Right to Cancel when service not available on new address

smalltimepro

Hi All,

I am trying to find out how the citizens are protected from utility giants (particularly phone & broadband) when moving house and the provider declines to provide the service on the new address.

Logic would dictate that if the service provider refuses to continue the service on the new address (even if through a different medium), the consumer should not be penalised for the discontinuation of the service.

Here is a scenario. I am with Virgin broadband. I intended to change the package I am on and was told that this would mean a new contract of 12 months. I then asked, what would happen if I had to change home in those 12 months and Virgin refused service at the new address. They told me that I would have to pay a termination charge of upto £180.
Why is it that when I am committed to the original contract and it is Virgin who are unable to continue it, I am still the one paying the penalty? I there any forum (consumer rights, citizen rights) where this issue has ever been raised? Has it, or can it be challenged in small claim courts? How can we campaign the government to protect the consumers in this regard?

Regards,
stp

neilmcl

But you're not committed to the original contract are you. That contract was to supply the service at a specific address. You're the one who's changing the goalposts by moving.

rikbar

The issue you have is that they are prepared to honour the contract, it is you that is attempting to change the contract, not them.

They contracted to provide Internet and phone services to one address, not to you as a person. As such when you move you are cancelling your old agreement and creating another. Some service providers will transfer the services if possible, but if they cannot do this then what else can they do.

The point at the end of the day is don't enter into a contract that you cannot commit to,or if you do make sure you are aware of the costs of not keeping up your end of the deal.

Slowhand

Did you agree to take out a contract at your original address? Y/N. What did the T&C'S say about moving? What penalties were mentioned?

smalltimepro

Slowhand wrote: »

Did you agree to take out a contract at your original address? Y/N. What did the T&C'S say about moving? What penalties were mentioned?

I am not yet taken out new the contract, and my old one is already on rolling. I understand the terms that virgin communicated to me but my question is not about what the contract says, but how the law protects me as a consumer. This is a thread about consumer rights after all.

I am well aware that any utility contract would be at a specific address, simply because it is a service that is provided on an address. You are all just stating the obvious.

For people who rent accommodation, moving address is a very common scenario, in most cases it impossible to coincide the end of your tenancy with the end of a utility contract. The point I am trying to make is that 'consumers' must be protected through regulation in such cases. If there is no such regulation then we must push Ofcom to enforce such a regulation and not let consumers become a hostage to cleverly designed contracts.

jacques_chirac

smalltimepro wrote: »

I am not yet taken out new the contract, and my old one is already on rolling. I understand the terms that virgin communicated to me but my question is not about what the contract says, but how the law protects me as a consumer. This is a thread about consumer rights after all.

I am well aware that any utility contract would be at a specific address, simply because it is a service that is provided on an address. You are all just stating the obvious.

For people who rent accommodation, moving address is a very common scenario, in most cases it impossible to coincide the end of your tenancy with the end of a utility contract. The point I am trying to make is that 'consumers' must be protected through regulation in such cases. If there is no such regulation then we must push Ofcom to enforce such a regulation and not let consumers become a hostage to cleverly designed contracts.

The law protects you by allowing you to challenge any unfair or ambiguous terms in a contract. Can you point out which term it is that you feel is unfair or ambiguous? Unless phrased in a particularly complicated manner, holding someone to a one year contract that was entered into without duress certainly is not.

bris

You are protected as a consumer from unfair practice, this however is not unfair.

There is leeway from them when you move, if you take them with you, but that is a seperate contract, with them letting you away with the disconnection charge at your old address.

Because they cant provide you with a new service they are within their rights to hold you to the contract you signed up to, this is their right, they do have rights too.

There is nothing that ofcom would do and why should they? The company give you free connection, routers etc to get you going, this cost them money to set up in the first place, you think it's fair you can just go when it suits you?

smalltimepro

jacques_chirac wrote: »

The law protects you by allowing you to challenge any unfair or ambiguous terms in a contract. Can you point out which term it is that you feel is unfair or ambiguous? Unless phrased in a particularly complicated manner, holding someone to a one year contract that was entered into without duress certainly is not.

The terms state that if I am moving house and the virgin is able to provide service at the new address, I would be shifted into a new contract that starts from date at new address, however if virgin is unable to provide service at new address, then the consumer must pay termination charge that is calculated based on remaining months in contract. This in most cases is about 60-70% of the contract value in months.

I do feel that this last part of the term is unfair and biased. In cases where the consumer terminates the contract of his own accord, it is acceptable, but in cases where he is forced to do it, it is not. You must note that nobody moves address just for the fun of it. Such situation result only from unavoidable needs.

Having said that, I think that ofcom must also force the providers to offer monthly rolling contracts. Forcing people into 12-18 month contracts for service does not seem reasonable for phone and broadband

starrystarry

They do offer monthly rolling contracts. Once your initial 12 month contract is over you move onto a monthly rolling contract. It's only if you want to change your package that you end up locked in again. Simple solution = don't change your package if you're likely to move in the next 12 months.

somethingcorporate

smalltimepro wrote: »

You must note that nobody moves address just for the fun of it. Such situation result only from unavoidable needs.

Must I note it? must I really?

What a crock. I think you'll find a lot of people move under their own volition. I have never moved because I have been forced to.

jacques_chirac

smalltimepro wrote: »

The terms state that if I am moving house and the virgin is able to provide service at the new address, I would be shifted into a new contract that starts from date at new address, however if virgin is unable to provide service at new address, then the consumer must pay termination charge that is calculated based on remaining months in contract. This in most cases is about 60-70% of the contract value in months.

I do feel that this last part of the term is unfair and biased. In cases where the consumer terminates the contract of his own accord, it is acceptable, but in cases where he is forced to do it, it is not. You must note that nobody moves address just for the fun of it. Such situation result only from unavoidable needs.

Having said that, I think that ofcom must also force the providers to offer monthly rolling contracts. Forcing people into 12-18 month contracts for service does not seem reasonable for phone and broadband

It would only be 60-70% of the contract if you chose to terminate it very early in the year. If you terminated it with a short time left, you would only pay a small amount. This is a fair way of calculating the fee.

As long as it is not the service provider that forces you to move, there is nothing unfair in them enforcing their contractual rights. And you would be surprised how many people do move for the fun of it!

Would you be willing to pay a considerable premium for a rolling contract? It is a good idea in principle, but the provider will need to be sure they can recoup their costs.

starrystarry wrote: »

They do offer monthly rolling contracts. Once your initial 12 month contract is over you move onto a monthly rolling contract. It's only if you want to change your package that you end up locked in again. Simple solution = don't change your package if you're likely to move in the next 12 months.

And nine month contracts for students also