NOW OPEN: the MSE Forum 'Ask An Expert' event. This time we'd like your questions on TRAVEL & HOLIDAY DEALS. Post by Wed and deals expert MSE Oli will answer as many as he can.
EE to increase pay-monthly mobile prices by 2.7% - MSE News

519 Posts



in Mobiles
EE customers on monthly mobile contracts will be hit with a 2.7% price rise next month...
Read the full story:
'EE to increase pay-monthly mobile prices by 2.7%'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
'EE to increase pay-monthly mobile prices by 2.7%'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
I believe that you are actually four years out of date with your understanding.
Ofcom now regards any price rise as delivering "material detriment".
Please consult the relevant Ofcom media release entitled "Protection for consumers against unexpected mid-contract price rises". This was issued on 22 January 2014, the eve of the implementation of its revised guidance. It includes a link to the guidance itself.
You may also be interested to review an article published by the Daily Express on 23 October 2013 with the headline "Line contract get-out highlighted". Representatives of the fair telecoms campaign, MoneySavingExpert.com and others celebrate Ofcom's announcement of the change, which you seem to have now forgotten about in misleading your readers.
I deeply regret having to pull up fellow campaigners in this public way. I would be delighted to share private contact details, so that we can work together, rather than in silly competition.
I am also a little unhappy at being considered insufficiently experienced to be able to include the relevant URLs in this posting. I hope I have provided sufficient information for the referenced materials to be found.
We all make mistakes from time to time. I will be happy to applaud a gracious correction.
The issue of "material detriment" only arises when one needs to exit a contract without penalty.
There cannot be a penalty for terminating a contract, unless one is potentially breaching a condition i.e. compliance with a fixed term.
Happily, and contrary to the comments in the article, Ofcom now deems "material detriment" to be the consequence of any price increase.
(There can be confusion with the term "contract". Technically, any purchase is under the terms of a contract. The phrase "mid-contract", or "in contract", is however commonly used to refer to situations where one is subject to a continuing fixed term arrangement. Strictly speaking, the term "out of contract" is a nonsense, as it refers to a continuing purchase arrangement that has no fixed term as part of the contract.)
As far as I was aware, EE have written in to their contract that line rental will rise by the January R|P|I rate in April, then it is seen as reasonable by OFCOM because the customer is made aware of this when taking out a contract.
Had it said in the contract, prices will rise every April but with no reference to how much it would be, then that would not be allowed.
Example 1 at Section 1.14 of the relevant Ofcom guidance, entitled "Guidance on “material detriment” under GC9.6 in relation to price rises and notification of contract modifications" (Sorry! I am not allowed to provide a link!) covers the relevant situation very clearly.
Obviously it is good and worthwhile to provide guidance on potential price increases in the terms of a contract. That does not however remove the right of the customer to exit with penalty, should they so choose, when a specific increase is imposed during the term.
It is only in cases where a specific (varying) cost is defined for the duration of the contract that the opportunity to leave with penalty is denied, i.e. when the terms of the contract, specified in £ and p, are applied.
All posters with limited history have this restriction.
Of course, tell them David said so.