How to dodge the 30 day cancellation notice with Orange contracts

blueperil

Silk wrote: »

The contract I glanced through with my Daughter a few years back in London had a clause where 30 days notice had to be given to vacate the premises in any event.

exactly, it may state it but it has no legal standing, the clause was invalid. She was not required to give any notice if leaving at the end of the minimum period, only after.

this could be the same with the mobile contracts, it may ask for notice before the end of the mimimum term but whether it's legally required or not is another thing.

I don't know but I'm certainly not positive this is incorrect either.

Silk

blueperil wrote: »

exactly, it may state it but it has no legal standing, the clause was invalid. She was not required to give any notice if leaving at the end of the minimum period, only after.

I don't follow you here
Why would a blanket clause requiring 30 days notice of intent to vacate not have any legal standing ???

blueperil

Silk wrote: »

I don't follow you here
Why would a blanket clause requiring 30 days notice of intent to vacate not have any legal standing ???

because it's not the law. They can write what they like in the contract but as in this case if common law says you don't need to give notice to vacate at the end of the initial period then the clause has no effect.

Either the landlord is unaware of this or they've put it in hoping the tenant is unaware and gives them notice anyway..

Actual wording - no notice to quit is necessary where the contract of tenancy specifies the term or event upon which the tenancy is to determine

all of the above could quite easily apply to phone contracts to.

Silk

blueperil wrote: »

Actual wording - no notice to quit is necessary where the contract of tenancy specifies the term or event upon which the tenancy is to determine

all of the above could quite easily apply to phone contracts to.

I'd have to look at where the precedent was set for that but would imagine it might be in a Tenancy Act maybe ??? and in which case would not apply to a phone contract.
The difficulty would be trying to use it as an unfair term after both parties have agreed to it.

blueperil

Silk wrote: »

and in which case would not apply to a phone contract.

I wasn't suggesting that the term I quoted could apply to phone contracts, clearly it's specific to tenancy agreements, more the whole scenario of tenants/phone owners being told one thing when the law would say another (and 99.9% just going along with it to the landlords/phone companies benefit).

The tenancy digression was just to show that sometimes it doesn't matter what is written in the contract, and that it's quite possible, regardless of what the phone companies put in their t&c's, that legally you do not have to give notice to end a contract at the end of the minimum period.

This is actually what orange suggest in their t&c's, so is it an anomaly or legally correct?

Del_Astra

joehunt wrote: »

@grumbler- how many people actually read the contract though and realize they have to cancel 30 days in advance and not just on the date the contract is due to expire? just saying you don't have to abide by there unenforceable rules which disadvantage the customer.

I have :-) I done it in the Orange store, they got rather hacked off about it. As I refused to sign it until I had read it, they didn't like me asking question either, so I didn't sign it, what a waste of time for all concerned. They seemed a bit miffed about it as well.

oopsadaisydoddle

Del_Astra wrote: »

I have :-) I done it in the Orange store, they got rather hacked off about it. As I refused to sign it until I had read it, they didn't like me asking question either, so I didn't sign it, what a waste of time for all concerned. They seemed a bit miffed about it as well.

I like this! I ALWAYS read everything before I sign up. I learnt my lesson from when I was younger and didn't. I know people say that terms and conditions are too long/confusing but I haven't found that to be the case much.

Silk

blueperil wrote: »

I wasn't suggesting that the term I quoted could apply to phone contracts, clearly it's specific to tenancy agreements, more the whole scenario of tenants/phone owners being told one thing when the law would say another (and 99.9% just going along with it to the landlords/phone companies benefit).

I see now where you quoted from now as someone used it in a Landlord forum in July last year and the same poster on the consumer action group.
It quotes Woodfall's Law of Landlord and Tenant from 1886 and uses Flower v Darby (1786) and Cobb v Stokes (1807)
The quick glance I gave it seems to refer with "fixed" term contracts rather than "minimum term" contracts.
In which case notice would not need to be given as the contact in question comes to an end without notice

blueperil

Silk wrote: »

I see now where you quoted from now as someone used it in a Landlord forum in July last year and the same poster on the consumer action group.
It quotes Woodfall's Law of Landlord and Tenant from 1886 and uses Flower v Darby (1786) and Cobb v Stokes (1807)
The quick glance I gave it seems to refer with "fixed" term contracts rather than "minimum term" contracts.
In which case notice would not need to be given as the contact in question comes to an end without notice

not where I got it from, but may well have been used there.

fixed term here and in the document you glanced refers to the same contract your daughter had, one where it will roll onto a monthly contract if the tenant doesn't leave. (same as the one you told me I don't give out)

pick a link, any link seeing as you have trouble accepting what I'm saying:

http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=site%3Alandlordzone.co.uk+do+I+have+to+give+notice+to+leave+at+end+of+contract&oq=site%3Alandlordzone.co.uk+do+I+have+to+give+notice+to+leave+at+end+of+contract&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Quite bored of this and repeating myself, hopefully the links will clarify for you.

Silk

blueperil wrote: »

]
you're like a dog with a stick, did you yourself not believe your daughter had to give notice if she wanted to leave at the end of the fixed term?

fixed term in this case, and the document you gave a quick glance to, refers to a minimum of 6 months which then goes on to a rolling contract, it doesn't mean fixed as in ends at 6 months (although you can leave if you wish). It does say that if you glance harder..

I think I've repeated myself enough now. sorry everyone else..

Interesting !!!
Why did you delete the above post ????