Problem with EE

Anoneemoose

Marktheshark wrote: »

There is some case law on diligence on forming contracts and where a party that is knowledgeable and makes an offer and thus forms a contract with a person who can not legally hold a contract such as mental capacity or age then it is void outright at onset.

Basically, if you offer a contract to anyone not legally able to enter one, its your loss, you should check the information first.

As I said, they wouldn't pursue for the debt if under 18 - but they will trash her credit file with a nice CIFAS marker.

gycraig_2

macman wrote: »

She would have been only 14 (or less) when the contract was taken out in Feb 2014, assuming a 12m minimum term. If done in store, don't the staff ask for some ID or proof of age and address? Utility bills? And who handed over the bank account details for the DD-mum or daughter?
I suspect we are not getting the whole story here.
If EE are going to trash her credit record anyway then there is no incentive to settle the bill, even if it's valid.

i used to work in carphone warehouse. a standard credit check you put your card in enter your pin it dummies a pound out and back in.

This verifies address and name both match what is the card and is valid. Vast majority of people at 18 fail credit checks for contracts anyway so it doesnt sound plausible for a 14 year old with 0 credit history to be able to get around the anti fraud checks AND pass the credit check.


why did your friend let a 15 year old take out a contract when its obvious that you should be 18 and why would your friend then pay said fraudulent contract?

sdduk

Funny how people come on here and ask questions and then don't answer the question asked to them.

Sounds to me is if this story is a load of porkies.

Has most people on here have said all Phone companies check ID
whether its in a shop or online and nine out of ten most will only accept a credit or debit card.

ljwilson_2

It transpired the person in the shop made the error, did not request id or dob. Not sure how she passed the credit check. They have now sent a revised bill for £6. Thanks for all your answers

Lorna

ljwilson_2

sdduk wrote: »

Funny how people come on here and ask questions and then don't answer the question asked to them.

Sounds to me is if this story is a load of porkies.

Has most people on here have said all Phone companies check ID
whether its in a shop or online and nine out of ten most will only accept a credit or debit card.

Sorry for not responding, I have been away. Why would I make this up? I have a life. The daughter did take the contract out for £8 a month for as SIM only. It is an EE sim. My friend made the monthly payments from his account. There is no way my friend or his daughter would knowingly commit fraud. As I said in my last post, it has all been sorted now but I take offence at the above post. I work full time and have got much better things to do than come on a forum and make things up! You can see from my profile that I have only used this forum a few times when I have a genuine query

macman

ljwilson wrote: »

Sorry for not responding, I have been away. Why would I make this up? I have a life. The daughter did take the contract out for £8 a month for as SIM only. It is an EE sim. My friend made the monthly payments from his account. There is no way my friend or his daughter would knowingly commit fraud. As I said in my last post, it has all been sorted now but I take offence at the above post. I work full time and have got much better things to do than come on a forum and make things up! You can see from my profile that I have only used this forum a few times when I have a genuine query

Then how did she apply for a contract mobile at 14 years old? That is clearly fraudulent, because she must have know that as a child she could not take out such a contract, whether she was asked for proof of age or not. And if your friend knowingly supplied her with the payment info, that makes her an accessory.
That is why EE raised the issue of fraud initially. The contract is null and void and any debts are unenforceable.

grumbler

macman wrote: »

Then how did she apply for a contract mobile at 14 years old?

She went to a shop and applied. As simple as that. "The person in the shop made the error, did not request id or dob".

That is clearly fraudulent, because she must have know that as a child she could not take out such a contract, whether she was asked for proof of age or not.

You can't be serious. Surely it's the shop staff that must know this, not the customer.
Regardless, the customer's word must not be taken for a fact and some proofs have to be requested by the staff or checks done. "The person" obviously failed to do this blinded by the coming commission.

And if your friend knowingly supplied her with the payment info, that makes her an accessory.

:rotfl:

macman

I'm not suggesting that the retailer isn't guilty of extreme negligence in not checking DOB. But I find it difficult to believe that a 14 year old who has the maturity to go into a shop and ask for a mobile contract and supply her mum's bank or debit card details, is not aware that she cannot enter into such a contract at 14. Are we to suppose that the retailer failed to check her address either, if not, how did she prove this?
And surely mum was aware that she could not enter into this contract either, but still supplied the means of payment?
I have to agree with earlier posters in that we haven't got the whole story here.

grumbler

macman wrote: »

I'm not suggesting that the retailer isn't guilty of extreme negligence in not checking DOB. But I find it difficult to believe that a 14 year old who has the maturity to go into a shop and ask for a mobile contract and supply her mum's bank or debit card details, is not aware that she cannot enter into such a contract at 14.

There is a big difference between "finding it difficult to believe" and accusing someone of fraud on the ground of these difficulties.

I find it difficult to believe too, that the DOB wasn't asked and checked, but I don't find it difficult to believe that a 14y.o. dosn't know from what age she can have a mobile contract.
And no, she doesn't have to know this despite you saying that she does.

Are we to suppose that the retailer failed to check her address either, if not, how did she prove this?

Well, based on the information we have the retailer clearly failed on many counts.

macman

So we can agree that it's fraudulent, but the defence would be that neither the daughter nor her mother knowingly committed the fraud, due to ignorance of the law. I never said that the OP's friend's daughter knowingly committed fraud, that phrase was used by the OP only. I do still have a problem believing that her mother was also unaware that a 14 year old cannot take out such a contract in her own name, regardless of who pays the bill.
Not guilty m'lud.