EE.T-Mob.Orange. Change T&C From 26th March 2014

tateman

It seems a common issue, I've had a response and it appears they made a mistake in calculating my refund. Amazing, they're still trying to rip people off. My 14 years association with Orange/EE has really been soured, unfortunately due to my area and where I work I'm limited to EE and carriers who piggy back on their network.

What this has taught me is I really don't need an expensive contract to meet my mobile requirements.

jakethepeguk

snap, identical to what they are doing to me.
They charged me a 19:95 disconnection charge, just paying back £42 when they should have payed me back 98.
I contacted them and they have advised me, this is a mistake and they have processed a further 100 quid, (which will take 14 working days).
complete bunch of muppets.
I also reported them to CISAS for failing to meet their dead lines, (this is the second time they have failed) and received the same copy paste email from them.
I find it ironic, they use the line "[FONT=&quot]sorry to hear that action has not been taken by Everything Everywhere to comply with the agreed decision within the required timeframe" [/FONT]in a copy paste email.
Its like hearing a child apologising for hitting his sibling!
And like Tateman, a lesson has been learned from this, no more expensive contracts for me, sim only from now on.

RandomCurve

It seems we may be reaching a tipping point with Ofcom, as they are reviewing their initial stance on the change in T&Cs -just to help tip the balance further in the consumers favour can you please send the email below - thanks.



[EMAIL="Ed.Richards@Ofcom.org.uk"]Ed.Richards@Ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="Lynn.Parker@Ofcom.org.uk"]Lynn.Parker@Ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]
Graham.Howell[EMAIL="Graham.Howell@Ofcom.org.uk"]@Ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="OCCtelecoms@Ofcom.org.uk"]OCCtelecoms@Ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]

And CC.
[EMAIL="Olaf.Swantee@ee.co.uk"]Olaf.Swantee@ee.co.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="jeroen.hoencamp@vodafone.com"]jeroen.hoencamp@vodafone.com[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="Joel.Taylor@ukmetro.co.uk"]Joel.Taylor@ukmetro.co.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="Edwin.lane@bbc.co.uk"]Edwin.lane@bbc.co.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="news@the-sun.co.uk"]news@the-sun.co.uk[/EMAIL]
[EMAIL="info@fightmobileincreases.com"]info@fightmobileincreases.com[/EMAIL]


Dear Mr Richards,

It appears to me that EE have breached GC 9.6 when notifying customers of a change to their T&Cs which was effective from 26th March 2014. From copies of correspondence that I have seen (available from the FightMobileIncrease.com website) it appears that Ofcom (the regulator with a statutory duty to protect the consumer) has taken a view of the situation which appears to be inconsistent with the facts.

Like many other concerned consumers I would like you to record a formal compliant both against EE and Ofcom in regards to this matter and I would appreciate a response to the 13 questions below which stem from Ofcom’s initial stance. For clarity and ease of response there are 13 questions below (marked Q 1 to Q 13).

Please confirm that you have recorded this letter as an official complaint both against EE and Ofcom (Q 1)

Concentrating on EEs change in T&Cs you have said:

“.. Ofcom has taken the view, based on the information we have, that the change does not appear to us to be one likely to give rise to the right to cancel the contract under GC9.6. ….

Can you clarify what information you have? (Q 2) It does not appear that you have reviewed both an OLD and NEW version of the contracts can you confirm that you have reviewed them (copied below for your reference)? (Q 3)


The reasons are as follows:
1. “The revised terms are likely to put consumers in a better, or at least no worse, position than the previous terms. They do not purport to create a right to increase prices more than was previously the case,”
This seems to be plainly incorrect – the old clause allowed an increase no higher than RPI OR ANY OTHER measure of inflation (e.g. lower rates such as CPI/RPI(J)), the new clause allows an increase up to RPI – can you explain how Ofcom reached the conclusion that the change does not “… purport to create a right to increase prices more than was previously the case”? (Q 4) (For your reference the February 2014 rates were: RPI 2.7%; CPI 1.7% (RPI 58.8% HIGHER); over the last 24 months RPI has been 18.8% higher).

“… and provide more clarity to subscribers as to the published RPI figure that will be used in such increases.”

By giving more clarity it reduces the scope for challenge, whilst this is good for EE it is not good for the consumer as there is less scope to exercise cancellation rights, Can Ofcom explain –with its consumer protection remit – why it considers giving consumers less scope to leave their contracts is beneficial? (Q 5)

“…We note in this context that EE and its brands always previously used RPI rather than CPI.”

Effectively you are saying that in all past increases EE have put in place an increase that triggers a consumer’s right to a penalty free cancellation, and Ofcom has done nothing to compel EE to write to consumers FULLY EXPLAINING their right to a penalty free cancellation. Can you explain why Ofcom considers this to be acceptable? (Q 6)

2. The new term sets out a position that, if or when applied, is unlikely in our view to cause material detriment to relevant consumers. Consumers to whom the new term applies (who will be consumers who entered into their contracts before 23 January 2014, and in respect of whom, therefore, our recent guidance does not apply) will be able to exit the contract without penalty for price increases that exceed the relevant published RPI figure.

Can you explain why RPI is not considered to be of Material Detriment to consumers? (Q 7). Your previous definition of Material Detriment taken from the Ofcom publication “ Price rises in fixed term contracts - Decision to issue Guidance on General Condition 9.6”, Published in November 2013 Ofcom explains the rationale for including the term at paragraph 3.6 as follows:

“…..Ofcom and, before us, OFTEL has included a material detriment requirement in the relevant part of GC9. 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.”

Please explain how a REAL TERMS increase (CPI and RPI(J) being the OFFICIAL UK measures of inflation – RPI is not even a designated as a National Statistic), is to the consumers benefit or neutral to the consumer? (Q 8)


3. Accordingly, the new term is unlikely to be a change that itself is likely to cause material detriment. On that basis, it would not require providers to notify and provide subscribers with the right to withdraw from the contract without penalty under GC9.6.

On reflection of the above points is this still Ofcoms view? (Q 9)

Why in 93% are the legal experts at CISAS finding that this change IS of Material Detriment? What does it take for Ofcom to acknowledge that it got this wrong and to take respective action? (Q 10)

Ofcom appear to be mixing two separate points for their reason for inactivity:

• Ofcom does not consider the change to be of Material Detriment; and
• That Ofcom will not take action due to its administrative priorities and/or only on behalf of consumers as a whole

I have addressed point 1 above and look forward to receiving the explanations requested above,

As regards point 2 – EE are by far the largest CP in the UK and the change has affected every customer who joined EE before 23rd January 2014 – how can Ofcom possibly consider that this does not affect a “body of consumers as a whole”? (Q 11)
As regards to your administrative priorities are you saying that as Ofcom does not have the resource to take on EE then EE are effectively “above the law”? (Q 12)


Finally in connection with the EE price rise under the new T&C effective from 26th March 2014 Ofcom does not consider that EE are bound to the Ofcom rule on GC 9.6 dated 23rd January 2014. Can you explain how this can be possible, as my original contract no longer exists so I am unable to contest a price increase above CPI, therefore I am bound by a new set of T&Cs that were implemented AFTER 23rd January? (Q 13)

It was disappointing that Ofcom sided with the industry and has allowed CPs to continue to apply price rises during the fixed period of the contract (especially as if CPs change T&Cs mid contract consumers are bound by the new term), but to go further and to say that changes to T&Cs that occur AFTER the new rules are implemented are also not subject to the new rules seems to defy all rules of natural justice and UK law.



Regards

A supporter of “FightMobileIncreases” – a pressure group dedicated to assisting consumers use the protection of the UTCCRs and GC 9.6, and to monitor and highlight Ofcoms actions (inaction) in relation to the Mobile Phone Market.

Old Clause (Orange EE and T-Mobile (Post 30 October 2012) – Clause number may vary
7.2.3.3. The change that We gave You Written Notice of in point 7.1.4 is: (i) an increase in Your Price Plan Charge (as a percentage) higher than any increase in the retail price index (also calculated as a percentage) or any other statistical measure of inflation published by any government body authorised to publish measures of inflation from time to time, and published on a date as close as reasonably possible before the date on which We send You Written Notice;


Whereas the new clause is as follows:
7.2.3.3. We have given You Written Notice of an increase in a Price Plan Charge under point 7.1.4 and (i) the increase in Your Price Plan Charge (as a percentage) is higher than the annual percentage increase in the Retail Price Index (RPI) published by the Office for National Statistics (calculated using the most recently published RPI figure before we give you Written Notice under 7.1.4);

sauceychoco

RandomCurve wrote: »

It seems we may be reaching a tipping point with Ofcom, as they are reviewing their initial stance on the change in T&Cs -just to help tip the balance further in the consumers favour can you please send the email below - thanks

sent from me

Thanks for all your help with figting this RC. I've accepted my adjudication which will be backdated to the 25th Feb :-)

LoopLife

Add me to the list of cancelled penalty free contracts

The adjudicator accepted the "material detriment".

Got my decision from CISAS yesterday, accepted it and I rang up and received my PAC code today!

Isn't the unlocking service supposed to be free once out of a contract? They said it takes 20 working days for the phone to be unlocked for the price of £20.40

sauceychoco

LoopLife wrote: »

Isn't the unlocking service supposed to be free once out of a contract? They said it takes 20 working days for the phone to be unlocked for the price of £20.40

I've had different experiences. Some providers have done it for free as long as I had been in contract for 3 months, others have wanted payment of flatly refused while in contract. If you bought your phone/contract via a reseller (e.g dialaphone) they are usually unlocked. Try putting another providers sim in it and seeing if actually is blocked. If it is I've been able to buy unlock codes from eBay that have always worked and code sent within 24 hours.

tateman

I got my iPhone from EE themselves and it worked with a 3 and Virgin Mobile sim without unlocking. I'm not sure if them using the EE signal in my area made that possible.

I was awarded the unlocking code in CISAS's decision so unlocked it later just to be on the safe side.

monkeyboymagic

RandomCurve wrote: »

It seems we may be reaching a tipping point with Ofcom, as they are reviewing their initial stance on the change in T&Cs -just to help tip the balance further in the consumers favour can you please send the email below - thanks.

Hi RC,

First time poster here - signed on because I wanted to say thanks for all your work/guidance. Got my decision back from CISAS today.

I had partial success:



I direct that the company terminate the customer’s contract without charge, on a backdated basis, with only monthly plan payments refunded as if the notice were given on 3 March 2014.

Should I take this to mean all my charges with Orange - I'm nervous about the bit underlined could this mean my set contract fees and not anything above that amount - for example £31 a month contract?

Thanks,

MBM

jasperpop

Hi folks..im in the throws of upgrading and after wrong info from customer service from tmob and ee im thinking of just getting a sim only

did want a new galaxy 4 but after going all thru setting up contract with dial a phone they informed me that I cudnt take my old number??
so I said cancel the order..fine.

today tried to buy at online mobiles net and they want £15! To port number to EE??

I said no..then they said they wud waive it..again I cancelled

im sick of being ripped off at every opportunity..and after reading the posts on here think I will give myself a break from the greed

Nodding_Donkey

jasperpop wrote: »

Hi folks..im in the throws of upgrading and after wrong info from customer service from tmob and ee im thinking of just getting a sim only

did want a new galaxy 4 but after going all thru setting up contract with dial a phone they informed me that I cudnt take my old number??
so I said cancel the order..fine.

today tried to buy at online mobiles net and they want £15! To port number to EE??

I said no..then they said they wud waive it..again I cancelled

im sick of being ripped off at every opportunity..and after reading the posts on here think I will give myself a break from the greed

You've posted about porting a number to EE in a thread full of people that have just spent months complaining to CISAS to get away from them.