BT, transfer contract to another person

boatman

In the T&C's of BT it says:


29. Transferring the agreement
The agreement is only between you and us. You cannot transfer it to anyone else, or try to do so. We can transfer the agreement, and our rights and obligations under it, to anyone else (including if we reorganise the way we work), as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on your rights.


Given that a contract should be fair to both sides, Is that term legally enforceable because it is not balanced, why can't I transfer the line/broadband to another person? Obviously they would need to pay the monthly rental due as that would have a negative effect on BT, but apart from that, is that term fair on us customers?

mije1983

boatman wrote: »

Is that term legally enforceable

Only a judge can determine that.

Fair and balanced doesn't have to mean identical though. I imagine they are covering themselves with the 'as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on your rights' line. As in effect, them transferring it wouldn't make a difference for you.

But as I said, you'd need a judge to rule on it.

boatman

It strikes me that they want to be able to palm you off to another company or one they may invent and then tell you its fine. Should there not be a restriction on that, such as when they go in to liquidation for example, I presume that i why it's there?

I think it constitutes a 'significant imbalance':

62(4). A term is unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer.


To transfer to another person would i guess involve a credit check,a name and bank DD change, takes all of a couple of minutes and at worst a £5 charge.

mije1983

Then get a judge to rule rather than picking apart the contract. That's the only way you'll get it changed. No matter what you 'believe', until BT are told they can't use that clause then they will carry on using it.

boatman

Is it not OFCOM's job to ensure terms like that don't appear?

onomatopoeia99

boatman wrote: »

In the T&C's of BT it says:


29. Transferring the agreement
The agreement is only between you and us. You cannot transfer it to anyone else, or try to do so. We can transfer the agreement, and our rights and obligations under it, to anyone else (including if we reorganise the way we work), as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on your rights.


Given that a contract should be fair to both sides, Is that term legally enforceable because it is not balanced, why can't I transfer the line/broadband to another person? Obviously they would need to pay the monthly rental due as that would have a negative effect on BT, but apart from that, is that term fair on us customers?

It's fair . I'll give you an example of how you could abuse being able to transfer the service provided to you as an individual.

You might transfer the service to a person that takes public position contrary to the organisation's ethics and that they would not supply for that reason. Normally, they would be able to make that decision if the person applied for a new contract, but if you act to deliberately mask the true identity of the person buying the service by paying the first month then transferring it, you circumvent their ethics policy.

There could be plenty of other examples, e.g. if someone got blacklisted by a supplier for making sexually explicit comments to call centre staff, you take out a contract on their behalf so the supplier gets forced to supply them.

I don't see it as your right to force a supplier to have someone they do not choose to accept as a customer, but when you take the supplier to court over this term, please post the case reference so I can look it up on bailii.

boatman

I'm not suggesting the company don't get a say, they would do their usual checks and charge a small fee for their trouble.

If they want to keep a term like that then surely it should be a little more even.


Perhaps, if you wouldn't mind, pass comment on this

iniltous

boatman wrote: »

In the T&C's of BT it says:


29. Transferring the agreement
The agreement is only between you and us. You cannot transfer it to anyone else, or try to do so. We can transfer the agreement, and our rights and obligations under it, to anyone else (including if we reorganise the way we work), as long as it doesn't have a negative effect on your rights.


Given that a contract should be fair to both sides, Is that term legally enforceable because it is not balanced, why can't I transfer the line/broadband to another person? Obviously they would need to pay the monthly rental due as that would have a negative effect on BT, but apart from that, is that term fair on us customers?

It this an actual problem for you ( you want someone transfer to someone else responsibility for your 'contact' with BT) or you have a lot of time on your hands to comb through the T&C's and decided that in your opinion this is an unfair condition ?

TBH, If all you want is for someone else to takeover the responsibility for your payment (until the end of a minimum term, if that's the problem , because wouldn't you just cancel the service if it's not wanted and you were outside any minimum term) simply change the account payment is made from , to whoever has aggreed to take on the responsibility for 'contract' , until the minimum term has expired, then they apply to takeover the service correctly, or you cancel penalty free.

You entered into a contract with them freely for a certain period of time, they don't need to offer the option to change responsibility to someone else, just because you don't want to honour the minimum term ( the only reason I can think that would even be an issue )

boatman

iniltous wrote: »

It this an actual problem for you ( you want someone transfer to someone else responsibility for your 'contact' with BT) or you have a lot of time on your hands to comb through the T&C's and decided that in your opinion this is an unfair condition ?

Looking to leave and don't want to pay BT more than I have to, nothing wrong in that I don't think. Yes, could fudge it, but would rather it done properly, just feel that BT are not following the rules.

iniltous

boatman wrote: »

Looking to leave and don't want to pay BT more than I have to, nothing wrong in that I don't think. Yes, could fudge it, but would rather it done properly, just feel that BT are not following the rules.

Playing devils advocate , but isn't it you that don't want to follow the rules, namely not seeing out the minimum term commitment you made.
I suppose , if you could get someone to takeover your responsibility , then BT lose out , in that the 'new' customer would expect to just finish your minimum term (however long that is) so BT mis out on a proper new customer with a 12 month minimum term, or ETC from you, plus , whoever you get to takeover the responsibility misses out on any 'new customer' inducements if they takeover your commitment.
I can see how you benefit , ( by not having to pay ETC ) arguably BT lose ( but I can see why it could be argued that they are no worse off ) but whoever takes over responsibility loses out the most, they appear to get nothing at all from the arrangement, so why would they agree ?

As I said, the obvious thing to do , if someone is prepared to takeover your deal, is for the money to come out of their account to pay for the remaining months...presumably this person must be trusted by you as anything done on the account by them, would be in your name, if you 'fudge' it, but as far as I can tell, no CP would entertain what you want to do, they probably won't have the processes in place to achieve what you want anyway, and they wouldn't benefit , so why would they do it ?

As I understand it , the only time something similar happens is if an account holder dies and the remaining spouse wants the account put in their name, but even in these cases, I think a new account is created , not just a different name on the old account, and a new minimum term started, but any ETC waived.

pmduk

It's a clause present in most consumer contracts, it's presence is to allow the company to assign your debt elsewhere should you default, or to enable them to sell off any part of their business should they choose to a third party.

I know that only a few mobile networks will allow you to transfer a contract to a third party. It's their choice whether to offer that, just as it was your choice whether to accept BT's contract terms or go elsewhere