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

RandomCurve

See posts #1431 and #1453


Use the above as a basis to write to EE and tell them you will take it to the County Court Small Claims Track if they will not refund charges taken from you after you had specifically requested cancellation and whilst a contract was not in place. - Use the term "past consideration"


Some case law:


Re McArdle (1951) Ch 669 Court of Appeal

Majorie McArdle carried out certain improvements and repairs on a bungalow. The bungalow formed part of the estate of her husband's father who had died leaving the property to his wife for life and then on trust for Majorie's husband and his four siblings. After the work had been carried out the brothers and sisters signed a document stating in consideration of you carrying out the repairs we agree that the executors pay you £480 from the proceeds of sale. However, the payment was never made.

Held:

The promise to make payment came after the consideration had been performed therefore the promise to make payment was not binding. Past consideration is not valid.

RandomCurve

Pilotmic wrote: »

The Respondent maintains a paperless environment with regards to Service Agreements entered into with its customers but does not retain a copy.

Just noticed this. So they don't have a copy of a contract for any of us. We can all leave then I suppose.

Technically - YES

RandomCurve

rockstarzzz wrote: »

I am on a discounted loyalty plus plan - The price plan that was meant to be £21 has been discounted to me and all I am meant to pay is £16. In line with your outcome, can I please get help with what you wrote as your defense? Currently I've submitted my claim according to RC's template and am expecting EE response tomorrow. It would be good if I can write defense in line with what you wrote and hopefully copy the paragraph above in my argument too?

Hopefully you included the green text which was within the CISAS template I provided earlier (see below). As I have not seen a defence from EE on this issue then if BLACKAQUA could share the EE defence and his/her response that would be really useful.
Ley me know if you omitted the green text below as if so then CISAS may rule any reference to this as new evidence and therefore not to be considered, but I think there is a way around this if you need it.


Without Prejudice (only use this if the your payment has increased above 2.7% e.g. Original payment £25.00 plus 2.7% (£25.00*2.7/100= £0.675p) so maximum new price = £20.67p)


The price rise applied to my account means that the actual net monthly core subscription price that I am paying to EE reflects an increase higher than the February RPI rate allowed under the contract, and as per our contract I am entitled to a penalty free cancellation








5. Without prejudice (Only to be used if the calculation shows a figure higher than 2.7% - even if it is 2.70001%)


The methodology used by EE to calculate the increase applied to my account results in the actual payment leaving my bank account each month relating to the core subscription price being in excess of the February RPI rate. In accordance with the contract if an increase is applied in excess of RPI then I am entitled to a penalty free cancellation (regardless of Material Detriment).


The figures are as follows Pervious monthly cost £XX.XXp. revised monthly cost £XX.XXp which is an increase of £X.XXp whereas a 2.7% increase would have resulted in a new monthly cost of £X.xxP, therefore under the terms of our contract as the net increase is in excess of RPI I am entitled to a penalty free cancelation





The quantum above RPI is irrelevant. Even if the increase was just 1p above 2.7% then EE must have applied a rate HIGHER than the published RPI rate which triggers my right to a penalty free cancellation as per the contract.

RandomCurve

sick_of_paying_more wrote: »

have had the following response from cisas it would appear that i got my dates wrong!!:shocked: i am going to email cisas to get an an idea how long this is liable to take but it would appear that they are not going to move on the 6 week deadline!! hope this helps someone else, will update as i get any news back

quote from email from cisas
Thank you for your email. I have referred this matter back to the adjudicator for clarification.

However, please be advised the deadline for your acceptance or rejection cannot be extended under any circumstances and we must receive your acceptance or rejection of the decision on or before 29/07/2014.

We will revert back to you upon receipt of the adjudicator’s response.

Kind regards

May be worth pointing out to CISAS that on many occasions they have extended deadlines to EE to submit defences, that when EE seek clarification CISAS do not enforce that EE still have to comply within 4 weeks including the wait for clarification - so why - when the clarty is need due to the decision being ambiguous are CISS unable to "stop the clock" until the clarification is given - surely this would be the most impartial way forward. (copy in Lynn Parker at Ofcom)


If CISAS still want to play silly bug**rs then on 29th accept the decision and add that it is with the expectation that "Backdated" can only mean including a refund of sums taken since the contract cancellation date.

RandomCurve

rockstarzzz wrote: »

Hello RC!

Thanks for pointing this out. .....

I have talked about price increase being more than RPI but haven't stated particular breakdown of my bill (as I wasn't aware if it should be original price or discounted) and have also sent appendix 2 where I've shown EE's email stating the rise wasn't more than RPI. ....

Can I survive this in case I get response today? ....

The fact you have talked about the increase being more than RPI will be enough that it won't be classed as new evidence! Depends how EE respond to that part - if they ignore it then you address it again in your defence stating that you note that EE have declined to comment on the fact that the actual payment leaving your account has increased by more than 2.7% (and then show the calculations - just at the NET level). If they do respond to that point then see what BlackAqua has to offer.


As for timing if EE had until today to respond - you probably won't here anything from CISAS until Monday/Tuesday (unless they are working weekends).

RandomCurve

factor29 wrote: »

I received a deadlock letter.... yes a letter! today.

So can now send my complaint off.. however cant figure out how to send more info to the ombudsman service. You only get 2000 characters which isnt enough

The email address which Vodafone supplied for them has bounced back saying I need to fill in the form online

Good news. Just copy the complaint as below into the "Form" and then attach an email with the full case (including restating the below) along with your Vodafone correspondence.


I have heard the Ombudsman has bee refusing to accept cases. but I have Ofcom on the case (once I backed them into a corner), but they can't do anything until someone sends me the actual email that the Ombudsman has sent - see the Facebook site for details.
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Fightmobileincreasescom/396612317147525






Complaint:

This claim is in connection with Vodafone refusing to release me penalty free from contract as required under GC 9.6 and the UTCCRs as the price variation clause used by Vodafone within its’ contract is not compliant with either GC 9.6 or the UTCCRs, and after X attempts of trying to elicit a response from Vodafone to explain how the clause is compliant Vodafone have refused to address the issue. Ofcom have confirmed that "the Ombudsman Service can accept complaints relating to GC9 and The UTCCRs as they are within the scope of its scheme."


I believe that Vodafone’s price variation clause is not compliant with:

• Ofcom General Condition 9.6 (GC 9.6)
  Further or in the alternative;
• Is unfair under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations (UTCCRs) - Schedule 2 Paragraph 1 (j)
  Further or in the alternative;
• Is unfair under the UTCCRs - Schedule 2 Paragraph 1 (l)
  Please note this complaint is not about Vodafone’s commercial decision to increases prices, as a business Vodafone is free to make any commercial decision it chooses.
  
  On Date Vodafone contacted me informing me of an increase in the cost of the out of bundle charges associated with my contract, increases range from 0% to 122% , and if I were to make one of each “call” the average increase would be 23%.
  
  When deciding on which contract to take the price of ancillary service was taken into account as by virtue of being services available to phone users they are services that I am likely to use (regardless of if I have actually used them to date or not), and whilst I am in the fixed period of my contract I am unable to avoid these increased charges without incurring inconvenience and the increase therefore is preventing me enjoying my contract in the way intended.
  
  Separately that as the Vodafone price rise clause is not compliant with the UTCCRs that all sums taken from my account over and above those set at the originally agreed contract price (for both out of bundle and core subscription price rises) are refunded in full back dated to August 2008 (six year limitation on bringing a case under the UTCCRs)

RandomCurve

Troy_Tempest wrote: »

25 July 2014



Dear Mr Tempest



Thank you for your further email of 21 July 2014.



Ofcom have read and considered carefully the 11 separate questions you ask but, having done so, Ofcom’s position is unchanged. All of the matters raised in your questions are covered by the detailed explanations Ofcom have previously given you of our position and, as indicated in the last letter, Ofcom are not going to engage in further correspondence on this matter.



As Ofcom also said in the last letter, if you remain dissatisfied with Ofcom’s response, you may complain about how we have handled this matter by writing to our Corporation Secretary, Graham Howell.



Yours sincerely



Jessica Eyles

Consumer Contact Team

Am I blind - did anybody else see Ofcom cover the points asked in their previous responses?


We so desperately need some media attention on this! I am still in contact with MSE on this, but it seems pretty low on the priority list at the moment!

RandomCurve

See Post #4 for the first email to send

ulaggy

Hi matey, I'm just preparing the first email. I've added in an extra point to say that I have a Full Monty 36 plan, which cost £36 hence it's name, and that a variable price on the plan is false advertising (as it wasn't called Fully Monty 36 Up Until We Put Your Price Up)

I've also added on that the point of sale for me was in-store and that the store assistant failed to explain any clauses regarding price increases.

I've done a quick google about false advertising and contracts and found this.

http://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/regulation/misrepresentation-act-1967

What do you reckon? I'm tempted to whip something about this in there. T-Mobile knowingly and fraudulently advertised a contract as £36 a month (hence the name) despite the fact they intended to increase the price on it. Worth a go?

RandomCurve

ulaggy wrote: »

Hi matey, I'm just preparing the first email. I've added in an extra point to say that I have a Full Monty 36 plan, which cost £36 hence it's name, and that a variable price on the plan is false advertising (as it wasn't called Fully Monty 36 Up Until We Put Your Price Up)

I've also added on that the point of sale for me was in-store and that the store assistant failed to explain any clauses regarding price increases.

Yes, that is all good evidence.