Leaving T-mobile. Can't talk to someone

Silk

sebtomato wrote: »

Hopefully, you can provide links to actual Ofcom or Telecom act documents, as I would hope you don't get all your knowledge from what's posted on various groups, or from the Carphone Warehouse/EE staff academy...

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
....you can always say you couldn't find it on google so it doesn't exist


What's a Telecom act document by the way ?

sebtomato

Silk wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
....you can always say you couldn't find it on google so it doesn't exist


What's a Telecom act document by the way ?

Yes, indeed, I can't find it on Google nor on the Ofcom website, so I have a strong feeling there is no such policy from Ofcom, but feel free to post an actual link to prove me wrong (unless all you can do is rows of smileys to support an argument :T).

Anyway, I spoke to normal CS today, they transferred me to a guy from retention, who then transferred me again to someone else as soon as I requested a PAC code. He couldn't offer anything near the competition anyway. Was on hold for a while again, and then another person said "as per Ofcom regulation, your contract will be extended if the PAC code is not used". After some debate for a few minutes, the message was corrected to "Hmm.. as per T-mobile T&Cs, your contract will be extended if PAC code is not used" (which is a much better answer). "Your PAC code will be valid until 2nd Nov". Me: " Are you sure, I think it must be valid for 30 days..."

So anyway, I have FINALLY got a PAC now, after 5.5 hours, they can't offer anything anyway, so I will transfer my number at the end of the month. I will then get a nice compensation from T-mobile, and confirm to them that their staff, assuming someone can actually talk to them, are told to provide incorrect information.

Avoid T-mobile at all cost!

Silk

sebtomato wrote: »

Yes, indeed, I can't find it on Google nor on the Ofcom website, so I have a strong feeling there is no such policy from Ofcom, but feel free to post an actual link to prove me wrong (unless all you can do is rows of smileys to support an argument :T)

Don't worry it doesn't exist if you can't find it :cool:


I've left off the smiley's though I still find your posts funny !

Hoseman

I said goodbye to these jokers plus I only wanted a SIM only deal and their offer was laughable. I had a 24 month contract and the first 9 months were good from a CS point of view, then it just went downhill. Like many other companies they don't really want you calling up and speaking to hence their automated menu nonsense.

sebtomato

I was on SIM only deal too. The retention team could offer:

250 min
250MB of data
for £9.90 a month, on a 12 months contract (and I have been with them for 4 years!). Not very good at all. I think they are getting rid of customers, and T-mobile won't exist for long.

I used to pay £6 a month for 500 min, unlimited text and unlimited internet with them for 2 years.

Virgin, Vectone, People's Operator (for EE MVNOs) and Giffgaff all have better offers for £10, and only 30 day contracts

Altarf

Silk wrote: »

It's nothing to do with internal processes, it's to do with The Communications Act and guidelines set by Ofcom.

Utter nonsense, it is an internal process that is intended to prevent problems when a PAC has been requested.

I think we are agreed that a PAC cannot be used on a cancelled contract, only while the contract is still live.

So for pragmatic purposes the phone companies have developed a process where they ignore a cancellation when a PAC is issued. If a customer gave them 30 days to cancel, and then a week later asked for a PAC, since a PAC is valid for 30 days, the contract could be cancelled a week before the end of the PAC expiry date, and lots of complaints will ensue.

With the internal process to ignore cancellation requests if a PAC is issued, if the PAC is used within its expiry period it ends the contract, so no problem.

However if the PAC is not used, there is a problem. A written cancellation of a contract is a written cancellation of a contract. A company cannot tear up that cancellation just because a customer has asked for a PAC.

The phone company is between a rock and a hard place, but it is a problem of its own making.

It must give a PAC on demand, but for commercial reasons it has decided to require a cancellation period. So it has invented this process to try to deal with the problems caused by its decision.

However at the end of the day, if the company decides to ignore the customer's valid instruction to terminate their contract, without getting the customer's agreement to withdraw the cancellation, then that is their problem.

If they don't cancel the contract according to the customer's valid written request, then they are going to look foolish in court if they try to chase them for any money.

Silk

Altarf wrote: »

Utter nonsense, it is an internal process that is intended to prevent problems when a PAC has been requested.
.

Golly another one !
What's utter nonsense The Act Of Parliament, the Ofcom guidelines or my post ?

sebtomato

Silk wrote: »

Golly another one !
What's utter nonsense The Act Of Parliament, the Ofcom guidelines or my post ?

Your post, since you can't provide links to such Ofcom guidelines...
And now, there is even The Act of Parliament!

Silk

sebtomato wrote: »

Your post, since you can't provide links to such Ofcom guidelines...
And now, there is even The Act of Parliament!

Where do you want to start .....
An Act of Parliament is a law, enforced in all areas of the UK where it is applicable.
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=what+is+an+act+of+parliament+uk
The Communications Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom
https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=what+is+the+communications+act
We are concerned with the transporting of numbers so it's section 58
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/58
Which amongst many other references to Ofcom states .....
(i)require communications providers to secure compliance with such rules relating to the use of telephone numbers by their customers as OFCOM may set out in general conditions or determine in accordance with provision made by the general conditions.


So in other words The Communications Act (The Law) is telling Networks to comply with the guidelines set by Ofcom


With me so far ? or anything you don't understand ? is there enough google links ?

Lets move on to Ofcom guidelines ....
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/numbering/guidance-tele-no/number-portability-info/
United Kingdom

Powers to enable Ofcom to set conditions requiring communications providers to provide number portability are set out in sections 51 and 58 of the Communications Act 2003 (the "Act").
Now on the page click on the "Mobile Number Portability"


http://www.mnposg.org.uk/Main_Docume...sue%201-27.pdf


21 The customer’s request to the DSP for an authorisation to port should normally be taken to revoke any previous notice to terminate service unless the customer requests the previous notice to stand and the DSP can accommodate this request. On issuing a PAC, the DSP must inform the customer: 

if any previous termination has been revoked, and any current or pending termination actions are being cancelled; 


if the account will continue and any notice to terminate will be lost if the PAC is not used within its 30 day validity; 


if the account will terminate before the 30 day validity of the PAC expires as a result of the customer requesting the previous notice to remain in effect, and on which date it will terminate;

which date will be used for the purposes of calculating any outstanding subscription charges under the contract.

Altarf

[QUOTE=Silk;66667054http://www.mnposg.org.uk/Main_Docume...sue%201-27.pdf[/QUOTE]

And who are mnposg.org.uk? They are the UK Mobile Number Portability (MNP) Operator Steering Group (OSG), with the executive membership being EE, 3, O2, and Vodafone.

So thanks for confirming that this is an internal process devised by the mobile phone companies and nothing to do with the legislation.