Misrepresented 36 month gym contract

OneOfManyjakes

I thought I had signed on a great 12 month deal at my local Gym. This week after 14 months on the contract I decided to cancel and then found out I was tied in for 36 months.

I have a copy of the contract, with hind sight its pretty clear that I am tied into the agreement for 36 months but at the time of the sale the sales person told me twice when I questioned the numbers that this was a 12 month contract.

OK so I should not have trusted the sales person and signed but its my understanding that this misrepresentation renders the contract invalid?

As per usual its a contract with the gym and the direct debits are collected by and administration company called Harlands. Harlands have given me 30 days to seek legal advice and are demanding full payment of the entire value of the contract to cancel. They have made no attempt whatsoever to acknowledge or deal with the misrepresentation complaint.

What are my rights in this matter?

somethingcorporate

Who are the contracted parties?

If it is the gym then you need to deal with them, not a 3rd party that collect the fees.

StuC75

Assume you received the contract at the time of signing up? If the term is clear stated - then its really a case of do you have any means of confirming your claim of it being 12 months??

If you're having to pay up the remainder - which is what is probably stated in the contract? the best you may hope for is for the VAT to be removed (as assume this is the same as mobile phone contracts? - and how they cannot include VAT on a service that has not been provided?).. or stick it out for the remainder...

OneOfManyjakes

somethingcorporate wrote: »

Who are the contracted parties?

If it is the gym then you need to deal with them, not a 3rd party that collect the fees.

The contract is with the gym. Harlands administer this for them and collect the direct debits but I'm not contracted to them.

I did just asked Harlands what legal basis they have for enforcing an agreement I have with the gym. Hopefully none!

OneOfManyjakes

StuC75 wrote: »

Assume you received the contract at the time of signing up? If the term is clear stated - then its really a case of do you have any means of confirming your claim of it being 12 months??

If you're having to pay up the remainder - which is what is probably stated in the contract? the best you may hope for is for the VAT to be removed (as assume this is the same as mobile phone contracts? - and how they cannot include VAT on a service that has not been provided?).. or stick it out for the remainder...

I have no means of proving what was or was not said verbally when I signed up. How would anybody every prove misrepresentation without written proof or recorded conversations?

StuC75

By asking for such statements to be confirmed in writing or by checking the contract that was signed. Whatever exists in writing is far more binding than anything verbal, and that appears to be what you are learning here. Unfortunate as that may be.

OneOfManyjakes wrote: »

I have no means of proving what was or was not said verbally when I signed up. How would anybody every prove misrepresentation without written proof or recorded conversations?

wealdroam

OneOfManyjakes wrote: »

I have no means of proving what was or was not said verbally when I signed up. How would anybody every prove misrepresentation without written proof or recorded conversations?

You only need to prove what is likely to have been said.

In this case, the fact that you have had a written copy of the contract for over a year might lead a court to conclude that you have had ample time to challenge any term.

Having said that, the OFT take a dim view of unfair terms in gym contracts.

OneOfManyjakes

Thanks for all the great advice everyone.

I have noticed something interesting about the membership contract. Its between me and the local independent gym itself and not Harlands. I've requested the details of my legal obligations to Harlands from them and here is what they had to say:

Harlands are stated clearly on the contract as the direct debit collection agency for <the gym> Via CFM 2012. The contract is held with Creative Fitness Marketing and Harlands, with use of the facilities at <the gym>.

Now Harlands are not mentioned anywhere other than the direct debit instruction which is cancelled already and there is no mention of "Creative Fitness Marketing" anywhere. I pointed this out and I'm looking forward to the response.

This is all starting to make sense. My guess is that creative fitness marketing are the agency that signed me up and misrepresented the contract last year. Sounds like they work closely with Harlands.

Presumably if Harlands cannot prove the existence of a contract between us then I will have to ignore them and take this up with the gym directly?

ValHaller

OneOfManyjakes wrote: »

As per usual its a contract with the gym and the direct debits are collected by and administration company called Harlands. Harlands have given me 30 days to seek legal advice and are demanding full payment of the entire value of the contract to cancel. They have made no attempt whatsoever to acknowledge or deal with the misrepresentation complaint.

What are my rights in this matter?

You should ignore Harlands entirely. They are a collection agent AFAICS. You should deal with the gym and give your notice to them unless the contract specifies that you must give it to Harlands.

unholyangel

Did you read the part wealdroam quoted?

Try also googling "OFT v Ashbourne".

Heres a sort of brief overview that many be useful:
The Court held:

various terms of Ashbourne's standard form agreements are unfair contrary to the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. In particular:

- Terms in contracts 1 to 10 which required consumers to pay in full for the remainder of the minimum membership period if they wished to cancel during this period. This was both because the minimum term operated as a "trap" for consumers who overestimate the use they are likely to make of the gym, and also because the contracts unfairly gave Ashbourne the right to demand too much in payment;

- Terms in contracts 11 to 13 which tie consumers in for more than 12 months. The judge indicated that if there is a longer period it would be unfair unless the consumer could give 30 days notice to cancel, and pay a modest sum in compensation. The court was willing to accept a 12 month minimum period in contracts 11 to 13 because they contain more circumstances in which the consumer can suspend or terminate their membership for stated reasons.

- Terms in contracts 6, 8, 9 & 10 which require the consumer to give cancellation notices to Ashbourne rather than the gym. In fact the contracts were between the gym and the consumer, and so the consumer should be able to deal directly with the gym.



How extensive/complex is your contract?

unholyangel

ValHaller wrote: »

You should ignore Harlands entirely. They are a collection agent AFAICS. You should deal with the gym and give your notice to them unless the contract specifies that you must give it to Harlands.

Actually the courts ruled such a term is unfair. If you are in contract with the gym then you should be able to give notice to the gym and shouldn't have to give notice to a third party.