'3' breaching my contract

Silk

Buzby wrote: »

When Three create a contract, the customer is sent written confirmation of the tariff selected and the minimum term. It matter not a jot that it is an upgrade (same customer number) or a new arrangement (an additional customer number). This confirmation - if it varies from the customer's understanding of he arrangement entered into, THAT is the time to challenge and seek clarification/rectification.

Yes the OP got that it says £31

Buzby wrote: »

This company always sends immediate confirmation and, I must say, has one of the clearest proceedures ensuring that if mistakes occur, they are spotted and addressed quickly

.
Nothing to spot because it said £31

Of course, it is not unknown for people not to read these letters (regarding them as junk mail, perhaps?) and then down the line when they believe something is wrong assert that they have been misled, or defrauded. Better yet, a !!!! & bull story is invented in a effort to get it of a legitimate agreement!

The OP read it and it says £31 so sent a copy to them to back up your so called !!! & bull story

Buzby wrote: »

Next, your assertion that price forms part of the contract. It might for some, but certainly not for mobile ones which have never to my knowledge included them (and I'm going back to 1984 with a Cellnet transportable.

If price wasn't part of it why does it have to be included with confirmation of what the costs are then ?

Buzby wrote: »

The contract is for SERVICE, but the cost is based on the TARIFF which is a separate issue, as prices/bundles and call charges can and do increase. I noticed from 1995 networks preferred not to increase prices, but brought out new tariffs that had higher rates, whilst customers who did not change benefitted from the original rates. (A case in point being Mercury One 2 One, which offered FREE off-peak calls). Quite a black market built up with customers selling these handsets with the free call package until it was eventually retired).

The OP hasn't had a price increase nor on a different tariff the tariff acording to his paperwork is £31

Buzby wrote: »

As for basic contact law - I'm more surprised that people don't read the contract at all, as all this nonsense about 'fixed term' costs is just bluster - the contract will not explicitly state costs, so expecting to walk away when the price increases as a 'right' is misjudged. Consumers (only) will be able to point to the RPI and if in excess of this, get a waiver. Business users will have to take it in the chin.

Who said anything about fixed term costs ????????
The OP was told it was £31 had confirmation that it was £31 but has always been charged £33 and never been told of any price increases.
If you think they are allowed to do that you are sadly mistaken, why stop at £33 how about £63 or £230 a month if they can charge what they want without you agreeing to it :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

angm_2

I have the same problem with my broadband provider. I signed up to £33 per month inc. VAT and have always been billed more than this and ther eis no mention to the agreement i signed up for. They rung me today to say that they had been charging more of a tariff than i originally signed to. To me this means that they have not honured the terms of the contract and it is my right to cancel. In your instance you signed up for £31 per month, they then tell you it is actually £33 per month. This is a counter offer and therefore renders your current contract as null and void. It's the same with companies automatically renewing your car insurance and it going up - they aren't actually allowed to do it as it is a change to the existing contract which renders it null and void (if you fight your corner when this happens they soon back down)

Buzby

Silk wrote: »

Yes the OP got that it says £31
.
Nothing to spot because it said £31

The OP read it and it says £31 so sent a copy to them to back up your so called !!! & bull story

If price wasn't part of it why does it have to be included with confirmation of what the costs are then ?

Because it does not form part of the contract terms? If there is a genuine issue of the letter stating one thing and the amount taken being different, then you ask for an explanation. If unavailable by phone, then in writing to their Glasgow CS centre (123, St Vincent Street, G1)

As for your unfortunate manner in being able to conduct a civil exchange without being disrespectful, you'll understand one day why your credibility has hit rock-bottom.

Silk

Buzby wrote: »

Because it does not form part of the contract terms? If there is a genuine issue of the letter stating one thing and the amount taken being different, then you ask for an explanation. If unavailable by phone, then in writing to their Glasgow CS centre (123, St Vincent Street, G1)

More rubbish yet again
An offer was made to provide a service at a certain price by the offeror, that was accepted by the offoree.
The contract is formed when that offer is accepted
The contract was offered at £31 and accepted at £31 and the contract formed.
As a minimum requirement the conditions for an offer should include at least the following 4 conditions: Delivery date, price, terms of payment that includes the date of payment and detail description of the item on offer including a fair description of the condition or type of service.
Variance from that would require notice such as price increases etc etc
An expression of willingness to contract can be in an advert on a website which is the offer at £31 and was accepted and confirmed in the reply by the offeror

Buzby wrote: »

As for your unfortunate manner in being able to conduct a civil exchange without being disrespectful, you'll understand one day why your credibility has hit rock-bottom.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
Just because you were shown the error's in your reply is disrespectful is it :T
As for credibility we'll that one for the Judge shall we