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

Dils47

They prob run out of adjudicators or they will decide a few cases, and copy and paste decisions for everyone else, hence why some have not been assigned adjudicators yet

iJ88

I have been following this forum for a while now. I am on a September 2012 contract. I received a response from EE via CISAS earlier this week. Please see their response posted below.
I also contacted EE to request to have my phone unlocked after I requested a penalty free cancellation.
I find section 38 of their response interesting...
"The Respondent submits that such is
standard practice for all mobile network operators and denies, if such is alleged,
that such practice is in breach of Agreement, statute or otherwise"

To be honest I forgot to mention that I requested to have my phone unlocked to CISAS.. So I'm not sure why Orange even bought that up!

[TEXT DELETED BY FORUM TEAM]

sshariff

iJ88 wrote: »

I have been following this forum for a while now. I am on a September 2012 contract. I received a response from EE via CISAS earlier this week. Please see their response posted below.
I also contacted EE to request to have my phone unlocked after I requested a penalty free cancellation.
I find section 38 of their response interesting...
"The Respondent submits that such is
standard practice for all mobile network operators and denies, if such is alleged,
that such practice is in breach of Agreement, statute or otherwise"

To be honest I forgot to mention that I requested to have my phone unlocked to CISAS.. So I'm not sure why Orange even bought that up!

COMMUNICATIONS & INTERNET SERVICES ADJUDICATION SCHEME
Claimant
and

You have just given out your personal phone number on a public forum! It might be in your best interest to have it removed ASAP.

sshariff

Dils47 wrote: »

They prob run out of adjudicators or they will decide a few cases, and copy and paste decisions for everyone else, hence why some have not been assigned adjudicators yet

I had this very same inclination that CISAS might simply use the exact same ruling against everyone else, hence I have taken a deviation from others. I'm trying to be positive however I will withhold from making any judgements until CISAS ruling. Just don't rule out SCC in the end if needed, that will hurt EE a lot more.

iJ88

Thanks for spotting that. I almost became the phone number that is scribbled on toilet doors across the country!
Not that it is going to matter any how. This phone number will soon be defunct. I will reply to CISAS but I won't hold my breath.
Any advice from Random Curve in regards to my response to CISAS?
I think that I have reached the stage where I will pay off the remainder of my contract and shut the account down. I will then pursue my claim with SCC.

sshariff

iJ88 wrote: »

Thanks for spotting that. I almost became the phone number that is scribbled on toilet doors across the country!
Not that it is going to matter any how. This phone number will soon be defunct. I will reply to CISAS but I won't hold my breath.
Any advice from Random Curve in regards to my response to CISAS?
I think that I have reached the stage where I will pay off the remainder of my contract and shut the account down. I will then pursue my claim with SCC.

Make sure you first complete the entire cisas process until the final decision, never go to scc before that. If cisas outcome is not in your favour then make sure you reject the decision in the end. Also I don't believe you need to pay out your contract, you can simply claim back the remainder of your contract that EE have "forced" you to continue.

RandomCurve

persil33 wrote: »

this is the defence I have just been sent
not seen one for tmobile pre 2012
I have pre and post 2012 on tmobile
have to split into two posts

DEFENCE
1. The Respondent.......

Hi I think you can just respond with the posts at #688 and#689 after changing the [paragraph numbers to fit the defence submitted.


You may just want to put something at the beginning to the effect that:


For "V58" of the contract I would like to remind the adjudicator that as per my claim T-Mobile used this clause in 2013 to apply a rate that had yet to be published which is a clear sign of how ambiguous and unfair the "old" term is. Therefore any attempt to clarify the term and thus make it more enforceable must be to my Material Detriment as I am more likely to have to accept a price rise than I was before the change, and have less scope to seek a penalty free cancellation.
Throughout my response to the defence all references to the changes being to my Material Detriment, both in a contractual and regulatory context apply to V58 and V59 of the contract."

RandomCurve

iJ88 wrote: »

Thanks for spotting that. I almost became the phone number that is scribbled on toilet doors across the country!
Not that it is going to matter any how. This phone number will soon be defunct. I will reply to CISAS but I won't hold my breath.
Any advice from Random Curve in regards to my response to CISAS?
I think that I have reached the stage where I will pay off the remainder of my contract and shut the account down. I will then pursue my claim with SCC.

You can re-use the responses I have already posted - just change the paragraph numbers to match those in the defence you received (see #744).


Now where is my marker pen!!!!

RandomCurve

Further to my post at #746 regarding a separate case against EE, we also "tested" the CPI v RPI argument (although not as the main thrust of the argument).
It is interesting to note that:

1. WE read the clause as meaning we can cancel if EE apply a right higher than RPI OR any other rate (eg CPI)
2. EE interpret (as per their defence documents) as meaning they can choose which rate to use
3. And the legally trained adjudicator has a 3rd interpretation as follows:

I note the customer’s comments regarding the application of the CPI as a more valid measure of inflation. I find, however, that since the contract makes specific reference to the RPI, where the RPI is available it should be used; an alternative measure is to be applied only when the RPI is not available. In the interest of clarity and certainty, I do not consider it to be reasonable to substitute the CPI for the RPI in these circumstances.


For some reason the adjudicator has taken it upon himself (EE offered no opinion on CPI v RPI in their defence), to invent a 3rd interpretation which has nothing to do with a literal interpretation of the words, and ignores the "choice" element EE have identified. Instead he has "second guessed" why EE may have written the clause as they have.


This just shows how difficult these things can be to pin down, but this is WHY the UTCCRs say that where a clause/term is ambiguous the meaning most favourable to the consumer should prevail, so with 3 separate and probably valid interpretations (depending on the angle you view this from - and 2 of the views from "legal experts") should be proof enough that the old clause was such that if a valid argument to use CPI can be made you should be allowed to escape your contract, so further evidence that the new clause is to your material detriment.


We'll keep this one "warm" in case we have to go to the SCC!

naf123

RandomCurve wrote: »

** CISAS CLAIMS UPDATED TO REFLECT EEs INITIAL RESPONSES **

Another update to help you find your way around
For anybody who has yet to send the email at #44 you may still be able to send as the contracts contain the following clause:

"If either party delays or does not take action to enforce their rights under this Contract this does not prevent either party from taking action later" - so go for it!!!

Email 1 - Original cancellation request is at post #44
All Orange and T-Mobile clauses are at post #57
EEs response to email 1 is at post #65
Email 2 - response to EE is at post #68
EE response to email 2 is at #73 OR #98
Email 3 - response to EE is at post #110 or #111 for post #73
Email 3 - response to EE is at post #116 for post #98
Post #402 if you want to "force" a deadlock notice from EE - only to be used when you have an email saying that EE will no longer communicate with you.



A CISAS guide to read BEFORE sending ANY of the CISAS templates #266
CISAS Template #267 and #269 for POST 30th October contract holders for Orange, T-Mobile, and EE - Updated 02-04-14
CISAS Template #383 for T-Mobile PRE 30th October 2012 contract holders - Updated 02-04-14
CISAS Template #385 for ORANGE PRE 30th October 2012 contract holders - Updated 02-04-14


Response to EE/Orange/T-Mobile defence document post 30th October 2012 page 35 #688 and #689
Response to Orange pre 30th October 2012 if your contract only states detriment in clause 4.3 (LEG300v14A) page 36 post #703 to #704

Thanks! MSE, can you advise me if there a quicker way to get to a post number or do I have to constantly scroll through the pages to find it?