EE/Orange/T-Mobile - Reclaim ALL price rises AND cancel contract re T&C change - 2

Mikmonken

RandomCurve wrote: »

So today was the day - Ofcom to call me back to explain why they can't make a decision - and my low expectations were meet. It seems the COMMUNICATIONS regulator doesn't know how to use a phone - as nobody called me
If they can't even understand how to use a phone how on Earth are they going to understand their obligations under the Communications Act?
Anyway I have some annual leave tomorrow - I think I know what I am going to be doing with part of that!!!

And today is the day that CISAS parent company CEDR are meant to get back to me about my complaint.

If CISAS are whiter than white, how come it's taking them so long to go through the evidence to prove that they've done nothing wrong?

next stage will be my complaint so far is with the COO of CEDR, only got one more person to fob me off after this.

claireb1

Mikmonken wrote: »

What RC is saying is that having received your claim, and then a response from EE, CISAS should have sent it to you for comment. They didn't, so they've broken policy by not allowing you to comment.

if you had been allowed to comment you would have been able to point out that a claim under the NEW price variation clause has nothing to do with the OLD price variation clause and the change in T&Cs.

Which would have lead to the claim being impartially reviewed and you having your contract terminated penalty free.

Thanks Mikmonken I understand that, Ive been away from PC most of the week. I thought digest it and decide best way to go next week. What would be best step to do, reply to the e-mail? I need bit guidance without this great forum and people I wouldn't have contacted them.

Mikmonken

Claire - I would drop them an email see quote from RC below

RandomCurve wrote: »

Posts #58 or #59 or #87 depending on which you feel is appropriate.

Page 3 of the forum for 58 and 59

Then once it's sent and you've got your auto response, phone them up and just reiterate the email. the phone number is on the CISAS website.

Basically if we do not get CISAS/OFCOM to take this case on, you, me and and the others who have had their cases thrown out because of rule 2b will only have the SCC route to go down, which isn't risk free.

the more people and the more effort we put into getting CISAS to except our claim the less risk we will have if you want to cancel penalty free.

RandomCurve

Well I chased Ofcom up and Lynn Parker phoned me back earlier today - it was an interesting conversation, but means that YOU need to do a little bit of pushing to get this resolved. It was clear to me that I was expected to "read between lines" and I ask that you also do that whilst reading the below.


Lynn accepts the arguments we are making that the this CLEARLY falls within the ADR remit, but also (correctly) points out that this is not what CIAS are objecting to.
Ofcoms hands are tied (YOU can untie them - see later) as whilst Ofcom can remind CISAS that the cases fall within its remit OFCOM can not comment on decisions made i.e CISAS have looked at the facts and have concluded that the cases are the same, therefore Ofcom can not interfere with that. The next bit is where it gets interesting.


IF CISAS have not followed process then Ofcom can take this up with CISAS therefore YOU need to send the following to [EMAIL="Lynn.Parker@ofcom.org.uk"]Lynn.Parker@ofcom.org.uk[/EMAIL]

1. Your original email from CISAS where they ACCEPTED your case
2. The Email from CISAS withdrawing your case
   1. hopefully that email makes it clear that they have discussed this with EE - if so then this shows that CISAS have adjudicated on your case WITHOUT following due process - I,e, your right to respond to EEs defence.
3. If the email does not mention EE then any evidence you have that EE have interfered (e.g. the letter ClaireB1 received at post #128) should be sent.
4. A covering letter which basically says that CISAS have invoked rule 2b after secret negotiations with EE (see evidence in the attached emails) and have adjudicated on your case without giving you your right to respond as required under the CISAS published process. The cases are clearly NOT The same, but you have not been given the opportunity to put your viewpoint across.

Ofcom are also aware of the approach Mikmonken (she was very discreet by not mention names just that "a consumer has...") has taken by involving CEDR and she suggests that it would be beneficial if as many people as possible write to CEDR asking them to investigate!


Mikmonken - can you publish a template - I can copy it onto the front pages!


So there you have it - read between the lines and get those emails in!

On a separate subject (and it may aid your correct interpretation of "reading between the lines) Ofcom are aware of the inconsistency of CISAS rulings re what "backdating" means and whilst she has a personal view (which she can't express), Ofcom can not comment, but will use that as part of its review of the effectiveness of the ADR schemes re the need to be consistent!

Mikmonken

Expect not to get a response to this for 5 days at least.

I sent this as a direct reply to my rejection email from Michelle.

send to -> CISAS@idrs.ltd.uk

Following your recent rejection of my case xxxxx and on reviewing CISAS rules and guidance I have concerns now around the impartiality of the CISAS process which I feel needs urgently address giving the stages within the cases.

You will note that all of these queries have previously been raised by an EE customer having had a case accepted and then rejected by CISAS following an intervention by EE. I believe clarity around the following points will help reassure the customer of the impartiality of the process as well as providing transparency.

Having accepted a case CISAS have rules and procedures in place to allow for an impartial process, in order to remain impartial these rules and procedures need to run in their entirety and in sequence.

In order for cases previously excepted by CISAS, but currently stalled, to remain impartial, there is a need for these cases to continue based on information and responses submitted within the initial timeframe and run their due course.

Following the procedures set out in rule 4. This will culminate if necessary in an adjudicator exercising rule 5.c and 5d if necessary to decide whether the case falls within the rules of CISAS. - there appears to be no provision within the CISAS rules following the acceptance of a case (rule 4.1a) to be rejected without following the procedures within Section 4 - The adjudication procedure

my clarifications are as follows:
1 - Clarification on where within the CISAS rules it is published that a Company are allowed to object to cases already accepted by CISAS without submitting a response.

2 - Copies of any policies and procedures regarding a companies ability to object to a claim.

3 - Clarification as to what constitutes "exceptional circumstances” (rule 4.1c) around the awarding of an extension to a company when compiling a response.

4 - Confirmation that in line with CISAS rule 4.1c company must submit a "response" within 10 days of receipt of the claim,

a) further responses can be sent within the 10 day time frame.

Examples of possible response but not an extensive list

Nothing submitted
Defence to claim submitted
Objection -> Defence to claim submitted
Objection -> request for an extension (if no extension granted the Objection would be deemed the response)
Objection -> request for an extension -> defence to claim (submitted in extension period.
b) Rule 4.3 All these responses will then be forwarded to the customer for comment prior to being allocated to an adjudicator for decision.
c) What, if any, responses from a company CISAS does not have to forward to the customers and where this list is document
5 - Clarification as to why a company has responded to an accepted case in the form of an objection (within a 10 day period) and CISAS have not followed process by informing the customer on receipt of the response (Rule 4.3a) allowing the customer to comment within 5 working days (Rule 4.3c) before an adjudicator reviews and makes a decision on the case (Rule 4.4b and 4.5)

6 - Clarification as to why CISAS have chosen to circumvent the following rules (and procedure) having accepted a claim. rule 4.3a, rule 4.3c, rule 4.5 and not allowed the case to run its natural cause within the defined timescale and allow Rule 5d (Powers of the adjudicator) Determine whether or not the dispute falls within the scope of the Scheme, to run its course?

7 - In light of the above and failure to follow procedure how CISAS plan to ensure impartiality of cases which have stalled and potential will have timescale reset which will have allowed a company significantly more time to compile a response than the defined “impartial” process timescales allow, and in effect a company has already submitted a response in the form of an objection.

I appreciate the above clarifications are detailed requests, however many relate to current procedure and rules which if present should be easily available, I note CISAS are currently engaged with OFCOM (hence OFCOM being CC’d) I believe that OFCOM have been engaged to early in the process and in effect CISAS have compromised their process and impartiality having accepted a case and then at the request of a company skipping from Rule 4.1 to Rule 4.5 (at which point an adjudicator may choose to instigate Rule 5.c) having not engaged or communicated with the customer at appropriate stages within the process.

regards

Mikmonken

The complaint - If you don't get a response within 5 days submit a proper complaint.

form is downloadable from here -> CISAS complaints form

it needs sending to complaints@idrs.ltd.uk

First doc is self explanatory

name address case ref.

Section 3 - My complaint surrounds a clearly failing by CISAS to follow due process having accepted a claim, engaging with the company outside of the defined channels advertised by the CISAS process and culminating in in the cancelling of my claim, without following procedure and failing to provide any evidence that procedures are in place and a clear lack of communication provided to the customer.
Continued overleaf

Section 4 - Case to be reopened and to follow due process – or compensation to the sum of £(outstanding months line rental +£20.42 unlock + £100 compensation) which would have been the approximate compensation (given the amount being charged by EE to cancel my account had an adjudicator ruled in my favour.

you will need to copy the following into a separate word document and send it along side.

The following paragraph summarise the crux of this complaint, however for information none of the points detailed below, have to date, been answered by CISAS.
CISAS have chosen to circumvent the following rules (and procedure) having accepted a claim. rule 4.3a, rule 4.3c, rule 4.5 and not allowed the case to run its natural cause within the defined timescale and allow Rule 5d (Powers of the adjudicator) Determine whether or not the dispute falls within the scope of the Scheme, to run its course?

As an organisation CISAS following a competitive tender process been awarded the responsibility of acting as an unbiased ADR between the customer and a company. In order for this to happen within the parameters of the ADR CISAS will be required to follow the procedures advertised.
Having accepted the case CISAS were required to provide me with a copy of the response provided by EE for my comment.
CISAS were required following receipt of my comment to send to an adjudicator for their decision.
On behalf of CISAS an adjudicator was therefore responsible to review my claim, the companies response and my comments and to come a decision.
An adjudicator can – under Rule 5d (Powers of the adjudicator) Determine whether or not the dispute falls within the scope of the Scheme.

This failure to follow process, having accepted a claim, shows a complete lack impartiality and has not allowed me the opportunity to exercise my right to alternative dispute resolution.

In addition to the complaint above – I request a full and detailed response to the clarificaitons raised on multiple occasions detailed below.

1 - Clarification on where within the CISAS rules it is published that a Company are allowed to object to cases already accepted by CISAS without submitting a response.
2 - Copies of any policies and procedures regarding a companies ability to object to a claim.
3 - Clarification as to what constitutes "exceptional circumstances” (rule 4.1c) around the awarding of an extension to a company when compiling a response.
4 - Confirmation that in line with CISAS rule 4.1c company must submit a "response" within 10 days of receipt of the claim,
a) further responses can be sent within the 10 day time frame.
Examples of possible response but not an extensive list
• Nothing submitted
• Defence to claim submitted
• Objection -> Defence to claim submitted
• Objection -> request for an extension (if no extension granted the Objection would be deemed the response)
• Objection -> request for an extension -> defence to claim (submitted in extension period.
b) Rule 4.3 All these responses will then be forwarded to the customer for comment prior to being allocated to an adjudicator for decision.
c) What, if any, responses from a company CISAS does not have to forward to the customers and where this list is document
5 - Clarification as to why a company has responded to an accepted case in the form of an objection (within a 10 day period) and CISAS have not followed process by informing the customer on receipt of the response (Rule 4.3a) allowing the customer to comment within 5 working days (Rule 4.3c) before an adjudicator reviews and makes a decision on the case (Rule 4.4b and 4.5)
6 - Clarification as to why CISAS have chosen to circumvent the following rules (and procedure) having accepted a claim. rule 4.3a, rule 4.3c, rule 4.5 and not allowed the case to run its natural cause within the defined timescale and allow Rule 5d (Powers of the adjudicator) Determine whether or not the dispute falls within the scope of the Scheme, to run its course?

7 - In light of the above and failure to follow procedure how CISAS plan to ensure impartiality of cases which have stalled and potential will have timescale reset which will have allowed a company significantly more time to compile a response than the defined “impartial” process timescales allow, and in effect a company has already submitted a response in the form of an objection. (in my case EE have already had an additional 5 days without requesting an extension)

I appreciate the above clarifications are detailed requests, however many relate to current procedure and rules which if present should be easily available, I note CISAS are currently engaged with OFCOM (hence OFCOM being CC’d) I believe that OFCOM have been engaged to early in the process and in effect CISAS have compromised their process and impartiality having accepted a case and then at the request of a company skipping from Rule 4.1 to Rule 4.5 (at which point an adjudicator may choose to instigate Rule 5.c) having not engaged or communicated with the customer at appropriate stages within the process.

Mikmonken

When CISAS send something back along the lines of...

I acknowledge receipt of your email of the 17th September 2014 which has been passed to me as the Director responsible for the operation of CISAS.

As we have previously advised, your application has been rejected on the basis that, in our opinion, the claim has already been the subject of a CISAS adjudication. I am sorry that you do not agree with our decision but that is our view and we have no plans to review your case further. As you know this decision does not prevent you from seeking redress through the courts if you decide to do so.

CISAS do not feel that it is appropriate to comment further on the requests you have made by email and by telephone in recent days. You are, of course, free to take the matter further with Ofcom if you wish and we will cooperate with the regulator in the normal way.

you need to send an email to gmassie@cedr.com (graham Massie, Chief Operating Officer)

Copy in Lynn Parker - Ofcom Lynn.Parker@Ofcom.org.uk

Subject line - Complaint Escalation Fwd: Clarification around CISAS process - Re: Case Ref: XXX Surname v EE Ltd t/as EE

Dear Graham,

Following my requests made in relation to a claim that having accepted CISAS chose to u turn following dialogue with EE I wish to escalate my complains as the response received from John Munton falls far short from the transparency and impartiality I would expect from an organisation tasked with providing impartial alternative dispute resolution.

I have attached full email audit for ease of reference and look forward to hearing from you in due course.

Kind regards

Mikmonken

And this is where I am up to, today however was day 10 the day Mr Massie promised to get back to me, so I am now (come 5pm going to send an email to the Chief Exec of CEDR, copying in Lynn Parker, with all the previous emails relating to my claim.

Maccadinho25

Ive sent four chasing emails since they rejected my case on 12th September and had absolutely no response from them what so ever so tomorrow ill email Lynn at Ofcom and complain to CISAS officially and get the ball rolling - top work guys

Maccadinho25

All sent - hopefully i got it all right! My initial emailed responses to CISAS were to ask for correspondence between EE and themselves to see why my case had now been rejected but i didnt go into too much detail with all the other points etc

Ive sent Mikmonkens template above to complain to IDRS so i hope its still ok even though i may not have sent the same as he had previously?

Also sent the email to Lynn with all my emails attached asking if something fishy is going on!