Unauthorised Mobile Phone Usage

NFH

Herongull wrote: »

It may be that at some stage in the future, these clauses get ruled to be an unfair term in the contract

It would never be deemed unfair to hold a customer liable for losses caused by his own negligence, i.e. losing a SIM card and failing to ask the network to block it sufficiently quickly.

Guys_Dad

NFH wrote: »

It would never be deemed unfair to hold a customer liable for losses caused by his own negligence, i.e. losing a SIM card and failing to ask the network to block it sufficiently quickly.

No you are wrong. Two reasons

1. wantmemoney says so.

2. it's always someone else's fault - particularly if it is big business.

I am surprised at your post that overlooks these points.

zagfles

Herongull wrote: »

By agreeing the mobile contract (including all the T&Cs), you agree to be responsible for all calls (including premium rate and calls abroad) made by the sim. If you are not happy with the T&Cs, do not agree the contract.

Get a PAYG phone - that is what I do. The last thing I want is all the stress and risk of having a contract.

It may be that at some stage in the future, these clauses get ruled to be an unfair term in the contract or that they have to be in larger print or made clear verbally to the customer at the time of getting the contract or whatever. Then they won't be binding any more. This may well happen at some time - it has happened in relation to other things in different types of consumer arrangements.

I think this is why mobile companies often agree to reduce the bill in such cases - to avoid court cases etc. With court cases there is a risk that the court may in fact rule these clauses to be unfair and then this sets a precedent and they can no longer enforce them.

AFAIK, this has not happened yet and until it does happen these clauses are binding unless the OP or someone else wants to take the phone company to court.

The trouble is that anyone taking them to court is taking a risk too. No one knows what a court might decide in these sorts of situations.

Indeed - I don't think the mobile companies would ever risk court, they'd settle out of court. Strange how it seems they always offer a reduction in the bill when challenged, if it's all the customer's fault surely they should pay the whole bill?

NFH

zagfles wrote: »

Strange how it seems they always offer a reduction in the bill when challenged, if it's all the customer's fault surely they should pay the whole bill?

As I said above, where the network has incurred a loss as a result of the customer's negligence but the customer hasn't consumed the service, the customer is liable only for the network's loss (i.e. cost price), not the full retail price of the service. Therefore it's normal that the networks will offer a reduction in the bill.

zagfles

NFH wrote: »

As I said above, where the network has incurred a loss as a result of the customer's negligence but the customer hasn't consumed the service, the customer is liable only for the network's loss (i.e. cost price), not the full retail price of the service. Therefore it's normal that the networks will offer a reduction in the bill.

They usually do even where the customer has consumed the service (eg big roaming bills).

wantmemoney

Guys_Dad wrote:

Thankfully we have well informed contributors on here with greater knowledge of English law to compensate.

but it's you and your 'call center' chums that are giving all the very dubious unhelpful 'legal' advice.
Some of you people clearly wouldn't recognize irony if it jumped up and bit you on your know it all !!!!!!.
Maybe your confusing irony with hypocrisy!

my advice to anybody with huge amounts of fraudulent charges on their phone bill would be to seek proper legal advice.
get the press and you MP involved.

wantmemoney

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/consumertips/household-bills/10146634/My-1000-Vodafone-bill-for-a-lost-mobile.html


'A £1000 Vodafone bill when I lost my mobile'
28 6 13

One reader was told to foot the bill when fraudsters got hold of his Sim. took on the telecoms giant. When Jon Barrett lost his uninsured iPhone on holiday in Barcelona, he resigned himself to the cost of a new handset. What he didn't bank on was Vodafone billing him more than...

"We make it clear in our terms and conditions that the customer is responsible for all charges on a lost or stolen phone up to the point that he or she reports it to us."

A spokesman said: "We've looked again at Mr Barrett's case and it seems that, rather than a straightforward case of fraudulent usage, this could be part of an organised scam. On that basis, we've waived all the charges. We're sorry that we missed this initially, but it is an extremely rare occurrence."

bull !!!!

so much for the silly 'ironic' remarks and 'legal' advice given on this thread!

my advice to anybody with huge amounts of fraudulent charges on their phone bill would be to seek proper legal advice.
get the press and you MP involved.