Tmobile price increase

anna2007

d123 wrote: »

This whole matter pivots on the one point of "immediate cancellation", and anyone who didn't do so while the rate was 3.2% will now fail IMO.

If anyone who followed this whole thread didn't give notice in the first half of April they really only have themselves to blame, it only took a phone call and follow up email to get it documented.

I think those who requested cancellation during the 30 day notice period have a good case - extract from the adjudicator's findings for my own case:

"The customer explains that the relevant RPI figure at 6 April 2013 (when notice of the price increase was given by the company) was 3.2%, being the figure published on 19 March 2013. I am mindful that the company has not made any submissions to rebut this figure as being the appropriate figure. Therefore, on a balance of probabilities I accept that the relevant RPI rate for the purposes of Clause 7.2.3.3 of the company’s Terms and Conditions was 3.2%. It is undisputed between the parties that the price increase that the company gave notice of on 6 April 2013 was 3.3%, in excess of RPI.

As the price increase of 3.3% notified by the company on 6 April 2013 was in excess of the most recent RPI figure of 3.2% published on 19 March 2013, I find that the customer had the right to immediately cancel her contracts within thirty days of notice of the price increase being given. As the company refused to allow the customer to do this, I find that the company breached the terms of its contract with her".

Also, although TM didn't "rebut" my claim of an RPI rate of 3.2%, it's clear from your own decision that the adjudicator accepts that TM's argument for March RPI renders the clause ambiguous, and therefore the customer's interpretation is the favourable one

philicibine

Hi guys... my first post here. I just wanted to say thanks for all the hard work done by all. I have been following this thread since day one and I am one of the lucky few that got my notice to cancel in on time.

Tmobile have refused me just like all of you. They also have refused me a deadlock letter, which CISAS said I had to get. They ignored my most recent letter, and my 8 weeks is now up.

So having read the news of this new CISAS ruling, I have been on the phone to them this morning. Offering them a last chance to end this before CISAS get involved again.

They are still refusing! Even after pointing them here!

So ive now re-applied for CISAS and am crossing my fingers for the best outcome! Although why Tmob couldnt / wouldnt just end it now i dont know!

daveuk1

anna2007 wrote: »

I think those who requested cancellation during the 30 day notice period have a good case - extract from the adjudicator's findings for my own case:

"The customer explains that the relevant RPI figure at 6 April 2013 (when notice of the price increase was given by the company) was 3.2%, being the figure published on 19 March 2013. I am mindful that the company has not made any submissions to rebut this figure as being the appropriate figure. Therefore, on a balance of probabilities I accept that the relevant RPI rate for the purposes of Clause 7.2.3.3 of the company’s Terms and Conditions was 3.2%. It is undisputed between the parties that the price increase that the company gave notice of on 6 April 2013 was 3.3%, in excess of RPI.

As the price increase of 3.3% notified by the company on 6 April 2013 was in excess of the most recent RPI figure of 3.2% published on 19 March 2013, I find that the customer had the right to immediately cancel her contracts within thirty days of notice of the price increase being given. As the company refused to allow the customer to do this, I find that the company breached the terms of its contract with her".

Also, although TM didn't "rebut" my claim of an RPI rate of 3.2%, it's clear from your own decision that the adjudicator accepts that TM's argument for March RPI renders the clause ambiguous, and therefore the customer's interpretation is the favourable one

Bizarre finding given that clause 7.2.3.3 gives you the right to cancel before the change comes into effect, not within 30 days, but hey ho.

d123

daveuk1 wrote: »

Bizarre finding given that clause 7.2.3.3 gives you the right to cancel before the change comes into effect, not within 30 days, but hey ho.

I can understand their interpretation, 7.2.3.3 does say cancellation before the change takes effect (which could be 30 days as per the notification period in 7.1.4).

7.2.3.3. The change that We gave You Written Notice of in point 7.1.4 is an increase in Your Price Plan Charge (as a percentage) higher than any increase in the Retail Price Index (also calculated as a percentage) for the 12 months before the month in which We send You Written Notice and You give Us notice to immediately cancel this Agreement before the change takes effect.

anna2007

d123 wrote: »

I can understand their interpretation, 7.2.3.3 does say cancellation before the change takes effect (which could be 30 days as per the notification period in 7.1.4).

I agree, the reference to 30 days clearly comes from clause 7.1.4, even though TM effectively gave most people 33-34 days' notice (notice received 5-6 April). Although the two clauses are slightly contradictory, I'm sure that anyone who gave notice in those last few days before 9 May shouldn't have a problem taking things further, given that clause 7.2.3.3 allows this.

Lifes_Grand_Plan

daveuk1 wrote: »

Indeed. I meant that I didn't agree with the interpretation that the terms were ambiguous, not that if they were that they should be interpreted in favour of the consumer.

I find a comment that the terms weren't ambiguous crazy, especially from someone claiming to be a lawyer / solicitor and especially so when one year they use the precipitously announced RPI and the following year they try to use an RPI not yet announced.

anna2007

philicibine wrote: »

Hi guys... my first post here. I just wanted to say thanks for all the hard work done by all. I have been following this thread since day one and I am one of the lucky few that got my notice to cancel in on time.

Tmobile have refused me just like all of you. They also have refused me a deadlock letter, which CISAS said I had to get. They ignored my most recent letter, and my 8 weeks is now up.

So having read the news of this new CISAS ruling, I have been on the phone to them this morning. Offering them a last chance to end this before CISAS get involved again.

They are still refusing! Even after pointing them here!

So ive now re-applied for CISAS and am crossing my fingers for the best outcome! Although why Tmob couldnt / wouldnt just end it now i dont know!

It's still very early days for the CISAS outcomes, it'll no doubt take considerably more decisions in favour of the customer before TM admit defeat and back down. Besides, it's clear that phoning Customer Services gets you nowhere, as the advisors don't have the necessary authority.

You're doing the right thing in continuing with your CISAS application

lazyjack

T-Mobile deliberately misled their customers by stating in their price increase letter:

1. They were using the current RPI of 3.3%, when it was actually 3.2%
2. If the customer wanted to terminate the contract, cancellation charges would apply - customers should have been given the opportunity to cancel penalty free

Based on this, I feel they have no option but to write to all affected customers and offer them penalty free termination of their contract. All we need now is OFCOM to get themselves a backbone and make sure this is what T-Mobile / EE actually do.

daveuk1

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

I find a comment that the terms weren't ambiguous crazy, especially from someone claiming to be a lawyer / solicitor and especially so when one year they use the precipitously announced RPI and the following year they try to use an RPI not yet announced.

To repeat one final time the point I have made previously, I think (and happily this is immaterial as I am not adjudicating) that the terms are clear. Specifically, "the month before the month in which we have you notice" is, in this case, March, as surely as night follows day. I grant you that T-Mobile caused confusion by sending out notice before the relevant RPI was known, which is staggeringly incompetent. But it doesn't, in my view, render the contract terms themselves ambiguous, albeit that this is a distinction people here don't seem to like and neither did it bother the adjudicator. That's fine, it's just my opinion.

What happened last year is an irrelevance. It has no bearing on whether TM are in breach this year.

psilvester

I relodged my complaint with CISAS last night and have just received an email acknowledging receipt and proceding to contact T-Mobile for a defence.

I did also write back to T-Mobile today asking if they would reconsider their refusal to issue me with a penalty free PAC based on the successful CISAS claims so far.