£1300 vodafone bill in one month!!

System

Of course in this modern world it is never the customer/consumer who has to take responsibility for their actions. It is always down to somebody else to have 'done something to prevent it'

If the customer is not willing to accept responsibility for the running of the account then I see no reason why the supplier should.

System

JethroUK wrote: »

Morality (like wisdom) is not easy to learn but don't worry because the judge will know what "knowingly" implies in court

And the judge won't give a toss about morality. His interest is the legality, and possibly responsibility. The responsibility for the state of this account lies 100% with the customer.

JethroUK

!!!!!! wrote: »

Of course in this modern world it is never the customer/consumer who has to take responsibility for their actions. It is always down to somebody else to have 'done something to prevent it'

If the customer is not willing to accept responsibility for the running of the account then I see no reason why the supplier should.

They are both responsible:

The user is responsible to maybe 3 x normal billing (for not keeping a handle on it)

Vodafone is responsible for adding a totally fictitious lottery figure to the service (that cost to them about £5 to provide) and 'knowingly' allowing the bill to reach stupid height - they can not possibly be rewarded for extorting these situations and for sure the judge will not

duchy

Thing is whilst people continue to take it on the chin why should a mobile operator bother sending out high usage alerts.

The solution is to not use these companies and switch to ones who DO offer alerts -if enough people voted with their feet the mobile phone companies would sit up and take notice.

JethroUK

!!!!!! wrote: »

And the judge won't give a toss about morality. ....

I laaarf :rotfl:

morality and legislation are not mutually exclusive - and there ends our conversation

perlonk!

Guys_Dad

JethroUK wrote: »

If I was the judge I would award Vodafone 3 x normal billing (about 100) which would also serve as a boot up the rear to act sooner and responsibly

That's why you are not a judge.

JethroUK

duchy wrote: »

...The solution is to not use these companies and switch to ones who DO offer alerts -if enough people voted with their feet the mobile phone companies would sit up and take notice.

I totally agree with alerts when the computer flags excessive/unusual useage just like my bank phoned me when i was drawing money in Germany to check it was OK - how much trouble is that

Eventually all phone companies will do it - especially since minors are likely to be involved

System

JethroUK wrote: »

I laaarf :rotfl:

morality and legislation are not mutually exclusive - and there ends our conversation

perlonk!

And that is why decisions in civil cases are made on points of law.

System

JethroUK wrote: »

Eventually all phone companies will do it - especially since minors are likely to be involved

But minors aren't involved. They can not hold contracts.

Yorksboy

Hi

I know this advise/information is a bit after the fact - but it might help for the future.

I have two teenage sons and pay for a contract for both of them - when researching changing them from PAYG to a contract I looked for a supplier that would allow me to put a zero credit limit on their accounts. This means that if they use up their allowance then they camnnot spend anything - it also stops them inadvertantly signing up to any text services that charge. The only operator I could find that did this was 3. Thois has worked well for the last three years.