MSE News: O2 to hike its prices by 2.7% - can you leave your contract penalty-free?

GolfBravo

DUTR wrote: »

however some of those texts equate to mms, how much would gg out of bundle calls have cost me?

Giffgaff prices and bundles.

Our neighbour and local friends are with Giffgaff - they highly recommend them, spend £7.50 per month. :T

DUTR

GolfBravo wrote: »

Giffgaff prices and bundles.

Our neighbour and local friends are with Giffgaff - they highly recommend them, spend £7.50 per month. :T

I am aware of GG, if the out of bundle charges are say 10p, then this month already I would be +£9.10 on top of my £12.50 so thats £21.60 which is already more than what I am due to pay and almost the same as the O2 monthly after the price rise, so as I say it depends on calling patterns, if it suits you then why not go for it?

hondamad21

AndyBSG wrote: »

Just been in touch with O2 myself telling them I want to cancel.

They quoted that RPI increases were covered in my contract so I hit them with the fact that the call charge increases weren't included and under CISAS regulations these represent a material detriment to me meaning I can cancel without penalty.

As soon as I said that they rolled over and i'll no longer be an O2 customer in 30 days.

Off to EE where my £37.15, 24 month contract will be replaced with a £22, 12 month sim only contract which gives me an extra 4GB of data and is a 4G one

Hi Andy

Can you tell me a bit more about what you said to O2 as I am composing an email to then just now.
Also can you tell me if you had a sim only or a handset contract?
How far were you into the contract?
Thanks

AndyBSG

hondamad21 wrote: »

Hi Andy

Can you tell me a bit more about what you said to O2 as I am composing an email to then just now.
Also can you tell me if you had a sim only or a handset contract?
How far were you into the contract?
Thanks

I was on an 18 month handset contract with 4 months still to run.

Phoned them up and said I wanted to cancel my contract without penalty due to the price increase.

They then told me I would have penalties as an RPI increase is specified in my contract.

I then said that I know RPI increases are covered but the unrelated Call, Text and MMS price increases are not covered and under CISAS regulations if I incur additional charges not covered in my monthly tariff due to extras then I can cancel on this basis.

JasonLVC

DUTR wrote: »

Which means if somebody can show that for the preceeding 3 months or so they were using out of call charges which had increased then they have a case, if not they don't have a case I think you may find.

Does this not then prove that these things are worth challenging as agaisnt the "you'll fail, you're a loser, court will laugh at you" stance from earlier?

Not having a go, just you sound a little defeatist which is at odds with this website which is about the consumer fighting back (successful campaigns such as PPI, bank charges, energy pricing, etc.)

I appreciate there are a lot of armchair lawyers out there who just want to take out an iphone 5 contract on £100 a month and then find a way to break the contract within weeks and keep the phone to flog on ebay for £500 and no contract.

But there are as many people who have contarcts which are essential for them but who are on a budget and a 50p a month increase could mean they have to start making choices on other things.

I know the values are small, but then so is the £20 a year it is when gas goes up and yet the pensioners and The Mirror kick off about it and if we are to take that view, then a freeze on job seeking benefits and disability payments should be okay as well.

But as you said, I'm happy to agree to disagree :beer: as this is just a forum where we're bound to get different views on things and I'm cool with that.

DUTR

JasonLVC wrote: »

Does this not then prove that these things are worth challenging as agaisnt the "you'll fail, you're a loser, court will laugh at you" stance from earlier?

Not having a go, just you sound a little defeatist which is at odds with this website which is about the consumer fighting back (successful campaigns such as PPI, bank charges, energy pricing, etc.)

I appreciate there are a lot of armchair lawyers out there who just want to take out an iphone 5 contract on £100 a month and then find a way to break the contract within weeks and keep the phone to flog on ebay for £500 and no contract.

But there are as many people who have contarcts which are essential for them but who are on a budget and a 50p a month increase could mean they have to start making choices on other things.

I know the values are small, but then so is the £20 a year it is when gas goes up and yet the pensioners and The Mirror kick off about it and if we are to take that view, then a freeze on job seeking benefits and disability payments should be okay as well.

But as you said, I'm happy to agree to disagree :beer: as this is just a forum where we're bound to get different views on things and I'm cool with that.

Jason I said I am happy to be proven wrong on this, I know you are not having a go and in reality it doesn't matter if you were, like you say and I did too, there will be some bright house type customers that want to live there life on this costs x/month and hope there is a get out clause which leaves them with a handset they maybe able to sell.
The reality is the poster couldn't afford it in the 1st place or their handset is no longer the latest and greatest what everyone is talking about but the £40/month bills keep dropping through the letter box every month.
I have a colleague who is still paying that for an S2.
The schemes now seperate the airtime from the handset so they may see a smaller increase.

There is nothing wrong with challenging what one thinks is not right, however more than 99% conclusion will be a fail.

This forum as far as I was aware was about saving money, and for me saving money here allows me to be less frugal elsewhere or be able to absorb increases elsewhere and still reduce my outgoings.

NittyGritty

DUTR wrote: »

Which means if somebody can show that for the preceeding 3 months or so they were using out of call charges which had increased then they have a case, if not they don't have a case I think you may find.

think you will find its 1 month not 3


"(b) we increase any of our Out-of-Bundle Charges in a way that would have had the effect of increasing your total bill (based on your usage in your bill in the month prior to our notification) by more than 10% if the increase(s) had applied for the whole of that month's bill. "

DUTR

NittyGritty wrote: »

think you will find its 1 month not 3


"(b) we increase any of our Out-of-Bundle Charges in a way that would have had the effect of increasing your total bill (based on your usage in your bill in the month prior to our notification) by more than 10% if the increase(s) had applied for the whole of that month's bill. "

You may have missed the 'or so' but the principle is still the same , I suppose the loophole for the chancers is to now use up plenty of out of bundle charges for February for them to be included in the clause?

PS It's not something I would try myself

GolfBravo

DUTR wrote: »

I suppose the loophole for the chancers is to now use up plenty of out of bundle charges for February for them to be included in the clause?

(b) we increase any of our Out-of-Bundle Charges in a way that would have had the effect of increasing your total bill (based on your usage in your bill in the month prior to our notification) by more than 10% if the increase(s) had applied for the whole of that month's bill.

DUTR

GolfBravo wrote: »

(b) we increase any of our Out-of-Bundle Charges in a way that would have had the effect of increasing your total bill (based on your usage in your bill in the month prior to our notification) by more than 10% if the increase(s) had applied for the whole of that month's bill.

So are you going to chance it and prove me wrong in a very public arena or not?