Tmobile price increase

RandomCurve

Once I have exhausted all other possibilities I will probably pay for the PAC - under duress - and than sue to have it refunded - and termination back dated to April 12th. Maybe once a few of us have taken that route - and won - everyone else can follow, which will still leave TM without customers!

Another angle to explore is that TM are blocking fair trade, as if I had exited penalty fee I would by now be with Tesco or 3 so those companies are losing business due to TM not honouring its T&Cs. EU competition commission? Some research for another day!

arturbdg

RandomCurve wrote: »

Once I have exhausted all other possibilities I will probably pay for the PAC - under duress - and than sue to have it refunded - and termination back dated to April 12th. Maybe once a few of us have taken that route - and won - everyone else can follow, which will still leave TM without customers!

Another angle to explore is that TM are blocking fair trade, as if I had exited penalty fee I would by now be with Tesco or 3 so those companies are losing business due to TM not honouring its T&Cs. EU competition commission? Some research for another day!

Aren't you Post Oct customer and aren't Post Oct clearly states that it is the released RPI? It is so hard to find T-Mobile Terms on the web that I am asking but if I remember correctly that is the case and as such don't understand why you would have any troubles leaving.

I am pre Oct customer and those terms are a bit ambiguous and as such somewhat harder to argue.

As for the CISAS it is insane that they are washing their hands off from the issue. Everything is a business decision - even breaking terms of contract is a business decision - it is a bad decision but still a decision lol...can't see why CISAS should not be able to look into the case.

With regards to my issue I have e-mailed CISAS with question about their appeal/complaints procedure as I do not accept their decision and I await their response.

From my personal experiences when you do not agree with something the first decision is usually not in your favor in any way and you have to appeal to get someone to take a closer look at the case.

Funny thing is that T-Mobile in the first instance wrote e-mails to people that they can't go to CISAS, then they changed their mind and now CISAS say you can't go to them because T-Mobile says so.

daveuk1

On the subject of CISAS refusing to adjudicate, I can't help but think something has gone badly wrong, whether through an internal misunderstanding or something more sinister. I'm not overly familiar with the extent of CISAS' remit but it intuitively seems as though refusing to adjudicate on a breach of contract on the grounds that it is inextricably linked to a "business decision" rather defeats the point of its existence.

As has been pointed out, you could argue that any breach of contract is related to a "business decision", in that a decision has been taken to act in a way that constitutes a breach of contract. At the root of this seems to be a misconception of what consitutes a "business decision" for CISAS purposes, but I also note that CISAS' rules state that it cannot rule on a dispute that involves "a complicated issue of law" and wonder whether CISAS is simply not sophisticated enough to adjudicate on this issue (which I do not regard as especially legally complex but CISAS appear unable to comprehend).

arturbdg

daveuk1 wrote: »

On the subject of CISAS refusing to adjudicate, I can't help but think something has gone badly wrong, whether through an internal misunderstanding or something more sinister. I'm not overly familiar with the extent of CISAS' remit but it intuitively seems as though refusing to adjudicate on a breach of contract on the grounds that it is inextricably linked to a "business decision" rather defeats the point of its existence.

As has been pointed out, you could argue that any breach of contract is related to a "business decision", in that a decision has been taken to act in a way that constitutes a breach of contract. At the root of this seems to be a misconception of what consitutes a "business decision" for CISAS purposes, but I also note that CISAS' rules state that it cannot rule on a dispute that involves "a complicated issue of law" and wonder whether CISAS is simply not sophisticated enough to adjudicate on this issue (which I do not regard as especially legally complex but CISAS appear unable to comprehend).

To some very tiny tiny extent I could understand why CISAS would not want to get involved to pre Oct customers - as it is bit more complex but for post October customers there is a clear case and as such it should all be over now.

In defense for pre Oct customers I can only say that through all of the period T-Mobile did not stated that price increase is different for pre and post customers and as such both should be treated equally and if post Oct customers are in breach from T-Mobile so does the pre Oct.

But hey no matter how you look at it (correct me if I am wrong) T-Mobile got now additional 52 million pounds to spend on lawyers to get out of this mess haha (it was said that 52 million is how much will they make from the price increase right

daveuk1

arturbdg wrote: »

To some very tiny tiny extent I could understand why CISAS would not want to get involved to pre Oct customers - as it is bit more complex but for post October customers there is a clear case and as such it should all be over now.

In defense for pre Oct customers I can only say that through all of the period T-Mobile did not stated that price increase is different for pre and post customers and as such both should be treated equally and if post Oct customers are in breach from T-Mobile so does the pre Oct.

But hey no matter how you look at it (correct me if I am wrong) T-Mobile got now additional 52 million pounds to spend on lawyers to get out of this mess haha (it was said that 52 million is how much will they make from the price increase right

I honestly don't see it as complex. They ought to have ruled against pre-Oct customers and in favour of post-Oct customers. There was no need to abdicate responsibility.

RandomCurve

I am Post October, but T-Mobile still insist that they they can use an RPI published AFTER they wrote to me and do not have to use the RPI published befoe they wrote to me!

I do have a plan up my sleave to help the Pre Oct customers, but I cannot use it until I win on a Post Oct contract.

However now CISAS say price rise is business decision I'm not sure they will acceppt my case (I can't submit it until 8th June). If they don't then it is plan B - through the courts and then to reveal my plan as above.

ruflonger

CICAS just called to inform me that TM have objected to my complaint. CICAS however have told TM my complaint is valid and been given further time to respond. :think:

ruflonger

ruflonger wrote: »

CICAS just called to inform me that TM have objected to my complaint. CICAS however have told TM my complaint is valid and been given further time to respond. :think:

On pre Oct contract

d123

Also just been advised that CISAS have turned down T-Mobiles objection in my case as well, T-Mobile have been given 5 working days to make a defence.

RandomCurve

Some potentially good news at last - can you both share the basis of the claim - i.e. how you couched it so that it is not a business decision?