Consumer Credit Act 1974

Fleabag

The coverage thing is on the provider's website. I am aware that, on the face of it, he doesn't appear to have any "cooling off" rights for an in-store purchase, which is why we're looking for reasonable arguments to try to get them to cancel this agreement. I would never try to argue that age in itself is a barrier to looking out for one's self, but in this case, I believe the salesman used my Dad's apparent age AND naivety of digital products and services to sell him something he specifically stated he didn't want or need, but was persuaded that what he wanted didn't exist, when in fact, what he wanted DID exist  - just not from that company. He believed that he would be better and safer buying in person from a company he was already a customer of. My Dad is an intelligent man, but he is more easily duped than he used to be. 

Fleabag

elsien said:

I didn’t think there was a 14 day in store cooling off period? 

Aside from which, as he’s already been in once for a refund, they’re going to be less likely to believe that he’s developed coverage issues following that refusal.
Did you talk to the shop manager? 

Dad returned to ask to cancel the contract last week. They said no. I don't think he asked to speak to the manager. Dad, my sister and I are going back tomorrow (to an appointment the salesman made with Dad to "set things up"). If necessary, we will ask for a manager. He also made an appointment for Mum (who already has a sim only contract with their company and has a smartphone we bought her a year ago). I can only assume he has made that appointment in the hope of selling her a new phone or increasing her contract. Neither of which she wants or needs. She isn't going to participate in that.

Alderbank

user1977 said:

"Mis-selling" isn't a general concept you can apply to normal retail transactions, the salesman isn't providing advice in the same sort of regulated way as applies to say, financial products. It's pretty normal to walk into a shop and be persuaded into buying something different from what you originally said you wanted. Or is your dad denying that he did end up agreeing to the contract he's now got?

Agreed, but signing up to a mobile phone contract isn't a 'normal retail transaction' like buying a loaf of bread or a bag of spuds. It is a regulated activity. The regulator is Ofcom who set conditions which all providers including EE have agreed to comply with.

General condition C8 'Sales and marketing of mobile communications services' does make specific reference to mis-selling.
EE say that as part of their compliance with these conditions 'we do not provide false or misleading information to deliberately deceive a customer when they are deciding to buy one of our products or plans, we do not harass or intimidate customers or put pressure on them to sign a contract and we do not exploit vulnerable customers, for example, the very old.'

https://ee.co.uk/content/dam/ee-help/help-pdfs/summary-of-gc8-obligations-for-website.pdf

When you go back to the shop to speak to the manager do ask about compliance with these Ofcom regulations. I believe that EE shop staff have to fill out and file a form to record the questions they have asked and the customer's replies to show they have complied with the regulations when selling a new contract. 
I am sure the manager will be able to resolve the problem for your dad.

unforeseen

How could you use the coverage issue when you are getting a new phone from the same provider that you currently have a PAYG sim from?

Nearlyold

Fleabag said:

But surely if he's legally entitled to cancel the agreement, they have to take the phone back. They don't sell phones (which is what he wanted to do) - they only offer them on contract. If he has the right to cancel the contract, they have no process available to them to sell him the phone.

I believe we also have a case to argue that he was mis-sold, and that his age, lack of technical know-how and failing hearing was the reason he was sold something he specifically didn't ask for (and told the salesman at the time that he didn't want or need a smartphone), but obviously using the CCA or the "coverage not what was expected" options would be immediate

Yes he does have the right to cancel the credit agreement if it's covered by the CCA, the European Consumer Credit Directive (in 2011 from memory) introduced a "14 day right of withdrawal" for Credit Agreements - this was incorporated into the UK CCA.

HOWEVER withdrawing from a Credit Agreement DOES NOT CANCEL the associated purchase - once you notify the lender you wish to withdraw from a credit agreement you then have 30 days to repay the lender the amount borrowed plus interest for the period the loan was outstanding. The purchase eg. the phone, car, furniture or whatever is unaffected and the seller does not have to take the item(s) back.

Manxman_in_exile

Alderbank said:

user1977 said:

"Mis-selling" isn't a general concept you can apply to normal retail transactions, the salesman isn't providing advice in the same sort of regulated way as applies to say, financial products. It's pretty normal to walk into a shop and be persuaded into buying something different from what you originally said you wanted. Or is your dad denying that he did end up agreeing to the contract he's now got?

Agreed, but signing up to a mobile phone contract isn't a 'normal retail transaction' like buying a loaf of bread or a bag of spuds. It is a regulated activity. The regulator is Ofcom who set conditions which all providers including EE have agreed to comply with.

General condition C8 'Sales and marketing of mobile communications services' does make specific reference to mis-selling.
EE say that as part of their compliance with these conditions 'we do not provide false or misleading information to deliberately deceive a customer when they are deciding to buy one of our products or plans, we do not harass or intimidate customers or put pressure on them to sign a contract and we do not exploit vulnerable customers, for example, the very old.'

https://ee.co.uk/content/dam/ee-help/help-pdfs/summary-of-gc8-obligations-for-website.pdf

When you go back to the shop to speak to the manager do ask about compliance with these Ofcom regulations. I believe that EE shop staff have to fill out and file a form to record the questions they have asked and the customer's replies to show they have complied with the regulations when selling a new contract. 
I am sure the manager will be able to resolve the problem for your dad.

@Fleabag -  when you go into the shop tomorrow press the manager on the above points from @Alderbank that I've put in bold.

In particular you need to stress that your father went into the shop and clearly explained what he required, but the sales assistant proceeded to ignore his stated requirements and sold him something that exceeded what he required - and presumably - was more expensive than was required to fulfil his stated needs.

You can try to incorporate the "our coverage doesn't meet your expectations" angle by arguing that he went in and explained he only said he wanted a cheap basic PAYG (or whatever) package and that's what he legitimately expected to be sold, but ended up being pressured into buying an all-singing all-dancing expensive one.  (I'm sure that isn't what the coverage bit was intended to mean, but nothing ventured... )

It may work or it may not - but nothing to lose by trying.

As others have said, make sure you keep cancelling the finance and cancelling the purchase clear in your mind as separate things.

Good luck.

Manxman_in_exile

MalMonroe said:

Fleabag said:

But surely if he's legally entitled to cancel the agreement, they have to take the phone back. They don't sell phones (which is what he wanted to do) - they only offer them on contract. If he has the right to cancel the contract, they have no process available to them to sell him the phone.

I believe we also have a case to argue that he was mis-sold, and that his age, lack of technical know-how and failing hearing was the reason he was sold something he specifically didn't ask for (and told the salesman at the time that he didn't want or need a smartphone), but obviously using the CCA or the "coverage not what was expected" options would be immediate

Please stop using age as an excuse for people not having any ability to make their own decisions. It's really irritating...

I have complained previously when posters have used the age of a parent (60) as an excuse for them making a bad decision.

But there's a big difference between 60 and 85.  Even between 70 and 85.

I am not at all irritated by somebody using an age of 85 in this way.  And that doesn't mean that I think everyone over the age of 80 is senile - but an unfortunately significant proportion of 85 yr olds are no longer in full possession of their former faculties.  It's a fact of life.

Fleabag

Manxman_in_exile said:

MalMonroe said:

Fleabag said:

But surely if he's legally entitled to cancel the agreement, they have to take the phone back. They don't sell phones (which is what he wanted to do) - they only offer them on contract. If he has the right to cancel the contract, they have no process available to them to sell him the phone.

I believe we also have a case to argue that he was mis-sold, and that his age, lack of technical know-how and failing hearing was the reason he was sold something he specifically didn't ask for (and told the salesman at the time that he didn't want or need a smartphone), but obviously using the CCA or the "coverage not what was expected" options would be immediate

Please stop using age as an excuse for people not having any ability to make their own decisions. It's really irritating...

I have complained previously when posters have used the age of a parent (60) as an excuse for them making a bad decision.

But there's a big difference between 60 and 85.  Even between 70 and 85.

I am not at all irritated by somebody using an age of 85 in this way.  And that doesn't mean that I think everyone over the age of 80 is senile - but an unfortunately significant proportion of 85 yr olds are no longer in full possession of their former faculties.  It's a fact of life.

Exactly. My Dad is NOT senile - he's an active and intelligent man who still is still a church organist and choirmaster and is more than proficient with music software he learned 20+ years ago, but he is out of his depth with these sort of technical issues. He doesn't understand the difference between 5g and 40gb of data. He didn't grasp that he was, essentially, being tied into an HP agreement (even if they find loopholes to avoid it being legally acknowledged as one). He is also a bit more trusting and easily coerced/conned than he once was. It is also a brutal fact that, at 85, a two year contract is not as advisable as it would be in one's younger years. Convincing an elderly person that a bells & whistles 2 year contract with 40gb of data he evidently won't use is absolutely not in his interests, but very much in the interests of the shop and the salesman. I believe his clear lack of understanding of the products and his trust in the company (and his belief that his loyal custom means anything at all) is reason to argue that age was a factor in him being sold an unsuitable product for his needs.

Fleabag

Manxman_in_exile said:

Alderbank said:

user1977 said:

"Mis-selling" isn't a general concept you can apply to normal retail transactions, the salesman isn't providing advice in the same sort of regulated way as applies to say, financial products. It's pretty normal to walk into a shop and be persuaded into buying something different from what you originally said you wanted. Or is your dad denying that he did end up agreeing to the contract he's now got?

Agreed, but signing up to a mobile phone contract isn't a 'normal retail transaction' like buying a loaf of bread or a bag of spuds. It is a regulated activity. The regulator is Ofcom who set conditions which all providers including EE have agreed to comply with.

General condition C8 'Sales and marketing of mobile communications services' does make specific reference to mis-selling.
EE say that as part of their compliance with these conditions 'we do not provide false or misleading information to deliberately deceive a customer when they are deciding to buy one of our products or plans, we do not harass or intimidate customers or put pressure on them to sign a contract and we do not exploit vulnerable customers, for example, the very old.'

https://ee.co.uk/content/dam/ee-help/help-pdfs/summary-of-gc8-obligations-for-website.pdf

When you go back to the shop to speak to the manager do ask about compliance with these Ofcom regulations. I believe that EE shop staff have to fill out and file a form to record the questions they have asked and the customer's replies to show they have complied with the regulations when selling a new contract. 
I am sure the manager will be able to resolve the problem for your dad.

@Fleabag -  when you go into the shop tomorrow press the manager on the above points from @Alderbank that I've put in bold.

In particular you need to stress that your father went into the shop and clearly explained what he required, but the sales assistant proceeded to ignore his stated requirements and sold him something that exceeded what he required - and presumably - was more expensive than was required to fulfil his stated needs.

You can try to incorporate the "our coverage doesn't meet your expectations" angle by arguing that he went in and explained he only said he wanted a cheap basic PAYG (or whatever) package and that's what he legitimately expected to be sold, but ended up being pressured into buying an all-singing all-dancing expensive one.  (I'm sure that isn't what the coverage bit was intended to mean, but nothing ventured... )

It may work or it may not - but nothing to lose by trying.

As others have said, make sure you keep cancelling the finance and cancelling the purchase clear in your mind as separate things.

Good luck.

Thank you, I had already saved that text from @Alderbank, as it is very pertinent to our argument. I did also get a very helpful Twitter reply from their customer service department this morning

"Thanks so much for getting back to me with those details. I completely understand why you are concerned and why you would like to help get this resolved for your dad. As the phone was taken out at at store it would be better for your Dad to speak to the manager to address the problem in this instance. The manager has the authority to take back the phone and remove the contract and this would be the quickest way to resolve this. If the manager advises they are not able to do this then your dad can escalate the issue with the regional area manager or through ourselves. You would be able to speak on his behalf in store, and with the account password you would also be able to speak to customer service or ourselves for further help. Would you be able to attend the appointment today and then let me know how you get on?"

I haven't used the ofcom conditions as yet, as it seemed that their CS dept were approaching it from that angle already. Rather than miss out anything or bring any emotions into the exchange, when we went in (a manager wasn't on duty), I shared my Twitter explanation and their reply with the salesman. His attitude changed dramatically (I assume he would rather not have a regional manager or HQ involved), kept the phone and will speak to his manager in the morning and ring me back. I expect a satisfactory resolution (and if not, we have the invitation to escalate). Our next actions will be to buy him a basic push button phone and switch both parents onto more competitive sim only deals (Mum would benefit from more data, as she has a year old smartphone and uses news & language sites a lot).

Thank you to all who have offered advice and support