Sky TV package. Fraudulent mis-selling

Heinz

ariba10 wrote: »

It is not illegal to record telephone calls.

The grey area is what you can do with the recording afterwards.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4801072.stm

garysletters

Trading standards have not given a reason why they are not following up....they just seem to want to solve customers problems however they can rather than investigating apparent company malpractice.
at the start of any call to sky the recording states "this call will be recorded", as the call forms a verbal contract, the sales staff know they are being recorded. Would it be OK to lie if you are not being recorded.
CCTV and phone taps are admissable in court, but I am aware recorded info sometimes is not.

steveeeee

OP's story reminds me of this article about Paypal (some NSFW language). The guy called them to complain about his account being frozen and heard a recorded message saying "this call may be recorded". Obviously Paypal intended this to mean "we might record this call", but it could also be interpreted as "you the caller are allowed to record this call". Very funny to hear their reaction when he tells them what he's doing

Anyway, I would say the same thing as several other MSE-ers - it's fine for you to have recorded the call, and you may well be able to use it as evidence in your complaint with Sky, but you won't be able to use it as evidence in court. If there was a similar "this call may be recorded" warning on their phone line, you might be able to use that angle on them?

dmg24

as the call forms a verbal contract

Was this ever stated to you?

I would contend that the telephone conversation was actually at most, an offer, and at least, an invitation to treat.

uktim29

Your just assuming the phone call is a contract. The contract will be whatever you put your signature on.

wen12

I know people that record calls to companies. One is involved with consumer rights. It is ok to record someone if you tell them.

I had the same problem with sky. they told me I would get 3 for £26 and that I would get the free broadband.

I rang up they say the broadband is not in this area and I have to pay £17 a month for their connect BB. He reckons that as cheap compared to BT(which I wouldnt have anyway.I said I only paid £6 a month with Virgin. Im cheesed off with being lied to.

Garys letters - I think they will say anything to get you to sign up to them. Im wondering if the contract is valid when they lied to me.so I could go back to Virgin.

Maybe we could contact Virgin for them to get involved. They are not happy with Sky themselves.

Wouldnt it be cheaper to just get an aerial. I was ripped off £200 but you can get it done for half that. Save you money on this tv packages.

But you can change to 2 mixes which costs £16 I think. It may be less. Like you I have all six.

I am now wondering where I should go for BB and phone. It is all going to cost more than Virgin anyway.

furrypolka

Just to explain: Contract law is civil law and Trading Standards do not have any enforcement powers in the civil courts. They can't actually do anything about individual cases of breach of contract. Consumer Direct and thereafter TS can both advise and some TS departments provide some further assistance in letter writing etc (where resources allow) but they cannot force traders to take action. Only a judge in the small claims court can do this.

The aim of Consumer Direct is to empower consumers with the information and advice to resolve their case themselves. They may refer some cases to Trading Standards where it is appropriate to do so.

Trading Standards can not enforce civil law in any individual complaints. They may be able to mediate by calling the trader or writing letters to see if they can help resolve the matter informally, but they can only do this where the department has the resources available. Some TS departments cannot afford to employ staff to work on civil advice and intervention, and many only offer this assistance in certain cases where the matter is complex or the consumer is particularly vulnerable.

Incidentally if you agreed to the terms of the contract as they were stated to you over the telephone and the service then started as a result of this, this is a verbal contract and they should be bound to these terms. It really depends what was said over the phone and whether the service started directly after this, or whether you were then sent follow up order forms etc.

garysletters

I agree with the last poster who answered very clearly and correctly (in my opinion)
I DO believe that the phone call forms a verbal contract, which is then as valid as any other contract, hence why they can then start taking money out of my account, otherwise this would be illegal.
I did not get sent any extra forms to sign, the "connection" dates were set during the call and thats the last I heard till TV installation man came round.
I thought Trading Standards, as the name implies, would have been interested in investigating the lies being told, failing any legal STANDARD by TRADING companies. On further investigation Ive been told all SKY problems get ent to 1 person in London who liases with Sky to "sort out" customer problems. Only if in her opinion a problem arises too often does she investigate.
My problem was "sorted out" by Sky cutting me off (totally, not even leaving the free sat channels), and "only" charging me 2 months full TV rental (not discounted as part of the package they failed to supply) for 2 months TV. (£42). Thanks sky......and what about compensation for all the time I've been without broadband, or free calls.
I know TS dont do court advice, and I know I probably wouldn't win against a big company if my recording wasnt submittable, it's just a huge con job!