We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Help needed with BT

Hi all, I was wondering if I could get some advice and help -

I recently signed up to have a phone line with BT - I only need it for my broadband and don't own a house phone. I asked the sales woman for the cheapest available and made it clear to her that it was only for internet, for which she offered me a line for £12. Excellent.

I have just received my first bill to find I was charged an extra £5 for not making at least 2 phone calls in the month.

I was never made aware of this over the phone and feel that it should not be part of my contract as it was verbally never told to me over the phone - Ok, so maybe I should have read the T&C's more carefully when they arrive but to know knowledge the contract would have been made over the phone as I did not sign anything and just agreed to the deal over the phone.

The easy option is to just buy a phone and make 2 quick calls (which I will be charged for) per month. But have I got good reason to call BT to say I was never told about this fee (evidence will be in their recorded call) and see if I can have this removed?

It is only £5 but I feel I have been cheated by not being told over he phone and that £5 will add up over time.

Thanks Guys

Comments

  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    You failed to check the T&C's. It's not BT's job to read them to you in their entirety. The minimum calls requirement has been in lpace for many years now, as all BT tariffs include some element of inclusive calls-you can't buy just line rental.
    The calls don't have to be chargeable ones.
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
  • Thanks for the reply.

    The reason I brought it up is due to this story -

    (I can not post a link being a new user....)

    Basically 'Angela' had taken out a contract on her mobile phone and was charged over £800 for data roaming -

    Initially, Angela complained and was offered a 25% reduction on her bill.
    Not wanted her credit rating to be affected, she paid up – but she had no intention of giving up there. She compiled all the evidence she needed and, confident in her understanding of contract law, she took T-Mobile to the small claims court.
    T-Mobile claim that they had sent the terms and conditions to her in the post and that she should therefore have been aware that data roaming costs apply whilst abroad.
    However Angela was adamant that the data roaming charges were not explained to her on the phone at the time that she purchased the contract and agreed to a set monthly. She knew that thanks to Contract Law, new terms and conditions cannot be added at a later date.
    Commercial Lawyer Mark Weston explains,
    ‘At the point in time when all of the terms of the offer are laid out, and at the point in time that those are accepted, those are the terms of the contract, so any data roaming charges that were introduced after the contract was made, are not part of the contract.

    Under the terms of the law, the terms and conditions regarding Data Roaming didn’t apply because they hadn’t been brought to her attention.
    As they hadn’t been discussed on the phone, even if they had been sent to her, they shouldn’t have been incorporated because it was too late. Only the terms discussed on the phone formed her contract.

    If the person above managed to get their money back due to the fact they were never told over the phone/did not read T&C's, why is this example any different?

    Sorry for the load of information!
  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    Possibly because the claimant was a lawyer, and took the chance?
    But generally speaking, once you start using the service, you are deemed to have accepted the terms.
    Since the most you would get back would be the first month's £5, is it really worth it (notwithstanding the fact that you will not in reality be successful anyway)?
    It's up to you as a buyer to check the T&C's before you contract-you failed to do so. Are you seriously suggesting that the BT rep should have to read the entire T&C's (many pages) for each new contract made by phone?
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
  • Its not the whole T&C - its was the cost of having the phone line. I was told it was £12, not £17.

    Being that its the first month I guess I am not too bothered and will go find a cheap handset to make these 2 calls a month.

    If it was a lot longer I would be more annoyed - more at myself for not checking my bills!!

    Thanks for the replies.
  • macman
    macman Posts: 53,129 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Name Dropper
    No, the cost of the line rental is £12, not £17. The T&C's require you to make 2 calls per month. Only if you breach that requirement are you charged the £5 extra.
    No free lunch, and no free laptop ;)
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.