Tmobile price increase

tsandcs

RandomCurve wrote: »

When I receive my letter from T-Mobile I'm not going to be able to resist closing the letter with the same paragraph as they have used in Anna2007 post (assuming they include it on mine).

"Although this may not be the outcome you were hoping for I trust this clarifies EE'S position on this matter ."

Yes - I will add a smiley.

EE - Everyone Elsewhere

LOL other than the smiley I was going to do that, just writing my response now, have you sent it to just the address at the top of the email?

50Twuncle

What happens to those of us - that have phones provided by Tmobile at a "special price" - reduced due to the agreement ?
I, for example, have a Samsung Note - that I paid £150 for - on the agreement that I kept up a contract - paying almost £15 per month for 2 years - this was taken out in June 2012 - Will they be entitled to take my phone back - if I successfully manage to get my contract annulled ?

RandomCurve

tsandcs - I have not received a letter or email yet but my response is fully drafted and I can't wait to send it - I will post here when I have sent it (a mixture of sarcasm and evidence).

I will post to the Hatfield Business Park Address as that is their registered office, and therefore I am legally entitled to serve notices there. I will use registered post (£1.70p first class) which means whilst I can't track where the letter is in the mail system I will be able to tell when it was signed for by T-Mobile. I will also email it to Olaf and the crew.

RandomCurve

21Twinkle wrote: »

What happens to those of us - that have phones provided by Tmobile at a "special price" - reduced due to the agreement ?
I, for example, have a Samsung Note - that I paid £150 for - on the agreement that I kept up a contract - paying almost £15 per month for 2 years - this was taken out in June 2012 - Will they be entitled to take my phone back - if I successfully manage to get my contract annulled ?

Don't know the answer for sure but my understanding would be that the reduced price was an inducement (in the same way that a free phone is) to enter into an AIRTIME contract. T-Mobile have breached the T&Cs of the AIRTIME contract and therefore you can cancel - and keep the phone

The rest of this post is just me venting steam!!
The above rationale is why I can't understand how they can apply an arbitrary RPI increase on the basis of their business costs increasing as the cost of the phone was incurred by T-Mobile at the start of the contract - and therefore can't inflate, and similarly the network was paid back in 2001 (?) and so can't inflate. Assuming there is also a profit element in the price how can they legally apply inflation to that?

Good Luck

EE - Everyone Elsewhere

50Twuncle

RandomCurve wrote: »

Don't know the answer for sure but my understanding would be that the reduced price was an inducement (in the same way that a free phone is) to enter into an AIRTIME contract. T-Mobile have breached the T&Cs of the AIRTIME contract and therefore you can cancel - and keep the phone

The rest of this post is just me venting steam!!
The above rationale is why I can't understand how they can apply an arbitrary RPI increase on the basis of their business costs increasing as the cost of the phone was incurred by T-Mobile at the start of the contract - and therefore can't inflate, and similarly the network was paid back in 2001 (?) and so can't inflate. Assuming there is also a profit element in the price how can they legally apply inflation to that?

Good Luck

EE - Everyone Elsewhere

I am guessing that their reason / excuse is that everything else is increasing in price - so their staff (India ?) need more pay - plus the tiny amount of electricity that they use to transmit our signals costs an insignificant bit more - plus the upkeep of the system - but that doesn't give them the right to break their own T&C ...

Mouse-Mouse

Couldn't find the answer on here - what happens to the handset that came free with the contract? Do you have to return it?

50Twuncle

Mouse-Mouse wrote: »

Couldn't find the answer on here - what happens to the handset that came free with the contract? Do you have to return it?

That is what I asked, similar to, at 08:30 this morning - check up this thread !!

powerful_Rogue

Mouse-Mouse wrote: »

Couldn't find the answer on here - what happens to the handset that came free with the contract? Do you have to return it?

No, you wouldn't. The handset is a gift for taking out the contract.

anna2007

Here's a copy of my emailed response to EE's email received yesterday (sent at their request to
executive.office@everythingeverywhere.com, which is different to the Orange email account it was sent from). Sorry, it's a bit long-winded, but does cover both sets of the T&C's. Please feel free to use any of the points I've raised if you feel it will help your own case.

Dear Ms Davidson,

Thank you for your email of 19 April 2013, in response to my email dated 9 April 2013.

I wish to clarify at the outset: I have no complaint regarding T-Mobile's decision to apply a price increase to my price plans; I fully appreciate that this is a business decision you have made, and that the terms allow you to increase prices up to RPI. Rather, my complaint is in relation to what I consider to be a clear breach of contract on the part of T-Mobile, by refusing me my right to cancel without penalty, in accordance with clause 7.2.3.3 (of both sets of terms and condions).

You have stated that your price increase is based on the latest RPI rate of 3.3%, in April 2013. This rate was published by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on 16 April 2013. Your written notice, informing me of the price increase, was dated April 2013, and was received by me, via Royal Mail, on 6 April 2013. I therefore received notice from you a full 10 days before the latest RPI figure of 3.3% was announced by Government. You have stated in your email that the letters were sent out between 2 and 8 April: I do not dispute this, as my own letter was received on 6 April 2013.

In relation to mobile number xxxxx xxxxxx, where the latest terms and conditions apply (Version 59, dated October 2012), clause 7.2.3 states that a cancellation charge won't apply if I am within the minimum term and:

"7.2.3.3. The change that We gave You Written Notice of in

point 7.1.4 is:

(i) an increase in Your Price Plan Charge (as a percentage) higher than any increase in the retail price index (also calculated as a percentage) or any other statistical measure of inflation published by any government body authorised to publish measures of inflation from time to time, and published on a date as close as reasonably possible before the date on which We send You Written Notice; and

(ii) You give Us notice to immediately cancel this Agreement before the change takes

effect".

As your wriiten notice to me was sent between 2 and 5 April 2013 (as confirmed in your email), and received by me on 6 April 2013, the relevant RPI rate, as per clause 7.2.3.3, is the one published by the ONS on 19 March 2013, at 3.2%. You claim to have used the RPI rate of 3.3%, published by the ONS on 16 April 2013, after the written notice was sent.

There can be no dispute that I am within my rights to cancel this agreement without penalty, as your price increase of 3.3% is higher than the relevant RPI rate of 3.2%. As I have given you notice to immediately cancel the agreement before the change takes effect, any refusal on your part to action my request in accordance with 7.2.3.3 is a clear breach of contract. I therefore require you to provide written confirmation that this agreement will be cancelled immediately by you, without penalty to me.

I note that the price increase you informed customers of at the end of March 2012, used the RPI rate of 3.7%, published by the ONS on 20 March 2012. Obviously, this conforms with your updated terms and conditions (although the older terms were the ones in place at that time), and also demonstrates that you had a reasonable period of time between 19 March and 2 April 2013, to update your written notice with the most recently published RPI rate of 3.2%.

Regarding mobile number xxxxx xxxxxx, it is clear that we have a difference of opinion regarding the relevant RPI rate in relation to clause 7.2.3.3 of the older terms and conditions (Version 58A dated November 2010), and this is fundamental in considering whether I have just cause to express my right to cancel under the clause.

My own interpretation of clause 7.2.3.3, and what should be the relevant RPI rate, is that it is the one relating to the month before the written notice is sent. As the writtten notice was sent by you between 2 and 8 April 2013, the relevant RPI rate would be 3.2%, published by the ONS on 19 March 2013.

I fully accept that the clause is ambigious, and therefore open to interpretation as to what the relevant RPI rate might be. Again, you have stated that you have used the RPI rate of 3.3% published by the ONS on 16 April 2013. However, I consider your interpretation of the clause to be fundamentally flawed, for the reasons outlined below.

In your written notice, dated April 2013, you explain that your price increase is due to inflation and is based on RPI, "currently at 3.3%". As you have confirmed that the letters were sent out between 2 and 8 April 2013, you could not possibly have known, at that time, that the RPI rate, published by the ONS on 16 April 2013, would be 3.3%. I believe that a future RPI rate, published after the written notice is sent, has no relevance to our agreement, and would have no relevance in a court of law. You would not be able to prove in court that you could accurately predict a future RPI rate, as far back as 1 March 2013, when you announced the 3.3% price increase. I therefore firmly believe that your arguement would hold no validity or credibility in court.

During the telephone call to your Customer Services (150) to give notice of my wish to cancel under clause 7.2.3.3 (06/04/13, 12.31pm, call duration 37 minutes, 49 seconds, name Alex, Team Number MDR670), the Advisor informed me that your 3.3% increase was based on January's RPI rate, published in February 2013. This clearly contradicts what you have said, although it is a more credible arguement than basing a price increase on a rate that is yet to be published. Incidentally, as this telephone call is obviously relevant to my complaint, I request that any recording of this call is retained and that you provide me with a transcript of the conversation.

In considering which interpretation of a contract term is correct, I appreciate that it is ultimately for a court to decide, and not either of the two parties involved. From my limited understanding of contract law, I am aware that there are five general principles that a court should follow (Investors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society), two of which seem particularly relevant here:

what the document conveys to a reasonable person and

that the meaning construed should not run contrary to a common sense viewpoint

If you consider my interpretation, i.e. that the relevant RPI rate is the one published in March 2013, the month before the written notice is sent, this is supported by reference to the current RPI rate in the written notice (the key document in bringing clause 7.2.3.3 into effect). My arguement is also supported by your actions during last year's price increase (in using the most recently published RPI rate before written notice was sent), and your amendment to clause 7.2.3.3 in the updated terms and conditions(Version 59, dated October 2012), which now explicitly states that the relevant RPI rate is the one published before the written notice is sent.

If we now consider your interpretation that the RPI rate referred to in the clause is literally for the month of March 2013, released by Government on 16 April 2013, i.e. well after the written notice was sent to customers, does this interpretation concur with the two principles above? I believe it would seem unreasonable to most people, and appear to go against a common sense viewpoint, that T-Mobile would be willing to base such a major business decision on a prediction of what the RPI rate might be in a couple of weeks' time. I have spoken to the ONS, who confirmed that no-one would have knowledge of an RPI rate before it was published, and commented that even the ONS staff involved in compiling the statistic do not know the rate until a few days before it is officially published.

On a separate point, you have stated in your email that customers wishing to end their contract with you, in accordance with clause 7.2.3.3, will not have the right to leave without providing you with 30 days notice or paying the cancellation charge that may apply. This statement is incorrect: clause 7.1.4 requires you to give me 30 days' notice of the price change; under clause 7.2.3.3, I am only required to give you notice to immediately cancel before the price change takes effect.

I wish to clarify that I have given appropriate notice to you of my wish to cancel these contracts, in accordance with clause 7.2.3.3 in both sets of terms and conditions, by telephoning your Customer Services on 06/04/13, as required by clause 7.2.2. I have also given appropriate notice in writing, in my letters dated 6 and 17 April 2013, my email of 9 April to your Executive Office, and again in this email communication. I would reiterate that I wholly disagree with your view that a cancellation charge would apply in this instance, due to the fact that your price increase of 3.3% is in excess of the relevant RPI rate, as at 6 April 2013, of 3.2%. I consider any refusal by T-Mobile to allow me my right to cancel without penalty to be a clear breach of contract, and I am willing to seek redress through CISAS and the courts, if necessary. I have received written confirmation from OFCOM that, because my complaint relates to breach of contract, rather than the price increase itself, CISAS will be able to look at my complaint and assess whether T-Mobile has complied with its own terms and conditions.

I therefore require immediate written confirmation, by return of email from your Executive Office, that T-Mobile does not dispute my notice to cancel both contracts under clause 7.2.3.3, and that I will not be liable to pay any cancellation fees. I will assume that the mobile numbers on my account can be used up until 6 May 2013, i.e. 30 days after I initially gave you notice to cancel, unless you tell me otherwise. I will, of course, be happy to pay any outstanding amounts up until this date, including any unbilled useage on the account. From 6 May 2013, the two related sim cards will no longer be connected to the T-Mobile network, and I will return these to you if requested.

If, however, your position remains unchanged on the matter, please provide confirmation that this is your final position and that the dispute is now in 'deadlock', so that I can progress my complaint with CISAS.

Yours Sincerely,

RandomCurve

Nice one anna2007 good luck with that. I am still waiting for my letter from T-Mobile and only have to deal with the latest clause which is far the easier one to defend - I will post my response once I have received the letter.

For info I was told on Thursday 17th April at approx 9:05am by the customer services team on 150 (Angie (663)) that T-Mobile had used Januarys RPI -and I will amend my letter to request a transcript of that conversation so I've got it should you require further evidence.

Additionally I received an email from Which today saying that they have passed my concerns on T-mobiles contract breach to their researchers. While I had their attention (on email) I informed them that things had moved on and that evidence was available from -Mobile that shows they have breached their T&Cs -and that evidence was your post of the letter you had received which I have emailed them.
Not sure how quick Which researchers work, but I did impress upon them the need for customers to act before 9th May, and offered to discuss any points they were unclear of with them on the phone- so maybe things are looking up re getting some publicity on this.