Tmobile price increase

diamonds

lazyjack wrote: »

If you need one quickly either pop into the Three store or I have a spare micro SIM I could post out to you. I ordered 2 but they send a 'spare' for a friend with each so I ended up with 4. Just PM me if you need one.

A kind gesture indeed, but not money saving! Stamps and prob be delayed or missing and Anna need go get one from a shop for £1 so less squander on the cash and more visiting 3 website for a free sim https://www.three.co.uk/Support/Free_SIM/Order

anna2007

lazyjack wrote: »

If you need one quickly either pop into the Three store or I have a spare micro SIM I could post out to you. I ordered 2 but they send a 'spare' for a friend with each so I ended up with 4. Just PM me if you need one.

Thanks again lazyjack, really kind of you to offer to post, I can collect a couple of 3 sims from my local store tomorrow. I did pick up two Tesco sims tonight too as a backup, I'll have so many sims I won't know which network I'm on

RandomCurve

diamonds wrote: »

Ofcom is part government funded, the rest by leasing properties it owns from Oftel inheritance and from fines handed out. That came from a Freedom of Information request to the Chief Exec of Ofcom.

Telcos paying approx. £500 per ADR case does impact consumers - end users pay for that in pricing of products/services.


The more CISAS cases per telco, the more EE brands products/services charges go up - another circle you ARE in and why YOU got these change of charges MID TERM YOU are currently fighting, but you are still in a loop of a circle, CISAS charges COST EE brands money, they recoup that from YOU the CONSUMER.


A breach of contract is a LEGAL matter not ADR, keep being a sheep and feeding the Ofcom/ADR/Telco incompetent system though rather than have a court rule on a matter of LAW...which stops the circle/loop/cycle system of yesteryear of a decade.


Ofcom, ADR and telcos don't want you to break their 'cozy' system when CONTRACT LAW is broken because ALL 3 lose out with consumer telecom rulings in a Her Maj Courts & Tribunals Service.

The magic roundabout....


bbbbbbaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh bbbbbbbbbbaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh black sheep have you any prob, no sir no sir with LAW I got my 3 bags full

Diamonds is probably right. Even if you take this to court EE will probably settle the day before the hearing because the last thing they want is any publicity that we can get out of out contracts!

RandomCurve

Chimper wrote: »

The relevant parts of my CISAS decision, found in my favour - pre-Oct - state:-

"Neither party could have been aware of the RPI figure for March 2013 at the time that notice was given as it had not yet been published. The only figure publicly available was that of 3.2% as published on 19 March 2013. This was the latest RPI figure available in the month before the company gave notice.
I am mindful that consumer contracts must be in plain, intelligible language. If a consumer challenges a term, and it is found to be unclear or ambiguous, the interpretation most favourable to the consumer shall prevail."

Maybe you can use something from that.

If this is the ruling that CISAS are applying then does that mean that EVERYBODY can still cancel their contract with TM?

The 30 days limit applies to notifying TM that they have used the wrong rate or it is of material detriment., but I thought for breach of law (or the UTCCRs) there was a SIX year claim limit - which can't be overridden by TMs T&Cs (which ever version they decide you are on!!).

Would it be worth while somebody writing to TM requesting an immediate penalty free cancellation based on breach of UTCCRs, and then going to CISAS when TM refuse.

Anybody with legal training out there care to give some guidance?

RandomCurve

Sonny_Bill wrote: »

Can anybody advise whether as somebody who was aware of the price increases, however of course hasn’t reviewed their terms and conditions like an idiot, is it too late to request a cancellation and refund?

I despise EE/T Mobile with a passion, they are a awful network with terrible customer service and I never hardly ever have a signal, so if I could get out of it now, for free before my contract runs out next March then I’d appreciate it! If not nevermind

May be worth a try - see my post above - subject o someone giving some real legal advice on time limits.

RandomCurve

I have an Adjudicator for my POST Oct (although TM seem to think that 5th Dec 2012 is PRE Oct 2012) claim:

Ms Alison Dablin

RandomCurve

fitz2012 wrote: »

While it is great for us as individual consumers to win, the reality is EE apparently gained 52 million from the price rises to Orange and T mobile.

They use legal tactics to frustrate and delay. No doubt most complainers give up and the majority of consumers just accept the small price rise. Put it in perspective here, only those willing to fight, will wait 8 weeks for CISAS, write letters, telephone Customer Services, Executive Office etc.

If I was CEO of EE, with a 52 million win and a few thousand loss from CISAS cases and small claims, I would be celebrating my legal team / Executive for a job well done!

The truth is, price rise terms in what customers believe and are sold as fixed price mobile contracts should never have been allowed to be introduced in the last couple of years.

Consumers are still waiting for Ofcom to end this. It is expected consumers will be allowed to leave penalty free if there is a prise rise, but what's taking Ofcom so long to do this ?!

My continued battle with Ofcom (so far much of it "behind the scenes"), but I thought I'd share this exchange with you - reply expected next week:


Appendix 4,


I’m not sure if you are trying to deliberately avoid the question so I will reword as best and as simply as I am able to and add some background first:

• Ofcom before conducting its consultation recognised:
  • Price rises were not clear in CP contracts
  • Harm was being done to the consumer
  • So effectively the contracts were mis sold.
  • There is no significant difference between this mis selling scandal and:
    • Endowment Policy mis-selling, and
    • PPI mis selling
    • In both of these cases the regulator required the industry to repay sums on contracts mis-sold

So the question is :
*10WHY does Ofcom not consider it appropriate that all companies under its regulation who have mis sold contracts force those companies to refund the amounts taken under the price rise clauses?
To follow the principles set in other mis selling scandals all customers should be allowed to submit a claim (to CISAS?) and only those cases where the company can prove that it CLEARLY AND ADEQUATELY bought the price rise clause to the attention of each customer should the price rise stand for that customer.

I have highlighted the questions (10) that I think require a response with a red asterisk “*” and I look forward to receiving your responses shortly.


Maybe if more of you asked Ofcom the same question we might actually get a straight answer - this is my third attempt at eliciting a straight response But I realise I have larger appetite than most for banging my head against a brick wall!!!

There are some other things going on with Ofcom and the media that would not be appropriate to share here today, but hopefully (and ONLY hopefully) I may be able to give some news next week.

RandomCurve

Lifes_Grand_Plan wrote: »

Ofcom are still busy sitting on their hands with the good old line...

"We can't act on individual cases but we do monitor the volume of each type of case and can get involved where there is a particularly large number of complaints..."

Wish I could get away with that type of response in my job.....

I agree that these wins will mean next to nothing to T-Mobile as they still do very well out of it, but hopefully these famous victories will at least teach a few people to fight when they believe they are being wronged.... anyone remember the posts on this thread in the early days effectively calling us all idiots for moaning about a few pence a month price rises....

Another part of my on-going saga with Ofcom - I can't reveal their response at the moment other than to say it was not the standard "we can't deal with individual cases" nonsense. I have (Finally - after several letters and phone calls - one nearly 40 minutes long) got them to accept that this is nothing to do with an individual case - but don't expect miracles because the response I did get could be taken in a number of different ways and I am currently seeking clarity on what exactly they do mean.

Does ofcom consider it is reasonable for TM to simply apologise to ofcom for not issuing deadlock letters to customers, as effectively TM know that customers are likely to lose interest in the issue, therefore saving TM the cost of defending a CISAS case, and – if they lose allowing TM to keep customers on contracts who would have left.

anna2007

RandomCurve wrote: »

If this is the ruling that CISAS are applying then does that mean that EVERYBODY can still cancel their contract with TM?

The 30 days limit applies to notifying TM that they have used the wrong rate or it is of material detriment., but I thought for breach of law (or the UTCCRs) there was a SIX year claim limit - which can't be overridden by TMs T&Cs (which ever version they decide you are on!!).

Would it be worth while somebody writing to TM requesting an immediate penalty free cancellation based on breach of UTCCRs, and then going to CISAS when TM refuse.

Anybody with legal training out there care to give some guidance?

I obviously can't offer any legal guidance, and not sure on this, but if the breach of contract only arises through TM refusing your notice to cancel without penalty, then that notice has to be given in accordance with the contract, i.e. before the price change comes into effect? Would be very interested to hear a legal perspective though.

aiutami

My response to T-Mobiles defence is now emailed to CISAS. It looks like T-Mobile's defence was a cut and paste job pretty much. I kept my own response simple but concise. Will keep forum updated with outcome.