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

claireb1

Cisas have been quick with there reply. So guess have to wait til next year when contract ends!

The decision has been taken by an adjudicator to withdraw the application from the scheme on the basis that it falls foul of CISAS Rule 2(b). No further action will be taken in respect of this matter.

Kind Regards

Service Team Leader
CISAS

Mikmonken I can provide dates if required but looks a no gooer for me personally. Just let me know.

[Deleted User]

jocklatic wrote: »

Ippy
Sorry to hear your claim didn't succeed & the poor Judge you seem to have had listening to your case. from your account of proceedings it does seem like he had already made his mind up. The contract increase may well only be 'pennies' in the judges/ EE eyes but those 'pennies' amount to a fair few thousand when you include all their customers. It may well be that RC & other more informed posters on here may be able to help others when they are due to the SCC??? Hopefully if nothing else then you have cost EE some of their valuable profits to defend their unjust increases :beer:

Hi Jocklatic,

Please do not feel sorry! But thank you!!
I would say that the judge did seem to have his mind made up way before the hearing began.
The purpose of sharing my story here just because I would like to give all claimants here an idea of how some of the judges in SCC might think/decide our cases. So please do consider the potential consequences before raising a claim with the court as the price can sometimes be quite high to pay. In my opinions this is really depending on the person who dealt with your claim. Some might understand the core of the claim, and some might just think the whole thing is a waste of time.
No matter what, I really thank everyone here for your time and effort on this.

ulaggy

I'm really disappointed to hear the results of your court case. I was going to go down this route and went so far as to send the Letter Before Action. However, I've been so busy and worn out from work (alternate weeks of day shifts then nights shifts is killer!) that I just didn't have the energy to get things organised. With today being the day I can give me 30 days notice to leave at the end of my contract, it's just not worth the risk of losing, I guess.

On the bright side, I'm going to Giffgaff PAYG as I had to replace my phone this year when it dropped out my gym locker (probably why I don't go anymore!) and it's unlocked. Giffgaff do a great deal - £15 for 500 free minutes, unlimited texts and 5gig of data which I can use for tethering on night shifts. I'll be saving £21+ a month. Just be glad to be gone from T-Mobile. I've learnt my lesson, won't be doing it again. Best of luck to everyone still fighting - does seem that we're all completely out of luck now and all the companies involved (EE, CISAS, etc) are banding together.

I'd also add my thanks. RC and many others have been really helpful and during this "journey" we've almost made a bit of a community. RC has worked tirelessly and I can only commend your spirit and tenacity! Thank you, everyone, for the help and support over the past 7 or so months

RandomCurve

[quote=[Deleted User];66800556]Hi Jocklatic,

Please do not feel sorry! But thank you!!
I would say that the judge did seem to have his mind made up way before the hearing began.
The purpose of sharing my story here just because I would like to give all claimants here an idea of how some of the judges in SCC might think/decide our cases. So please do consider the potential consequences before raising a claim with the court as the price can sometimes be quite high to pay. In my opinions this is really depending on the person who dealt with your claim. Some might understand the core of the claim, and some might just think the whole thing is a waste of time.
No matter what, I really thank everyone here for your time and effort on this.[/QUOTE]

Well I must say this is not the news I wanted to - or expected to - hear.
Did you get a chance to actually quote some of the provisions of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations to the judge?
Did you get a chance to ask him (or EE) how they relate in this case?
Did you make it clear to the judge it was a standard form contract and you are "captive" for 24 months - some of the key reasons why the protection of the UTCCRs are in place?


If so I would like to know his response.
And the killer question when talking about "pennies" does the law only apply at a certain level?
And if so what is that level?
And can he confirm then that if you refused to pay EE by the price increase amount there is nothing they can legally do?


Not sure what the appeal process from here is - never lost at SCC before (only been once on a totally unrelated matter). But happy to help you research it

[Deleted User]

ulaggy wrote: »

I'm really disappointed to hear the results of your court case. I was going to go down this route and went so far as to send the Letter Before Action. However, I've been so busy and worn out from work (alternate weeks of day shifts then nights shifts is killer!) that I just didn't have the energy to get things organised. With today being the day I can give me 30 days notice to leave at the end of my contract, it's just not worth the risk of losing, I guess.

On the bright side, I'm going to Giffgaff PAYG as I had to replace my phone this year when it dropped out my gym locker (probably why I don't go anymore!) and it's unlocked. Giffgaff do a great deal - £15 for 500 free minutes, unlimited texts and 5gig of data which I can use for tethering on night shifts. I'll be saving £21+ a month. Just be glad to be gone from T-Mobile. I've learnt my lesson, won't be doing it again. Best of luck to everyone still fighting - does seem that we're all completely out of luck now and all the companies involved (EE, CISAS, etc) are banding together.

I'd also add my thanks. RC and many others have been really helpful and during this "journey" we've almost made a bit of a community. RC has worked tirelessly and I can only commend your spirit and tenacity! Thank you, everyone, for the help and support over the past 7 or so months

Congra! At least you are now free to go somewhere else!

RandomCurve

Just in case anybody still thinks that EE play things fair and are open and honest - read the below - I have tried to keep it simple (but of course it is in EEs interest to make it complex)


Orange customers ORIGINAL (Feb 11?) T&C was as follows:
“4.3.1 we have increased the Charges by an amount equal to or less than the percentage increase in the All Items Index of Retail Prices published by the Central Statistical Office in the Monthly Digest of Statistics in any 12 month period;”


When they first put in a price increase people escaped their contracts as neither the All Items Index, nor the Central Statistical Office exist!


So in October 2012 Orange updated their T&Cs to read:
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; “


So to "confuse" the issue back in 2012 consumers who were on the original clause (EE never changed their clause they only used the new clause for new customers). EE would quote the new clause to all customers - even those on the old clause - sneaky a? https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4517039 post #59!


Well now it gets worse:
I have just seen some defences where EE are quoting the ORIGINAL clause (which was replaced in October 2012) to consumer who took out contracts in 2013 As the Original (Feb 11) is a smaller change to get to the new March 2014 clause than the October 2012 clause - so EE are "reducing" the material detriment argument!!


Still luckily I have been following this for a while because I also know that the ORIGINAL pre October 2012 clause at 4.3 (not 4.3.1) said you could cancel your contract if the change was of DETRIMENT to you (not MATERIAL detriment), but guess what - all the new clause 4.3s say "Material Detriment" - and that will be an EASIR case to win for US!!!!


Think about it - the change literally is "Material"!!!

[Deleted User]

RandomCurve wrote: »

Well I must say this is not the news I wanted to - or expected to - hear.
Did you get a chance to actually quote some of the provisions of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations to the judge?
Did you get a chance to ask him (or EE) how they relate in this case?
Did you make it clear to the judge it was a standard form contract and you are "captive" for 24 months - some of the key reasons why the protection of the UTCCRs are in place?


If so I would like to know his response.
And the killer question when talking about "pennies" does the law only apply at a certain level?
And if so what is that level?
And can he confirm then that if you refused to pay EE by the price increase amount there is nothing they can legally do?


Not sure what the appeal process from here is - never lost at SCC before (only been once on a totally unrelated matter). But happy to help you research it

Hi RC,
I have to admit that I had not prepared the hearing properly. I've been very busy recently (joined a new company and there is currently short on staff in our department), and I almost forgot that I had a hearing booked. So I just rushed to the court on that day and only read the documents on the phone while I was on my way there. This was my own fault, can blame no one other than me, and I was prepared to lose the case, but just not in a way like this. I cannot remember what exactly happened in the court, but I will try to write down as much details as I can.

When both the defendant and me walked into the court room the judge there asked if we have a chance to discuss the case yet and then defendant immediately answered that we have and no agreement can be reached (I really cannot remember what exactly he said, so I just wrote down here something similar). The defendant then turned to me to say that it was referring to the correspondences. I then said nothing about it. The judge asked what the claim was actually for, and then he started reading the documents presented in front of him. The defendant interrupted by offering the judge a short summary of the case. This's why I asked in my previous post that whether the judge will ever read the documents provided before the hearing began, or they just rely on the information given in the hearing? It was just a short summary, so you probably can imagine that it was really very short. I think the defendant was saying something like claimant disagreed a changed made by EE by specifying which statistics will be used, in order to meet the requirement of ofcom of having a clear term (Again, I really cannot remember what exactly he said). And then the court asked if this claim was for termination of contract, I said yes. Then the judge started saying some really general stuff AND when he spoke about that he would see if any party having no chances of winning the case blahblah (really cannot remember what he said) he looked at me directly 5 times. I might be misunderstood, but I do feel that he at that time already had something in mind. Also before he said "any party" he was saying the claimant I think, but he corrected himself very fast, he said "the claimant" ,,"the defendant", then "any party" having no chances xxxxxxxxx. He carried on speaking and then said that he cannot see there is any connection, any materials detriment and any ground for a claim?.. I replied to him and saying things like terms changed, mentioned the differences between rpi and cpi, talked about the effect it could have on the customers, contract etc. As soon as I finished my speech, the judge immediately said that "they have the option to do so, they are just narrowing the scope, I cannot see there is any ground for a claim blahblah". The conversation repeated again and again during the hearing. This was why I mentioned in the previous post that the hearing was mostly between the judge and me, the defendant did not actually said a lot in the hearing and I think he already knew at that time he was going to win. It was just that apparent. And when the "pennies" was mentioned, the look on his face was quite unforgettable, I have to say I was just giving up at that point. I could sense his impatience during my speech in the hearing. And even though he never really expressed anything, I could feel that somehow he thought I was there wasting his time. Of course, these were just my personal thoughts. I really could not bother to hear his length verdict so I only remembered two things from that conclusion: my claim was struck out and an order for addition payments was approved. I already contacted the defendant regarding how payments can be made to him as I do not want to miss the deadline.

No, I did not actually quote some of the provisions of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations. Nor I made it clear to the judge that it was a standard form contract and I am "captive" for 24 months as I at that time did not think this kind of information was important in a hearing.
"And the killer question when talking about "pennies" does the law only apply at a certain level?
And if so what is that level?
And can he confirm then that if you refused to pay EE by the price increase amount there is nothing they can legally do?"
I asked neither questions quoted above but I think I asked something similar when I talked about the cpi and rpi. But basically he should know the impact on changes from either cpi or rpi to just rpi. If he thinks the company has the option to do it and it just simply narrowing the scope, I... Well, overall we did not really talk about utccrs/ofcom etc in the hearing.

Moreover, although I cannot find the court letter received a couple weeks ago (it is lost), I remember that it says something like upon reading the documents provided, the judge would like to schedule a hearing to discuss xxxxxxx, so I think the judge might have read the documents provided, but if that is the case....

g6jns_2

I am sorry to say that this illustrates the difficulties of a LIP (Litigant in person) up against a professional lawyer in a case with complex evidence. Unless you can condense it down to a few paragraphs then you are unlikely to succeed. You really need a professional to help you on the day. Perhaps RC might like to see if he can choose a strong case and see if he can get someone to act pro bono (free of charge). Nevertheless full marks for trying.

jocklatic

Does sound like the SCC route is a minefield & as g6jns says it's a complex case & EE have trained lawyers representing them. It may well be that after 1 or 2 cases have gone to SCC then we may get a better idea on how to fight it???
On a seperate note i have had a reply from Graham Howell/ Ofcom basically wringing his hands of any need to intervene & that its the jobs of the court......EE/ CISAS / Ofcom = bed partners

barrowvian

When I created the SCC claim, they gave EE 14 days since the 5th day after the claim was issued, which is the 25th for me. EE filed an acknowledgement of service which I believe means they're requesting to have 28 days to submit a defense.

I was reading on the Money Claim site that after 14 days I can submit my claim for judgement.

For anyone that knows, what would happen if after the 14th day I submitted my claim for judgement? It says on the submission page that I only have to wait 14 days. It already lets me scroll right through the judgement already, up until the point I can submit it. Would this likely be frowned upon by the court?