Mobile Phone Contract - Price Rise Refunds

snakeyface

Success in part!

Contract cancelled and backdated to April, PAC code and £27 compensation. Very pleased!

I have 6 weeks to accept, so is it okay to leave it 5 weeks and effectively get an extra 5 weeks of free phone use?

Thank you so much RC. I had an Orange contract taken out in May 2013, and adjudicator Dean Taylor.

Mick_Cranes_Sidestep

bobbyh1982 wrote: »

ABSOLUTELY BUZZING!

CLAIM SUCCEEDS!

The company shall cancel the customer’s contract without penalty backdated to his notice of 24 April 2014, provide a PAC and unlock code, and compensation of £100.00!!!!

Over the moon with this - Top work RC!

Can somebody please help with what to do next - I'm off to Spain on Saturday, I'm guessing my usage will be free then I accept the decision when I get back?
What happens then - do I simply wait for CISAS to get in touch and the details with a cheque from EE?

My bill is also due on Monday - should I cancel my DD?

Thanks!

Read the second letter with the email. It details what you now have to do. If you accept, it will be at least another 4-6 weeks before you are free of your contract and you have to pay your bills in the meantime, so don't cancel your DD. Anything you pay you will get back.


MCS

amf

I am on holiday just now so can only post brief details. Adjudicator RW, who I'd asked to be replaced owing to inconsistent decisions compared to his colleagues, decided against me. On basis that I did not cancel when advised of new ts and cs so I had accepted new terms. I'm up for a new CISAS case on the issue of tsand cs.

barrowvian

RandomCurve wrote: »

9. My conclusion on the main issues is that:
a. The customer has failed to prove that the company has breached the contract or failed in
its duty of care.


The claim - had the adjudicator bothered to read it - was not that EE had breached the contract, but that they had breached OFCOM REGULATION GC 9.6 - I thought these adjudicators were supposed to be experts on telecommunication regulation!

Hi RC,

Do you have a template for starting a new CISAS claim based upon the new direction of the claim? Thanks.

RandomCurve

The summary of your actual claim was:


Summary


My claim is not in regards to EE/Orange/T-Mobiles’ (referred to as EE throughout the remainder of this claim) business decision to increase prices, as a business EE is free to make whatever business decisions it chooses. My claim is that the price rise notified to me is of material detriment as per the Ofcom definition of Material Detriment under GC 9.6, and therefore under GC 9.6 I am entitled to a penalty free cancellation.

The adjudicator considers the main issues are:
Main issues
2. I consider that the main issues in this adjudication are:

a. Whether the company has broken a term of the contract between it and the customer or
failed in its duty of care.

b. Whether the reasons given by the customer are sufficient to justify an apology, penalty
free termination, and £50 compensation.


The claim was not based on the contract - of course EE are not stupid enough (this time around) to have breached the contract - hence why we never submitted a claim on that basis. EE have breached Ofcom General Condition GC 9.6.


The adjudicator also says:
c. The customer submits that if the terms and conditions have been changed, then the
Ofcom guidance relating to material detriment, effective to all agreements entered into
after 23 January 2014, should apply to him. I do not accept this.

d. The change to the terms and conditions amounted to an amendment to an ancillary term, as opposed to a core term of the agreement


Under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations the price term is considered to be "the most important term of all" - how can this be ancillary according to the adjudicator?


The adjudicator also says:
g. I am mindful that the terms and conditions have always had a price variation clause and
have made reference to the RPI as the limit to any such increase. The clause has the
effect of putting the customer on notice that the price may increase during the minimum 5

term of the agreement, and that if this increase is in excess of the RPI, it will give rise to
a right to penalty-free termination.


Just not true! The old term was the LOWER of RPI and ANY OTHER MEASURE OF INFLATION!


The adjudicator also says:
j. Nevertheless, I do not accept that a real terms increase amounts to material detriment
within the context of the terms of the agreement and the contract was entered into before
the Ofcom guidance came into force. The customer was aware at the commencement of
the agreement that the price could increase by no more than the RPI, and I find that this
context is sufficient that any such increase cannot be considered to be of material
detriment


So has not even taken into account the regulation that says changes must be Beneficial or neutral in their effect".


I really do think either EE or Ofcom have "got" to some of these adjudicators!
The revised defence response will address all of these points as we are now having to second guess what an individual adjudicator will add into the actual claim and which bits of the claim they will ignore!

RandomCurve

barrowvian wrote: »

Hi RC,

Do you have a template for starting a new CISAS claim based upon the new direction of the claim? Thanks.

Will have soon

KARLITO

Hi RandomCurve,

Thanks again, to consider a revised counter defence (Refer to posts 1072 and 1074, if others are interested and in similar situation). Thou, forgive me for asking, knowing it takes time and effort, do you reckon something will be had by the 30/06/14? Just, it's my dead line to submit. Still can't believe, they didn't even pay any attention what's so ever to my gender, wait I can it's EE!

RandomCurve

Working on a revised defence response now and will also have to address some of the points the adjudicators are ignoring in their decision making - hope to have something up in the next couple of days.
I know exactly what I want to say - it is translating that into something the adjudicators can follow which is the difficult bit.
E seem to be succeeding by introducing spurious arguments and leading the adjudicators down blind alleys, and of course as the adjudicators seem to start from the point that EE must be right because they have big expensive lawyers makes it all the easier for EE o do this!

Tezza316

Just had confirmation from CISAS that they have received my notification of acceptance and EE have 4 weeks to action the adjudicators decision.

Now the waiting game...................

RandomCurve

For all of you waiting to start a new claim based on the T&Cs and Price rise combined.


I am waiting to see how the discussions with MSE go regarding their willingness or otherwise to lend support/publicity - hopefully know relatively soon so I think we should hold of to gain maximum impact. I also think a new thread is required which I will start (unless MSE start one for us).