period of deflation in 2008 the didin't write to me and reduce the price did they! This put them at odds with the Unfair Consumer Contracts Act 1999, and the OFT guide to Unfair Contracts.

3. My latest contract was taken out in July 2011 they used an annual figure of 5.2 % for November 2010 _ November 2011 which equated to 5.2% but the actual inflation from July 2011 - November 2011 was just 1.2% therefore their 4.34 % increase was against their terms assuming that I accepted the figures publised by the ONS as opposed to the contract which stated CSO.

In the end OFCOM were toothless and said it was a business decision and they wouldn't intervene, if you could prove financial hardship you may get out of it but it was down to Orange as a goodwill measure.

I sued Orange ( Everything Everywhere Ltd) through Moneclaim Online. Initially I sued for the full amount they wished to charge me to leave my contract. We eventually settled out of court through Mediation for an amount which represented an advance payment to me of the cost of the increase to my tarrif, plus costs and reasonable fees.

Once you reach deadlock with Three i suggest issuing a county court summons arguing that your personal RPI figure has been exceeded and also that their freedom to vary the contract but only at times when it suits them to be Unfair as advised by the Unfair Consumer Contracts Act 1999, mainly the bit that refers to non negotiated contracts.

Hope this Helps


Del

Buzby

There is no 'mid-term' - your minimum term contract has nothing to do with the tariff, and could increase a month after you signed up. The T&Cs allow for increases, but 10% is around the limit. As the amount is less than this, you will not be able to challenge them.

Quentin

Buzby wrote: »

The T&Cs allow for increases, but 10% is around the limit.....

Who says?

No mobile phone company would get away with forcing their customers to agree they have the right to apply up to 10% price increases every year!

And what would happen were inflation to take off higher than this figure you have made up? They'd go bust, and we'd lose the networks!

frazefast

Excellent flow chart. It is hopeless talking to 3 on the phone as their agents can hardly speak English let alone know their own T&Cs. I have thus told them via a complaints form that I will be cancelling my contract due to the detrimental effect these increases have on me. Not sure what else I can do when their agents have no idea on the phone.