Tmobile price increase

daveuk1

RandomCurve wrote: »

Originally Posted by ruflonger
With respect to price increases, the UTCCRs provide that terms which permit increases linked to a relevant published price index such as the RPI are likely to be acceptable (i.e. not unfair), provided the method by which prices vary is explicitly described.

Consumer Contact Team




Will either of you write to Ofcom and ask why they stated to MSE that EE had behaved reasonably when they applied an unpublished rate, but at the same time are saying that an increase in RPI is likely to be acceptable if it relates to a "published" rate?

They are clearly referring to the fact the RPI (in general) is a published measure of inflation, rather than the use of a particular month's RPI before or after it's been published.

anna2007

daveuk1 wrote: »

They are clearly referring to the fact the RPI (in general) is a published measure of inflation, rather than the use of a particular month's RPI before or after it's been published.

Really? Sorry, but that's not clear at all and seems rather skewed logic to me, given the context, i.e. whether a term is likely to be fair. I think it's entirely reasonable to take a 'published' RPI to mean one that has been issued for public distribution and is therefore known to both parties, rather than referring to RPI in general.

anna2007

RandomCurve wrote: »

Originally Posted by ruflonger
With respect to price increases, the UTCCRs provide that terms which permit increases linked to a relevant published price index such as the RPI are likely to be acceptable (i.e. not unfair), provided the method by which prices vary is explicitly described.

Consumer Contact Team




Will either of you write to Ofcom and ask why they stated to MSE that EE had behaved reasonably when they applied an unpublished rate, but at the same time are saying that an increase in RPI is likely to be acceptable if it relates to a "published" rate?

RC - Ofcom haven't replied to me yet, so I'll take this up with them and my MP if/when they give me the same response.

d123

anna2007 wrote: »

Really? Sorry, but that's not clear at all and seems rather skewed logic to me, given the context, i.e. whether a term is likely to be fair. I think it's entirely reasonable to take a 'published' RPI to mean one that has been issued for public distribution and is therefore known to both parties, rather than referring to RPI in general.

I would agree with your conclusion, DaveUK does seem to be playing devils advocate quite well over the last few pages and is (perhaps inadvertently) appearing to be helping formulate a T-Mobile defence against any argument raised here.

daveuk1

d123 wrote: »

I would agree with your conclusion, DaveUK does seem to be playing devils advocate quite well over the last few pages and is (perhaps inadvertently) appearing to be helping formulate a T-Mobile defence against any argument raised here.

I have responded to that accusation before. To be fair, I've always said that the post-Oct situation is cut and dried in favour of the consumer. I personally don't believe that any of the arguments raised for the pre-Oct customers have a great deal of credibility and I think I've explained why. I'm sorry that it's the case. If I thought differently, I would have pursued my own case vigorously, believe me, but it is what it is.

There is, I suppose, a risk that T-Mobile are reading this thread and hanging on my every word but I'd be quite surprised (and worried for them) if that were the case.

A lot of the argument here (and this most recent point) revolves around people who are looking to interpret words in a particular way to suit their own argument. Doubtless, T-Mobile have been guilty of the same.

The RPI is a published price index. That is obviously (to me) the point of the OFCOM quote. They are saying that terms that permit price rises linked to a published index (rather than some unpublished and therefore opaque other index, such as increases in the price of green socks) are likely to be acceptable - the point being that the process is transparent. They are not getting into the issue of a particular month's RPI and whether or not it has been published.

And, if you think about it, the fact that T-Mobile were dumb enough to leave themselves at the mercy of a yet-to-be-published rate doesn't make it unfair to the consumer as the consumers' rights are not affected. If the March rate had been .3%, T-Mobile would have been screwed. It wasn't, so they got lucky. It has nothing to do with fairness.

d123

daveuk1 wrote: »

There is, I suppose, a risk that T-Mobile are reading this thread and hanging on my every word but I'd be quite surprised (and worried for them) if that were the case.

I'm thinking more from the point of people answering you. You are giving what I presume you think is T-Mobiles point of view, anyone debating or answering those comments is giving their potential defence at CISAS away early and allowing T-Mobile extra time to formulate their repudiation.

Just something for people to think about before engaging in too much debate with your viewpoint.

makemesumdosh

Interesting story on EE on the Daily Mail website (under the Money section), by Peter Campbell.

its all about them possibly floating on the LSE next year.

i carn't find a link to email him directly about how T-Mobile have treated us over the RPI and how Ofcom and CISAS are dragging their heels.

Maybe he would be intereted in hearing how EE make business decisions prior to a possible stock market floatation

:-)

RandomCurve

makemesumdosh wrote: »

Interesting story on EE on the Daily Mail website (under the Money section), by Peter Campbell.

its all about them possibly floating on the LSE next year.

i carn't find a link to email him directly about how T-Mobile have treated us over the RPI and how Ofcom and CISAS are dragging their heels.

Maybe he would be intereted in hearing how EE make business decisions prior to a possible stock market floatation

:-)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-2273165/T-Mobile-Orange-consider-10billion-flotation-joint-venture-EE.html

Good find - I'll write to them with the EE "fit and proper persons" story. - Thanks.

Also notice that the Express are carrying the story - which is interesting as they always delete my emails without reading them - so I think I'll have to call them. http://www.express.co.uk/finance/city/389456/Phone-network-EE-to-dial-up-10bn-float

And the Telegraph have also run it http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/9845849/Everything-Everywhere-plans-10bn-float.html

So have a few of the internet news sites.

EE really are fighting for their lives over this price rise fiasco - so don't expect kid gloves - not that we have!!!

d123

Had an email from OFCOM today in answer to my last observation of the way CISAS were handling the issue.

This might be of interest to anyone who has struggled to get CISAS to take their case on.

OFCOM wrote:

After speaking to a colleague I can confirm that we have been in contact with CISAS about this. CISAS have confirmed that they will take on cases that relate to how the Terms and Conditions have been applied and the claims raised about purported failures to follow the correct procedure to introduce the price increase as well as customer service issues.

Unfortunately CISAS will not be able to take on complaints about the price increase in general. As such, if your complaint falls within the above criteria, you may wish to contact them again about the issue.

RandomCurve

d123 - Finally seems that some of the pressure we have all been applying is beginning to pay off . I assume ofcom must have had a fair few complaints if they have spoken to CISAS, so hopefully with a little more pressure we can get ofcom to actually investigate too - which could save us all the hassle of going via CISAS/SCC.
When I called Ofcom about this 3 weeks ago (17-5-3 post #957) they said that CISAS was independent and that Ofcom could not take this matter up - if I was not happy with CISAS refusal to look at the case I need to contact CISAS myself. So it took 3 weeks for Ofcom do a U-Turn, it seems that anybody connected with the mobile industry can just make up the story as they go along!

The other good thing of course is that it will cost EE more than the price rise for our individual cases, but in the grand scheme of things unless ofcom do something positive - like force EE to re-write to ALL customers who could have cancelled and offer them that opportunity, then EE will still be laughing all the way to the bank - still, one step at a time.