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

nsabournemouth

So i have replied with this, a mixture of pretty much everything on the site!

Dear EE,

You are trying to give yourself a right to exclusively use RPI (which is always HIGHER than CPI).Therefore under GC 9.6 EE should give me right to a penalty free cancellation as this is of a material detriment to me. As I understand it you do not have any right to decide what is and is not of material detriment. In doing so you are n contravention of the UTCCRs.

Schedule 2, paragraph 1, states that terms may be unfair if they have the object or effect of:
(m) giving the seller or supplier the right to determine whether the goods or services supplied are in conformity with the contract, or giving him the exclusive right to interpret any term of the contract.


The Universal Service Directive 2003/22/EC does not refer to material detriment, it simply says that a proposed change to the contract is enough for me to walk away with no charge. I also note that you have failed to advise customers of their potential right to cancel in your communication regarding the change of terms.

The Communications Provider shall:
(a) give its Subscribers adequate notice not shorter than one month of any modifications likely to be of material detriment to that Subscriber;
(b) allow its Subscribers to withdraw from their contract without penalty upon such notice; and
(c) at the same time as giving the notice in condition 9.6 (a) above, shall inform the Subscriber of its ability to terminate the contract without penalty if the proposed modification is not acceptable to the Subscriber.


You seem to have opened the USD to your own interpretation. The very fact that the terms change moves from an unenforceable clause to an enforceable one should be enough for you under the USD to let me walk away from the contract with no charge.

The old term:

4.3.1 we give you written notice to increase the Charges (as a percentage) by an amount equal to or less than the percentage increase in the All Items Index of Retail Prices 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;

The new term:

4.3.1 the increase in the Charges (as a percentage) is equal to or lower 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 4.3).



For your information I include the recent CPI and RPI rates that show very clearly that the change in the terms is likely to be of detriment to me.


Recent CPI v RPI rates:


Aug 2013 CPI 2.7%; RPI 3.3%
Sep 2013 CPI 2.7%; RPI 3.2%
Oct 2013 CPI 2.2%; RPI 2.6%
Nov 2013 CPI 2.1%; RPI 2.6%
Dec 2013 CPI 2.0%; RPI 2.7%
Jan 2014 CPI 1.9%; RPI 2.8%

I would also remind you that you have settled with me on a contract where a very similar complaint was made, you are not showing any consistency with how you are dealing with this matter.

As advised in my previous email, I have given you notice that I do not except the change in the terms and conditions and under the Universal Service Directive 2003/22/EC.

RandomCurve

tateman wrote: »

I've just received this after the 2nd email....



I'm not sure what to do now, request a deadlock reference? It's really annoying me that each email they send has the spin "we're doing it for your benefit". :mad:

See post #462 on page 24

alistairswanson

I got a letter from them stating that the change to T&Cs should not be to my material detriment

What a poor choice of words, effectively confirming that it could be. This should enabe me to get out no problem.

sauceychoco

I'm now responding to EE's second email (#98) with the third email (#116).

I'm on the pre Oct 2012 contract, so thank you Random Curve for the 'less is more approach'.

I did spot something I wasn't sure about, the use of the word determent. Should it be detriment?

RandomCurve wrote: »

EE cannot give itself the sole right to determine what “Material Determent” means, therefore you would have been obliged to write to me fully explaining this cancellation right –and you did not!

50Twuncle

sauceychoco wrote: »

I'm now responding to EE's second email (#98) with the third email (#116).

I'm on the pre Oct 2012 contract, so thank you Random Curve for the 'less is more approach'.

I did spot something I wasn't sure about, the use of the word determent. Should it be detriment?

Either that - or perhaps EE are trying to DETER you from taking matters further...... ?

ed_209_2

baldyj wrote: »

I think LGP is on Orange, and I believe that their clause is worded differently to those on T-Mobile/EE - see post #448

4.3.1 we give you written notice to increase the Charges (as a percentage) by an amount equal to or less than the percentage increase in the All Items Index of Retail Prices 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;

I'm not sure it matters - as has been posted before the key is the use of the word OR.

Its the higher of RPI or CPI... RPI is 2.8%, CPI is 1.9% = 1.9%
Its the higher of RPI and CPI... RPI is 2.8%, CPI is 1.9% = 2.8%

4.3.1 looks very similar to the EE term in this regard.

BananaPilot

Just had an email from CISAS. EE were supposed to respond by 17/03/2014:



"We acknowledge receipt of a request from the company for an extension of time in which to submit their defence. Under CISAS rules, one extension, up to 5 working days is allowed and we therefore expect the defence [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]on or before 24/03/2014[/FONT][/FONT].

If the defence is still not received by this deadline then we will proceed with the appointment of an adjudicator and refer to the adjudicator the documents received to date.

The adjudicator may then proceed to determine the dispute ex-parte on the basis of the statement of claim documents. Alternatively if the adjudicator sees fit, he / she may direct that the company may have a further extension of time within which to submit the defence to claim."

Does this mean EE are worried?

SimonD316

IIRC the first complaints were accepted by CISAS around the 3rd of March and EE had upto 17th to respond. It's going to be interesting to see what they try use as their defence.

Edit - BananaPilot just beat me to it! Interesting response from EE :eek:

Sunnyhaze

In my opinion, if they don't respond within the time frame, then they should automatically lose. It's just EE's way of trying to squirm out of it.

ed_209_2

BananaPilot wrote: »

Just had an email from CISAS. EE were supposed to respond by 17/03/2014:



"We acknowledge receipt of a request from the company for an extension of time in which to submit their defence. Under CISAS rules, one extension, up to 5 working days is allowed and we therefore expect the defence [FONT=Arial,Arial][FONT=Arial,Arial]on or before 24/03/2014[/FONT][/FONT].

If the defence is still not received by this deadline then we will proceed with the appointment of an adjudicator and refer to the adjudicator the documents received to date.

The adjudicator may then proceed to determine the dispute ex-parte on the basis of the statement of claim documents. Alternatively if the adjudicator sees fit, he / she may direct that the company may have a further extension of time within which to submit the defence to claim."

Does this mean EE are worried?

Seems like a vain attempt at filibustering!