Mobile Phone Contract - Price Rise Refunds

pau1200

pau1200 wrote: »

Hi,

i have a couple of questions before i send of my claim.

Im quite sure when i agreed to the contract (sep 2012) it was originally £35 per month, its now £37.18 and after the next hike it will be £38.18 so in less that 2 years my price is 9% more, so does the first part apply or is it current price + increase?

When current price is mentioned is that ex vat or inc vat?

Can anyone clarify my above question, I really want to send my claim off. I'm just unsure about the first point and whether I should remove it

Mikmonken

pau1200 wrote: »

Can anyone clarify my above question, I really want to send my claim off. I'm just unsure about the first point and whether I should remove it

VAT shouldn't make a difference in terms of increase as it's as a % so 10 + VAT + 2.7% is the same as 10 + 2.7% + VAT

in terms of your increase if you can evidence that you've had 2 price rises within 12 months i think you should add it i.

you might want to check they've not added something onto your contract that you didn't ask for or that, but if you can't evidence it then just base it on the current price rise like everyone else.

WraithGR

Hi RandomCurve,
First of all thanks for all your hard work helping everyone on this thread!
What do you suggest to do in this case?:
First time I contacted them was the 14th of April with the regular template from #165. I followed up on the 22nd (stating they didn't respond to my email and please respond or acknowledge deadlock so I can go to CISAS), not knowing they had sent me the standard response letter saying "sorry but no you can't leave".

I then responded to the letter on the 24th with the template from #175 saying their letter doesn't adequately cover my questions.
This morning I replied with yet another chaser email (you ignored my last email please respond to this email) copying in Ofcom, since I had had no reply. Now I got this:

Dear Mr [Wraithgr]

Thank you for your email, received in the Executive Office. A letter was sent to you dated 22 April to confirm the following.

I am sorry you are unhappy with the recent Price Increase. As a company we are committed to offering the best value for service which is why we have kept the increase to a minimum. The increase is a result of the rising costs to our business and is in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI), which is a measure of inflation.

We are obliged, as are all UK operators, to abide by General Condition 9.6 of the Ofcom. This condition sets out what we must do if a change is of material detriment to a customer, which is to provide 30 days' notice and allow a customer to end their agreement free of charge. When the changes are not of material detriment, the customer does not have the right to end their agreement. In the case of this price increase, the change is not of material detriment to customers.

The increase is in line with the Terms and Conditions of your contract specifically clause 7.1.4. As the increase is less than RPI should you wish to close the account early in accordance with clause 7.2.3.3 you would be subject to an early termination fee.

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

They seem to have completely ignored my follow-up even though I am expressly referring to their letter of the 22nd. Does this help my case in any way? Do I now respond by going to CISAS and saying EE are ignoring me, or do I try again to reply with something like "I have already responded to your letter of the 22nd, please see my response attached once again for your convenience" and copy in Ofcom? Do I re-send #175 and ask them to properly read it?

It seems like someone may have screwed up on their end and sent me the wrong response template (twice, btw)... Which do you think I should do?

WraithGR

Sorry for the double-post. I have drafted a reply with reference to their response and my earlier emails which I plan to include just below the original message in my email. What do you think?
Dear Mr Swantee,

Case Reference: XXXXX
Account Number: XXXXX

Thank you for your email. Unfortunately your response once again 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.
In my correspondence of the 24th of April I am specifically referring to your letter of the 22nd of April, stating in detail the reasons for which your letter was an inadequate response. I have included those emails below for your convenience. Since my attempt to contact you on the 24th of April I had received no response other than your email below, which refers to your letter of the 22nd of April, completely ignoring my response and request for clarification on the 24th. Please kindly respond to my email of the 24th of April clearly articulating why you are refusing to provide a penalty-free cancellation with reference to each of the points in said email 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,

miss*charisma

I've received my first reply from EE:

" 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."


I've noticed that they have quoted clause 3.7 from their terms and conditions in their first email response to me. Does anyone know what this refers to? I only realised I could fight this a few days ago and have literally no clue what I'm doing! Is there a template reply anywhere for this one? Thanks everyone for your help!!!!

Mikmonken

miss*charisma wrote: »

I've received my first reply from EE:

" 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."


I've noticed that they have quoted clause 3.7 from their terms and conditions in their first email response to me. Does anyone know what this refers to? I only realised I could fight this a few days ago and have literally no clue what I'm doing! Is there a template reply anywhere for this one? Thanks everyone for your help!!!!

You need to look for post #175 if you've sent the first template or search for posts by RandomCurve as he's the brains behind this operation

Troy_Tempest

Right, I'm just going through the Cisas submission and my reply from EE also had the reference to clause 3.7

(3.7. Allowances which include (or Charges which are for) calling a UK mobile number will exclude calls to the numbers or customers of networks which are not a UK national cellular mobile operator network. Networks in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands are not UK national networks. Please refer to Our “What It Costs (Non Standard Charges)” booklet for details.)

This, from my paper copy T&C's (yes I kept it )


They've clearly mixed T&C's up with Orange? I wondered if this should be ignored or incorporated into the response.

My daughter has had a reply from EE on her August 2013 contract inviting her to go to Cisas. Slightly different response i think from some of the others:

Case Reference: xxxxxxx
Account Number: xxxxxxxxx

Dear Miss Xxxxx,

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

I am sorry you are unhappy with the recent Price Increase. As a company we are committed to offering the best value for service which is why we have kept the increase to a minimum. The increase is a result of the rising costs to our business and is in line with the Retail Price Index (RPI), which is a measure of inflation.

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

I trust the above information is of assistance to you.

Yours sincerely



Executive Office, EE

Mikmonken

Troy_Tempest wrote: »

Right, I'm just going through the Cisas submission and my reply from EE also had the reference to clause 3.7

This, from my paper copy T&C's (yes I kept it )


They've clearly mixed T&C's up with Orange? I wondered if this should be ignored or incorporated into the response.

My daughter has had a reply from EE on her August 2013 contract inviting her to go to Cisas. Slightly different response i think from some of the others:

Like the way they're saying they're keeping the rise to the minimum, yet raising by the maximum they're allowed too...

Mikmonken

I had the same reference in my letter but hadn't checked what it related to as basically they ignored all points I quoted any way but 3.7 from revised EE contract that they linked to via text back in feb says

3.7 By using the Services You consent to Us copying and/or modifying images or information You have created where such copying and/or modification is carried out for the purposes of transmission. This also applies where You use the portal.

Not sure of the relevance of this clause in this case, but it does underpin shoddy customer care

RandomCurve

Mikmonken wrote: »

You need to look for post #175 if you've sent the first template or search for posts by RandomCurve as he's the brains behind this operation

I'm flattered. I just wish Ofcom would do the job it is supposed to do (protect consumers), then we would not all be having to do this as Ofcom would have made the rules clear (as they were supposed to under EU directive 2002/22), and EE would not be playing these clever games to extract money from you when you are in a fixed period of the contract.