A1comms (Buymobiles.net)

mullet_2

I'll try to keep this short.

18 year-old daughter bought a phone on a two-year contract with Orange last Feb online from buymobiles.net, largely because a free tablet was offered with the package.

She is unwaged and living in a hostel. The cost was £35 a month and she had to use our home address which was where her bank account was still registered.

She could never get a signal in her room and of course the technical helpline she had to ring was chargable and Orange sold her another £5+ a month on the back of this. We kept trying to log into the online account thing but the website wouldn't recognise her number so she couldn't see her account and customer service was terrible, etc etc (a whole other story!) and basically the goddamn thing went unused for the rest of 2014.

So a couple of failed direct debits later and we had a letter from the debt collection agency. I paid the outstanding amount off - until the end of the two-year contract, plus the admin fee. I just wanted to say goodbye to Orange/EE and never have anything to do with them again.

I was therefore pretty devastated to receive another bill this weekend from a company called A1comms - this seems to be the registered company which trades as Buymobiles.net - demanding the return of the handset and the tablet or their cost price of £413.12.

I've read in other threads that this is because Buymobiles lose out financially somehow if the contract doesn't run its full term - but I feel we have fulfilled our side of the contractual relationship (albeit the debt recovery firm did get involved!) and whatever deals these companies have got going on between them are nothing to do with me! Am I right?

Collabora

like the other thread, all you did was pay off the airtime contract with Orange/EE. It seems Buymobiles TOS state you will own them for the hardware if you end contract early

mobilejunkie

Why repeat old ground which you've already read?

You may be able to negotiate the amount, but not the debt. Her credit files will already be wrecked for at least the next six years. An expensive toy; amazing that someone on "no wage" would enter into a mobile contract for £35 a month in the first place. If she continues in this vein she'll be living in a hostel for the rest of her life. Or perhaps she'll learn an important lesson at last and change her outlook and therefore prospects - but it will now be a long and hard road.

Collabora

to me it looks like because all her friends had the latest phone, so even though she could not afford one, she had to have one to beat them, but its come back to bite her .

mullet wrote: »

and whatever deals these companies have got going on between them are nothing to do with me! Am I right?

Yes you are correct. It is 100% between buymobiles and your daughter and nothing to do with you

mobilejunkie

Actually, the only issue is between Buymobiles and the daughter. The network is a separate contract and totally irrelevant, as has been pointed out numerous times before on the similar thread.

Herongull

The contract between Buymobiles and your daughter may have been ambiguous. The other thread mentions the following:

2. Payment and Ownership of Goods

2.2. In these Terms and Conditions of Business: - "Goods" means goods or products offered for sale by us. "Goods" also means mobile phones that are discounted or "SUPPLIED FREE" with monthly paid contracts.

2.4. Goods and Promotional Products remain our property until you have fulfilled the minimum term of your airtime contract.

As was pointed out in the other thread, buying out the airtime contract could easily be interpreted as fulfilling the minimum term of the contract.

Ambiguous contracts are normally interpreted against the party who drafted them.

If your daughter's contract also contains ambiguous terms like these, the company would not win in court. For this reason they would be very unwilling to actually take her to court. If they lost this would make it clear to others with similar contracts that they don't have to pay these extortionate charges.

Do you still have a copy of the contract?

mobilejunkie

That is incorrect. For the umpteenth time, there are two separate contracts and the one with the network has nothing to do with the one with the dealer. Their terms aren't ambiguous.

Whilst it is not certain whether the dealer would instigate proceedings, whether they won or lost wouldn't have any relevance to others in the same boat.

mullet_2

A quick update: have today received a hand-delivered demand from Burlington Group for £98.44 which I intend to pay off just to be done with it.

As has been pointed out to you on other threads, mobilejunkie, the t&cs are internally inconsistent and as they are only available online and are constantly updated it is impossible to find out exactly what my daughter signed up to, nor is it possible to find out to what extent bumobile were monetarily disadvantaged when the financial terms of the contract were fulfilled but the temporal terms were not. Were it myself who would be taken to court over this rather than my learning-disabled daughter I should be taking this further.

mobilejunkie

As I've consistent point out for years (even have a major thread on it) it matters not what the t&c are now, is irrelevant that they are only on line and people should always print them out at the point of sale.

The fact that your daughter has no income and learning difficulties is completely irrelevant. The outcome is good provided you have it in writing that this payment is in full and final settlement - though you should check her credit files as they may well be wrecked for the next 6 years (which, in her case, may be a blessing in disguise).

Of course, should this not be in full and final settlement (in writing) it will be no end to the matter.

mullet_2

How on earth can i obtain confirmation that is in full and final settlement when I don't have any kind of breakdown of what is owed, or to whom? The demand from Burlington Group says that the sum owed is due to a "default" and refers to an account with "A1 Comms". That is all.

There was no default as every single penny agreed to within the terms of the contract (note - one contract, not two) was paid.

If a default occurred it was EE - the network supplier - who defaulted. Not the purchaser. I only paid the contract off early because their customer services were so god-awful. I think (at the very least!) they have a duty to inform customers that customers will have to pay extra if they pay their contracts off early.

**** this. I am angry now. These people are demanding money with menaces by holding the threat of poor credit ratings over people's heads.

Silk

mullet wrote: »

**** this. I am angry now. These people are demanding money with menaces by holding the threat of poor credit ratings over people's heads.

You can't get a poor credit rating from A1, that would have to come from the network. As you say the contract was taken out by your daughter then any default through the network would go against her not you.