Tmobile price increase

d123

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

If you wouldnt mind, however I havent had any emails from T-Mobile saying this is their final position or anything similar.

So far small claims court looks best issue, and will claim for the remainder of my contract that is £.309.

I would suggest this would be evidence of deadlock

Please be advised that a deadlock letter will not be issued in regard to this matter as we believe this matter falls outside the scope of the Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme (CISAS). I dispute that we are in breach of the Terms and Conditions of the agreement.

ruflonger

anna2007 wrote: »

ruflonger - this was the wording in my final email from EE - you've got your deadlock letter

Thanks Anna and everyone else who responded. CICAS here I come
:beer:

d123

powerful_Rogue wrote: »

If you wouldnt mind,

PM sent with details.

daveuk1

anna2007 wrote: »

The clause is ambiguous though (it's clearly open to at least two meanings - in fact many more on this thread!); the fact that you believe that the rate of 16 Apr is the relevant one, and I believe the 19 Mar rate applies, proves the ambiguity

One thing is clear - the wording of the clause doesn't meet the plain language requirement of the UTCCRs or Ofcom regulations.

The rate of 16 Apr is irrelevant as far as I am concerned - how can I possibly exercise my right to cancel, under clause 7.2.3.3, when I receive notice on 6 April (I also first gave notice to cancel on 6 April) and the RPI's based on a rate not due to be published for another 10 days? Their claim to be referring to a future RPI rate seems as ludicrous to me as their claim to have taken a business risk on guessing this rate!

I completely agree that there is ambiguity. My point is that it is caused by T-Mobile announcing the price rise before the relevant RPI was known NOT by the wording of the Ts & Cs. Surely you'd agree that the "increase in the the RPI for the 12 months before the month in which We send You Written Notice" is the RPI for the 12 months before the month of April 2013, so the RPI for March (released on 16 Apr)?

d123 wrote: »

The only problem is new people joining the thread will be seeing all the drivel he is writing, in what is already a complicated matter his strange ideas will just cause more confusion.

With regards to nivag1961, I would add, for a practising solicitor it is odd he is on a builders forum reviewing equipment for central heating systems and brick/block cutters, pop his (unusual) name into google and see all the hits on screwfix.com reviews.

He has definitely spouted much drivel but I don't think he claimed to be a solicitor. That was me.

d123

daveuk1 wrote: »

He has definitely spouted much drivel but I don't think he claimed to be a solicitor. That was me.

He has made some claims in his posts, for example

nivag1961 wrote: »

Where did you study law? I did my LLB in Nottingham Law School and I do know what I am taking about.

>>>>>>>


Anyone may PM me if you want to see a copy of my LLB (full not conversion) or my BSc.:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I think he has had posts deleted where he made other claims. For example, his "letter" to the SRA.

daveuk1

Yeah, he claims to have a law degree. His letter to the SRA was inferring that I was lying about being a solicitor.

RandomCurve

daveuk1 wrote: »

I completely agree that there is ambiguity. My point is that it is caused by T-Mobile announcing the price rise before the relevant RPI was known NOT by the wording of the Ts & Cs. Surely you'd agree that the "increase in the the RPI for the 12 months before the month in which We send You Written Notice" is the RPI for the 12 months before the month of April 2013, so the RPI for March (released on 16 Apr)?

I think we all agree that Post Oct 2012 contract - it is clear and simple that T-Mobile have used an RPI which is higher than they are allowed - they will try and tell you they have not , but they have so CALL and WRITE to them and request IMMEDIATE TERMINATION. If you don't do it before 9th May - then you've missed your chance - DO IT NOW - it takes 10 minutes (+ time it takes for customer services to answer) if you use the phone script and template letter posted yesterday #449, 450, and 451.



Pre October 2012 - not so clear cut - BUT WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE? Take 10 minutes and lodge a compliant. This has got A LONG WAY TO RUN, with many twists and turns to go There can only be 2 outcomes:

1. T-Mobile win:
   1. So you wasted 10 minutes, but you have the satisfaction of making it cost them more to implement the rise which may make them think twice next time.
2. T-Mobile lose:
   1. You have got out of your contract and can tell T-Mobile what it can do with itself! (All due to GREED - their costs REDUCED by a huge sum year on year (£400 million - minimum) but still putting your price up!)
   2. BUT if you have not requested termination by 9th May for the sake of 10 minutes you're now stuck with these " " (you can fill in your own word). How sick will you feel then?

So pre or post October 2012 - CALL and WRITE NOW

Don't get mad get EEven

arturbdg

daveuk1 wrote: »

I completely agree that there is ambiguity. My point is that it is caused by T-Mobile announcing the price rise before the relevant RPI was known NOT by the wording of the Ts & Cs. Surely you'd agree that the "increase in the the RPI for the 12 months before the month in which We send You Written Notice" is the RPI for the 12 months before the month of April 2013, so the RPI for March (released on 16 Apr)?



He has definitely spouted much drivel but I don't think he claimed to be a solicitor. That was me.

I think that important question to answer is whether T-Mobile is allowed to use two different RPI's-one for pre October customers and other for post October customers.

If you look at post October customers terms you will see that it does refer to PUBLISHED RPI which at the time of notice was February one.

Also Orange plays key role as well. You can interpret your terms as you like but there is only one fact and you can't change it.

Shall I explain clearly or is it enough?

Artur

arturbdg

RandomCurve wrote: »

I think we all agree that Post Oct 2012 contract - it is clear and simple that T-Mobile have used an RPI which is higher than they are allowed - they will try and tell you they have not , but they have so CALL and WRITE to them and request IMMEDIATE TERMINATION. If you don't do it before 9th May - then you've missed your chance - DO IT NOW - it takes 10 minutes (+ time it takes for customer services to answer) if you use the phone script and template letter posted yesterday #449, 450, and 451.



Pre October 2012 - not so clear cut - BUT WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE? Take 10 minutes and lodge a compliant. This has got A LONG WAY TO RUN, with many twists and turns to go There can only be 2 outcomes:

1. T-Mobile win:
   1. So you wasted 10 minutes, but you have the satisfaction of making it cost them more to implement the rise which may make them think twice next time.
2. T-Mobile lose:
   1. You have got out of your contract and can tell T-Mobile what it can do with itself! (All due to GREED - their costs REDUCED by a huge sum year on year (£400 million - minimum) but still putting your price up!)
   2. BUT if you have not requested termination by 9th May for the sake of 10 minutes you're now stuck with these " " (you can fill in your own word). How sick will you feel then?

So pre or post October 2012 - CALL and WRITE NOW

Don't get mad get EEven

Unless T-Mobile have right to choose different RPI's as I mentioned before for pre and post October customers then both cases are clear cut, it's just that approach will be different, wouldn't you agree?

shedder101

use the pac code move the ball forward as i did

they can shout as much as they like right is right and when it goes to court i will have my day, if i loose so be it

i purchased a fixed price contract for two years, at no time did any one tell me the price could go up, so i cared not a jot when they put the price up i cancelled my contract yes i used the clause because it was in breach.

all further letters will now state they broke a fixed price contract end of story, #480 is dead right we need to stand up as consumers for our rights.

so if you were sold a contract for 1,2 or more years, if you weren't told the price could increase and you believed you costs would be X each month then they have broken the contract and no amount of small print will help them.