Tmobile price increase

Hominu

d123 wrote: »

The rate of increase has no bearing, it could be 1p, £1 or £100. If you had a clue, and an idea of what the thread is about you would realise it is the breach of contract, and subsequent refusal by T-Mobile to remedy the breach that is the issue.

I did read the thread (well, skimread, as it is over a thousand posts long) and got the idea that some people think it's illegal to hike the price of a contract and some think its the amount of the hike, whilst others want to cancel their contract due to the hike.

Then you have others writing a letter of complaint because their bill was increased by 3.3% instead of 3.2%, like it made any difference.

It all seemed a bit petty to me.

My bill has been increased also, but I just moaned about it for a bit and got on with my life. I never thought people would be writing to letters to OFCOM about it!

However, if I had just joined a 24 month contract at £30pm, and then was told the month after that my bill would increase to £31, effectively adding £24 to the overall bill, then I would be pretty miffed and complaining to the relevant bodies (kind of what seems to be happening here). In fact I did complain when I was given one price over the phone and another on my statement (it was about 58p more), but I didn't spend too much time on it for the extra it would cost me compared to how much time it would take up to complain about it further.

If you manage to get O/TM/EE to throw out the price raise somehow (only applying to new customers), without cancelling my contract, then I will happily join in, but I'm sceptical and doubt it will happen.

RandomCurve

Chimper wrote: »

Maybe it's time to reflect on what's been done here and also look at the bigger picture.

I think you are spot on.

TM have a whole army of people working on this as their main job, and it is fair to assume that some of them are legally trained. They have direct access to the press via their press office, they have cosy relationships with Ofcom and others in the industry.

We are a bunch of well intentioned amateurs with jobs and families and have to fit this into our spare time. We have no established relationships with the press of the industry.

So chances of winning look slim.

However one thing we do know is that anybody on a Post Oct 2012 definitely has a case as the T&Cs clearly state that the price rise must be published on a date BEFORE the price letter is sent. And I think this is where we need to focus the attention.

I have an outline of a campaign in my head that basically follows a plan as follows:
Step 1: Focus attention on the POST Oct 2012 contracts
Step 2 - Turn attention to the unfair application/T&Cs in Pre Oct 2012 contracts
Step 3 - Challenge on "Material Detriment" RPI 3.2%, Wage inflation 1.1%
Step 4 - Highlight that the Mobile companies have not been clear in regards to the fact they can increase prices and therefore they legally can't (I.e. as Watchdog have been telling us).

I don't want to put any "meat" on the above in an open forum - and sure other have ideas too, so (forgive my lack of social media "savvy"), is there somewhere we can move this campaign to a "closed forum" for those who are serious about pursuing this? Or should I set up a password protected website (if I can work out how to)?

d123

Hominu wrote: »

I did read the thread (well, skimread, as it is over a thousand posts long) and got the idea that some people think it's illegal to hike the price of a contract and some think its the amount of the hike, whilst others want to cancel their contract due to the hike.

Then you have others writing a letter of complaint because their bill was increased by 3.3% instead of 3.2%, like it made any difference.

It all seemed a bit petty to me.

My bill has been increased also, but I just moaned about it for a bit and got on with my life. I never thought people would be writing to letters to OFCOM about it!

However, if I had just joined a 24 month contract at £30pm, and then was told the month after that my bill would increase to £31, effectively adding £24 to the overall bill, then I would be pretty miffed and complaining to the relevant bodies (kind of what seems to be happening here). In fact I did complain when I was given one price over the phone and another on my statement (it was about 58p more), but I didn't spend too much time on it for the extra it would cost me compared to how much time it would take up to complaint about it further.

You do seem to misunderstand, the network is within its rights to increase its prices at anytime (even after 1 month of a 24 month contract). If the increase is less than the current rate of RPI the customer has no choice but to accept the increase.

What T-Mobiles T&Cs say though, is if the increase is more than the rate of RPI then the customer has the right to terminate the contract.

That is why the 3.3% vs 3.2% argument is important, not because of the increase, but because any increase above the RPI rate allows for termination, and a refusal to allow the termination is a breach of contract.

The actual increase, the fact that there was an increase, isn't the issue, it is a pure breach of contract by T-Mobile that is being complained about.

I hope that helps your understanding of the issue.

RandomCurve

Hominu wrote: »

I did read the thread (well, skimread, as it is over a thousand posts long) and got the idea that some people think it's illegal to hike the price of a contract and some think its the amount of the hike, whilst others want to cancel their contract due to the hike.

Then you have others writing a letter of complaint because their bill was increased by 3.3% instead of 3.2%, like it made any difference.

It all seemed a bit petty to me.

My bill has been increased also, but I just moaned about it for a bit and got on with my life. I never thought people would be writing to letters to OFCOM about it!

However, if I had just joined a 24 month contract at £30pm, and then was told the month after that my bill would increase to £31, effectively adding £24 to the overall bill, then I would be pretty miffed and complaining to the relevant bodies (kind of what seems to be happening here). In fact I did complain when I was given one price over the phone and another on my statement (it was about 58p more), but I didn't spend too much time on it for the extra it would cost me compared to how much time it would take up to complain about it further.

If you manage to get O/TM/EE to throw out the price raise somehow (only applying to new customers), without cancelling my contract, then I will happily join in, but I'm sceptical and doubt it will happen.

The whole point is that it is not really to the with the money, but the principle if they increase the price by 3.3% - and you only pay an increase of 3.2% (say withhold a penny every month) do you think TM will ignore it -or threaten you with court action and trash your credit file? - so why should they get away with it? We all have different motivations in life, and if your value system means that you can shrug your shoulders and say "fair cop the B'strd scr'wed me, but that's what you expect from B'stards" then that is fine (I wish I could be like that sometimes)!

For me I see more and more in life big companies treating their customers as cash cows and behaving like bullies as if they are above the law - and my value system does no allow me to sit by and do nothing about it.

Neither of us has the "right" value system on this matter - we just have different value systems.

anna2007

d123 wrote: »

I didn't think it could more strange, T-Mobile have just sent me a letter, which seems to me to be a monumental mistake on their part.

Remember, the CISAS case is on hold because T-Mobile claimed they didn't accept it was in CISAS's remit to consider the case.

So then why do T-Mobile EE Executive Office send a letter (described as on behalf of Olaf Swantee) that says the following?:



I think I'll be forwarding a scan to CISAS with a query as to why it's on hold when T-Mobile have acknowledged the case is at CISAS and they will await instructions from them regarding the account. Seems in black and white the T-Mobile have agreed to CISAS adjudication....

All the fun of the fair .

How ironic... so it's not just the customers EE are screwing over, but CISAS too... don't they mean CISAS are awaiting further instruction regarding your account?!

stoney73

Just got this email from cicas:

Dear Mr stoney73

"Thank you for your e-mail.

We suggest you include this evidence in your comments when the company’s defence will be sent to you for comments.

Kind regards,


Jean-Marie Sadio BA (Hons) Bsc ( Hons) "

It was in response to the extra Info that RandomCurve posted a few pages back.

Guys_Dad

Hominu wrote: »

I did read the thread (well, skimread, as it is over a thousand posts long) and got the idea that some people think it's illegal to hike the price of a contract and some think its the amount of the hike, whilst others want to cancel their contract due to the hike.

Then you have others writing a letter of complaint because their bill was increased by 3.3% instead of 3.2%, like it made any difference.

It all seemed a bit petty to me.

My bill has been increased also, but I just moaned about it for a bit and got on with my life. I never thought people would be writing to letters to OFCOM about it!

However, if I had just joined a 24 month contract at £30pm, and then was told the month after that my bill would increase to £31, effectively adding £24 to the overall bill, then I would be pretty miffed and complaining to the relevant bodies (kind of what seems to be happening here). In fact I did complain when I was given one price over the phone and another on my statement (it was about 58p more), but I didn't spend too much time on it for the extra it would cost me compared to how much time it would take up to complain about it further.

If you manage to get O/TM/EE to throw out the price raise somehow (only applying to new customers), without cancelling my contract, then I will happily join in, but I'm sceptical and doubt it will happen.

You do miss the point.
Some are genuinely demanding that companies stick to their t&c as principle.
Others object to mid term increases and if the network does do this, then the slightest deviation from what is in the t&c is not legal.
A significant number, however, would like to use this as a way to get out of their contracts penalty free.

anna2007

stoney73 wrote: »

Just got this email from cicas:

Dear Mr stoney73

"Thank you for your e-mail.

We suggest you include this evidence in your comments when the company’s defence will be sent to you for comments.

Kind regards,


Jean-Marie Sadio BA (Hons) Bsc ( Hons) "

It was in response to the extra Info that RandomCurve posted a few pages back.

Stoney - was this new evidence submitted after CISAS accepted your application? If so, be careful - sorry, but I no longer trust CISAS to be looking out for the customer's interests. The rules state that any further evidence submitted at this stage might delay the application, as TM could ask for more time to consider it. You should be ok, because CISAS have advised you to include it in your comments on TM's defence, HOWEVER TM would be within their rights to tell CISAS to disregard your new evidence, because they didn't get the chance to see it.

I think you should email CISAS back, asking them to confirm that they will still consider your new evidence, even if TM object to it (on the basis that they haven't seen it). It's just extra protection for you if TM later try to twist it to their own advantage.

stoney73

anna2007 wrote: »

Stoney - was this new evidence submitted after CISAS accepted your application? If so, be careful - sorry, but I no longer trust CISAS to be looking out for the customer's interests. The rules state that any further evidence submitted at this stage might delay the application, as TM could ask for more time to consider it. You should be ok, because CISAS have advised you to include it in your comments on TM's defence, HOWEVER TM would be within their rights to tell CISAS to disregard your new evidence, because they didn't get the chance to see it.

I think you should email CISAS back, asking them to confirm that they will still consider your new evidence, even if TM object to it (on the basis that they haven't seen it). It's just extra protection for you if TM later try to twist it to their own advantage.

Thanks for the advice Anna2007, I have just sent an emailing requesting confirmation of above.

Old_Gold

stoney73 wrote: »

Just got this email from cicas:

Dear Mr stoney73

"Thank you for your e-mail.

We suggest you include this evidence in your comments when the company’s defence will be sent to you for comments.

Kind regards,


Jean-Marie Sadio BA (Hons) Bsc ( Hons) "

It was in response to the extra Info that RandomCurve posted a few pages back.

This may be a small thing for a lot of you but if I am in conflict with an organisation over something they have done and I get a reply from someone who is using his paper qualifications as he/she has done it would get right up my nose.
How many of you get a letter/email with a signature like that? Not many I would guess.