EE/Orange/T-Mobile - Reclaim ALL price rises AND cancel contract re T&C change

Mikmonken

I think your request to reopen the case would be based on putting some meat on why each if the rules for not accepting the claim that I posted early does not apply.

RandomCurve

My "Chaser" for a response to the official compliant against Ofcom.


Dear Mr Howell,

It is now nearly two weeks since I sent my compliant to you (see below), and as yet you have not acknowledged receipt.

As Lynn Parker was adamant that Ofcom had fully addressed all of the issues raised in my previous correspondence, then if she is correct I would have thought you could have responded on the same day - there was nothing complicated in any of my queries, they may just have been a little "uncomfortable" for Ofcom to answer without actually taking action to protect the consumer. I therefore take some comfort from the fact this is taking so long to investigate and trust you are not using the time (as our past history suggests) to either find further ways to circumvent giving any real response, or agreeing a "scheme" which is not compliant with UK legislation with EE to extricate them from the mess that their own greed has caused.

Regards

RandomCurve

Mikmonken wrote: »

By the way as I'm sure everyone here would agree with we really appreciate what you're doing here with our cases!

Doing my best - I have so much history with EE, CISAS and Ofcom that I can (normally) second guess what they are doing before they do it - and more importantly know how we can counter act it!

My shot across the boughs in my email to Mr Howell above is in reference to what Ofcom agreed with EE when they used the wrong RPI last year (Ofcom allowed EE to reduce the increase to the rate they should have used) legally under GC 9.6 and under the contract they should have declared it as Material detriment, and at the very least had it declared null as per the remedy under the UTCCRs! - Ofcom corruption - sorry - regulation at its finest!

ulaggy

"We acknowledge receipt of your application in the above matter.

However, we are unable to accept it as the subject of the dispute has already been considered for Adjudication under CISAS Reference xxxxxxxx.

Please be advised that an issue cannot be considered twice for Adjudication. As such, this claim falls outside the scope of our scheme.

Please be reminded that the decision made by the Adjudicator in your CISAS case reference xxxxxxxx referring to the same issue is without prejudice. As you have rejected it, you are at liberty to refer the matter elsewhere ( The Courts...) for further consideration.

We are sorry that we are unable to help you further with this matter.

Yours sincerely,"

That was my CISAS rejection. I've not argued with CISAS yet to get them to rethink their refusal. To be honest, at this point I'm more tempted to just head straight to SCC, I think.

RandomCurve

Below sent o:
Lynn (Ofcom)
Olaf Swantee (EE)
CISAS
Ed Richards (Ofcom)
The BBC and Metro news
Email was headed:


EE Corrupting Due Process?


Dear Lynn,

Concern Re CISAS Independence

EE and CISAS appear to breaking the procedure to ensure that consumers are guaranteed an INDEPENDENT review at CISAS should a case fall within CISAS’s remit.

Many consumers have submitted cases against EE on the following grounds:

• That the Change in T&Cs in March 2014 was of Material Detriment to them, and
• That all previous price rises applied by EE should be refunded as the price variation clause EE relied on was unfair and therefore unenforceable under the UTCCRs

CISAS have sent letters to consumers stating that they have accepted the case, but now the process has been “stalled” whilst EE have secret talks with CISAS to try and persuade them NOT to take the cases on – you may recall that this very similar to EEs behaviour in March/April 2013 when T-Mobile imposed a price increase, and Ofcom had to step in to advise CISAS that they did have a duty to take the cases on. I cannot give you any guidance as to the grounds EE are seeking to have the cases “dismissed” on as the talks are SECRET (so not an open and independent process?).

Both of the above complaints clearly fall within the remit of CISAS. In connection with point 1 above in previous cases CISAS themselves have stated:
““I find that:
a. The customer’s claim concerns the application of the company’s Terms and Conditions under which he is provided with a communication service. I am therefore satisfied that it relates to a communication service. I do not consider contractual interpretation to be a complicated issue of law. I am therefore satisfied that I am able to adjudicate on this dispute.”
And on Point 2 Ofcom informed me on 17th July (in relation to the Ombudsman refusing to take cases regarding Vodafone’s out of bundle price increases Ofcom reference 1-265323635):
“On your second question, I can confirm that the Ombudsman Service can accept complaints relating to GC9 and The UTTCRs as they are within the scope of its scheme” (Ofcoms mis-spelling of UTCCRs)

Given the above there is no possible reason for CISAS to entertain any contact what-so-ever from EE other to accept their defence document.

The above (and historic instances that you and I are aware of) raise the question as to whether ADR schemes are independent of or “inter dependant” on the industry. I trust Ofcom will intervene to ensure that this corruption of the system is halted and that the fair, open, transparent and independent process can resume.

Regards

Mikmonken

ulaggy wrote: »

That was my CISAS rejection. I've not argued with CISAS yet to get them to rethink their refusal. To be honest, at this point I'm more tempted to just head straight to SCC, I think.

I think they're saying here you've submitted the price rise claim again, they're wrong so it should be accepted.

ulaggy

Aye, I knew that from the moment I got the email - evidently they didn't actually read it properly. Though the new case does talk about price rises as well as the change in T&C. Don't understand why I'd be refused when others weren't, other than whoever looked just not doing their job properly!

Mikmonken

I reckon that's probably the case and also think that's the angle EE are trying to use to get it kicked out as every response EE sent ignored T&Cs and just referred to the price rise.

I still think you should object it will strengthen our case somewhat if you can get reinstated!! You can always object to the outcome and take them to scc then they may be more of us needing to pursue it by then, although I hope not

Mikmonken

RC happy for my email to OFCOM to be added if needs be. Not sure if all my pestering will prejudice my case though so don't want to risk other peoples cases by posting myself

barrowvian

I called CISAS this morning to follow up. I was basically just told that it's with a lead adjudicator and it "should be decided today" whether or not EE's objection is upheld. Funnily enough, he wouldn't tell me anything else and when when questioned about why I wasn't notified of this objection he said, it's up to the lead adjudicator. I don't really feel I've got any closer and I don't have much faith that I'll hear back today.