Mobile Phone Contract - Price Rise Refunds

Mikmonken

skuk21 wrote: »

RC many thanks for your assistance.

I sent my email off on the April 13th and have not received a reply.

How long is taking for you guys to get a response?

I've resent an email using the template from post 166. Fingers crossed!

Many thanks

my chase that copied in OFCOM got me a reply in a couple of hours

claireb1

I Just had a reply to my first e-mail that was sent on 22.4.13. Like ones on here from Victoria Hunt what do I do next please?

skuk21

Mikmonken wrote: »

my chase that copied in OFCOM got me a reply in a couple of hours

ahhh I missed that. What is their email address please?

snakeyface

claireb1 wrote: »

I Just had a reply to my first e-mail that was sent on 22.4.13. Like ones on here from Victoria Hunt what do I do next please?

Send the email in post 175, you may want to edit it slightly but RC said they wouldn't notice if it doesn't apply exactly. RC will post a CISAS claim email shortly.

Geewalt1

RandomCurve wrote: »

This is the Forum for attempting to obtain a PENALTY FREE cancellation from EE/Orange/T-Mobile if you received a letter from these companies advising you that they are applying an RPI price increase of 2.7% effective May 2014.

1. You will find some background information at Post #98 and #99
2. The first email to send is at post #165
3. If you do not receive a response to your first email then send the second email at post #166 and also copy in [EMAIL="Lynn.Parker@ofcom.org.uk"]Lynn.Parker@ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]
4. When you receive a response from EE if it is the same as the one at post #168 then the response is at post #175.

You have 30 days from when you were notified of the price rise to send the email at #165


Good Luck

Hi RC, the reply I received from EE is not identical to post #168 so will #175 still apply to this?

Dear Mr xxxxxxx,

Thank you for your email dated 10 April 2014, received in the Executive Office, I have been asked to respond on behalf of EE.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the recent increase to our prices and some of our services. As a company we are committed to investing significantly in our network and work hard to give the best value for our service, we have in this instance tried to keep these increases to a minimum. However due to rising business costs linked to inflation we have had to revaluate our pricing structure.

In this instance, the increase to price plans is in line with RPI at 2.7% and compliant with the Terms and Conditions of your contract. Our Terms and Conditions give us the right to increase the cost of our services and this change does not give you a right to terminate your contract. Please refer to clause 3.7 in your Terms and Conditions.

Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you were looking for, I trust I have clarified EE's position regarding this matter.

Yours sincerely



Victoria Hunt
Executive Office, EE

PeteM1967

I've been reading this thread with interest over the last few weeks being EE customer (T-Mobile) on a 24 month contract dating from 8th July 2012.

Basically I will be leaving when my contract expires so was wondering if there is anything from me to gain from attempting the CISAS cancellation route being discussed. EE will be fleecing me for approximately 6 weeks until I can escape.

I tried contacting them on Saturday to explain that I would leave on 8th July if my contract price increased. This simply resulted in me being shunted off to some Indian call center with a representative who was completely useless. I was told to leave when the contract expired so I guess that must be official EE policy regarding existing customers coming to the end of contract!

Marshall93

RandomCurve wrote: »

Don't forget to change the red XXX's and DATES (there are 2) as appropriate and only leave the blue text in if you are a T-Mobile customer whose contract started before 30th October 2012. delete the Orange text as appropriate so that you just leave 15.1 or 7.1 in the email (it is the number EE will have included in their response to you).




The email addresses to use are:

[EMAIL="executive.office@ee.co.uk"]executive.office@ee.co.uk[/EMAIL]; (or who ever responded to your original email) AND
[EMAIL="Olaf.Swantee@ee.co.uk"]Olaf.Swantee@ee.co.uk[/EMAIL]


Dear Mr Swantee,

Re Phone number 07XXXXXXXX – Case reference XXXXX

Thank you for your email Dated.
Unfortunately the response falls short of a full response requested that addresses ALL of the points raised in my original email and as such I find the level of customer service unacceptable due to the number of issues that have remained unaddressed.

You state “…Retail Price Index (RPI), which is a measure of inflation.” however whilst it is a statement of fact that RPI is a A measure of inflation, it does not address my concern that CPI (1.7%) is the OFFICIAL UK measure of inflation as considered by the Bank England to regulate the economy, whilst RPI (Since March 2013) is not designated as a National statistic. Therefore you have not explained to me why EE considers this REAL TERMS increase not to be of Material Detriment – please respond in full.

I note that EE recognises its obligations under GC 9.6 “We are obliged, as are all UK operators, to abide by General Condition 9.6 of the Ofcom.” As EE will be aware you changed the price variation T&C effective 26th March 2014 (2 months after Ofcom changed the definition of Material Detriment in GC 9.6) therefore this clause is subject to the new GC 9.6 definition which is:

Paragraph 6.22“In particular, we consider guidance is needed as to price rises which we are likely to regard as materially detrimental (or likely to be materially detrimental) and invoking the requirements of GC9.6. Such price rises are likely to include any increase to core subscription prices.”

As previously requested please explain how EE has compiled with GC 9.6, and why you are refusing my request for an IMMEDIATE PENALTY FREE cancellation as the changed T&C is subject to the new Ofcom definition of Material Detriment?

You also mention clause 15.1 (Orange)/7.1 (T-Mobile/EE) of our contract, but our contract is regulated by Ofcom and it is under Ofcom regulation GC 9.6 that I am requesting a penalty free cancellation; can you explain why EE considers our contract not to be subject to Ofcom regulation?

Other points that you have missed/ignored form my original email:

Notwithstanding the fact that the price variation is subject to the new Ofcom definition of Material detriment you have not addressed how this price variation is not to my Material Detriment under the old definition (as requested in my original email) – am I to take it that EE agrees that the price variation is subject to the new definition?

If not please address the two points that were raised in my original email reproduced for you convenience below:

First point not addressed: Without Prejudice.
The term “likely to be of Material detriment” in the regulatory context can be determined by understanding why the term was introduced into GC 9.6 by OFTEL and retained by Ofcom, and by reference to the source European documentation for GC 9.6 which is the Universal Service Directive (USD) USD 20/(22) for which GC 9.6 is the UK enactment. It is clear that the intention of USD 20/(22) was to give the CONSUMER the choice to cancel their contract during a fixed period for ANY modification that is made which they do not accept as follows:

USD 2002/22/EC
Chapter IV – End User Agreements
Article 20 – Contracts
Paragraph 4

4. Subscribers shall have a right to withdraw from their contracts without penalty upon notice of proposed modifications in the contractual conditions. Subscribers shall be given adequate notice, not shorter than one month, ahead of any such modifications and shall be informed at the same time of their right to withdraw, without penalty, from such contracts, if they do not accept the new conditions.

Further Ofcom GC 9.6 supports the USD implementation as the term "likely to be of material detriment" was introduced because:

"Our intention was to reflect our general duties and principles of good administration and proportionality in particular. We sought, in light of these, not to rule out contract variations altogether. For example, those beneficial to, or having a neutral impact on, a subscriber.” (from Ofcom publication “ Price rises in fixed term contracts - Decision to issue Guidance on General Condition 9.6”, Published in October 2013”

As Ofcom's (and OFTEL before them) reasoning for introducing the term was to protect me - the consumer - from changes which are not to my benefit or at the very least are neutral then a price rise of any kind is clearly neither to by benefit, nor neutral, and are therefore likely to be of Material Detriment.

Second point not addressed: Without Prejudice
In the Ofcom publication “ Price rises in fixed term contracts - Decision to issue Guidance on General Condition 9.6”, Published in October 2013. Ofcom defined “Likely to be of Material Detriment as follows:

Paragraph 6.22
“In particular, we consider guidance is needed as to price rises which we are likely to regard as materially detrimental (or likely to be materially detrimental) and invoking the requirements of GC9.6. Such price rises are likely to include any increase to core subscription prices.”

And whilst Ofcom have announced that this will only apply to contracts entered into on or after 23rd January all Ofcom have actually done is clarify a definition. They have not changed the words of GC 9.6. As they have only clarified a definition then the definition must apply to all contracts as it cannot be a legally correct position that two contracts subject to the same regulation with exactly the same wording (GC 9.6) can have two different meanings.


Without prejudice
Since my original email I have also realised that the price rise applied to my V58 T-Mobile contract – which was taken out before 30th October 2012, clearly has the wrong month’s annual inflation rate applied. In March 2013 T-Mobile were most forceful* in insisting that the Annual RPI applied to my account of 3.3% related to March 2013 RPI published in April 2013 (and not February RPI published in March), whereas now you are applying the February 2014 ANNUAL RPI rate to the same contract. Clearly EE are not allowed to apply a 12 Month inflation rate to an 11 Month period as this would effectively be applying an RPI rate higher than the actual RPI rate in that period, and is therefore is to my Material detriment (not only because the12 month rate was 2.5% and not 2.7% (7.5% higher), but also EE would have charged me the whole price rise for an additional month).

*T-Mobile Defence to a CISAS case regarding the wrong months RPI being applied in 2013.
COMMUNICATIONS & INTERNET SERVICES ADJUDICATION SCHEME
REFERENCE: 212132298

BETWEEN
MR XXXXXXXX Claimant
and
EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE LIMITED
trading as T-Mobile Respondent
…………

19 As the Written Notice was issued in the month of April 2013 then the relevant month’s RPI figure for the purposes of Clause 7.2.3.3 of the Agreement is the RPI figure as published by the Office of National Statistics (“ONS”) representing March 2013; being the month before the month in which the Written Notice was issued. The March RPI figure, published by the ONS Statistics was 3.3%. By way of the Monthly Statistical Bulletin (“the Bulletin”) published by the ONS the following is stated:-

The RPI 12-month rate for March [2013] stood at 3.3%

The Bulletin is a lengthy document so has not annexed to this Defence but can be made available to CISAS upon request. …………

The Respondent believes that the facts stated in this form are true. I am duly authorised by the Respondent to sign this statement.

Dated the 03 July 2013
Rue Kandi
Legal Executive
For and on behalf of the Respondent whose address for service is at:
Everything Everywhere Limited
Hatfield Business Park
Hatfield
Hertfordshire
AL10 9BW.



I look forward to receiving my PAC (penalty free) and a penalty free cancellation back dated to DATE when I first contacted you on this matter. Should EE not consider this to be an appropriate action then please clearly articulate why this is not the case with reference to each of the points above AND provide a deadlock reference in order that I can pursue a claim via CISAS. Any response which fails to address the specific points above would not be acceptable to me and will be used as evidence of EE’s lack of duty of care and poor customer service.

Regards

It mentions clauses 15.1 and 7.1, but my email from them mentions clause 3.7 only, should I just change the email to say 3.7 or use one of the options from the template email?
Thanks so much for this,

BonnieBonn

ulaggy wrote: »

Hurrah, a response. Not a PAC code, but hey we didn't expect that really! At least now I can go to CISAS at the same time as everyone else

"Case Reference: XXXXXX
Account Number: XXXXXX


Dear Mr XXXXXX,

Thank you for your email, received in the Executive Office, I have been asked to respond on behalf of EE.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the recent increase to our prices and some of our services. As a company we are committed to investing significantly in our network and work hard to give the best value for our service, we have in this instance tried to keep these increases to a minimum. However due to rising business costs linked to inflation we have had to revaluate our pricing structure.

In this instance, the increase to price plans is in line with RPI at 2.7 percent and compliant with the Terms and Conditions of your contract. Our Terms and Conditions give us the right to increase the cost of our services and this change does not give you a right to terminate your contract. Please refer to clause 7.1 in your Terms and Conditions.

EE do not feel that this change is of material detriment to you as it is in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI), which is a measure of inflation. I acknowledge you do not agree with this decision therefore the next step would be to seek independent adjudication via CISAS.

You may refer your complaint to CISAS. CISAS will determine whether the complaint falls within the jurisdiction of its ADR Scheme. We may argue that it does not. If CISAS agrees its Scheme applies, it will adjudicate on the complaint in line with the Scheme rules. CISAS's details are as follows:-

CISAS
International Dispute Resolution Centre
70 Fleet Street,
London,
EC4Y 1EU

Email: [EMAIL="info@cisas.org.uk"]info@cisas.org.uk[/EMAIL]
Tel: 020 7520 3827
Fax: 020 7520 3829

Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you were looking for, I trust I have clarified EE's position regarding this matter.

Yours sincerely



Executive Office, EE"

I have just had this response today after sending the second email - a big thank you to Random Curve for all the help so far! Wouldn't have made this progress without the previous emails you put together for us :]

Hopefully we will all get the response we need to go to CISAS and progress further with this!

Troy_Tempest

RandomCurve wrote: »

I bet they send you straight to CISAS re the Pre Oct 2012 T-Mobile contract - they know they have been caught out here and won't want to engage with you!!

Ha! Bang on RC! I had a reply this morning saying I can go to CISAS!

No reply to my daughter (August 2013 contract).

So, shall I send an email to CISAS immediately, or wait for you to draft a response?

Email Received today:

Case Reference: XXXXXXX
Account Number: XXXXXXX


Dear Mr XXXXX,

Thank you for your Email received in the Executive Office, I have been asked to respond on behalf of EE.

I'm sorry you are unhappy with the recent increase to our prices and some of our services. As a company we are committed to investing significantly in our network and work hard to give the best value for our service, we have in this instance tried to keep these increases to a minimum. However due to rising business costs linked to inflation we have had to revaluate our pricing structure.

In this instance, the increase to price plans is in line with RPI at 2.7% and compliant with the terms and conditions of your contract. Our terms and conditions give us the right to increase the cost of our services and this change does not give you a right to terminate your contract. Please refer to clause 3.7 in your terms and conditions.

EE do not feel that this change is of material detriment to you as it is in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI), which is a measure of inflation. I acknowledge you do not agree with this decision therefore the next step would be to seek independent adjudication via CISAS.

You may refer your complaint to CISAS. CISAS will determine whether the complaint falls within the jurisdiction of its ADR Scheme. We may argue that it does not. If CISAS agrees its Scheme applies, it will adjudicate on the complaint in line with the Scheme rules. CISAS's details are as follows:-

CISAS
International Dispute Resolution Centre
70 Fleet Street,
London,
EC4Y 1EU

Email: info@cisas.org.uk
Tel: 020 7520 3827
Fax: 020 7520 3829

Whilst I understand this is not the outcome you were looking for, I trust I have clarified EE's position regarding this matter.

Yours sincerely


Executive Office, EE
NOTICE AND DISCLAIMER
This e-mail (including any attachments) is intended for the above-named person(s). If you are not the intended recipient, notify the sender immediately, delete this email from your system and do not disclose or use for any purpose.

We may monitor all incoming and outgoing emails in line with current legislation. We have taken steps to ensure that this email and attachments are free from any virus, but it remains your responsibility to ensure that viruses do not adversely affect you.

EE Limited
Registered in England and Wales
Company Registered Number: 02382161
Registered Office Address: Trident Place, Mosquito Way, Hatfield, Hertfordshire, AL10 9BW

pau1200

hi,

from rc previously posts he is putting together the template we need to send CISAS so we just need to be patient.