How to end mobile contract for failure to meet contractual standards?

oldernonethewiser

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

d123 said:

tightauldgit said:

I km1500 said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

Has the service changed recently or have you moved? it seems a bit odd that you would raise an issue of poor coverage 6 months into a contract. Generally you would have had a 14 day cooling off period on the contract where you could have changed your mind, 6 months into the contract I think things are more restricted. 

You'd have to look at the terms and see exactly what you were promised but I absolutely agree that on the face of it if you can't access data at your home address then it should be a breach of contract. Whether it is or not legally though is a different question

I think the options you have would be either to keep plugging away at them in the hope they see sense. Or you look to see if there is an option to reduce your contract to something cheaper and write it off. 

If you want to push the matter then you could write to them and tell them that you consider the lack of data to be a breach of contract and you will no longer be making payments on the contract until data is reinstated, cancel your payment method and then see if they come after you for the debt. 

Or if you want a less risky approach, cancel the contract and pay the exit fee under protest and then raise a small claims action to recover it.

Looking at the advice offered online then you need to look and see if your contract offers a network guarantee - if it does you're on stronger ground, if not then I think it's a shakier position. 

Other ways to exit the contract? - if they raise the prices you may well have the option to terminate, or you might be able to get another provider to buy you out.

I would doubt that very much.  The companies do not provide coverage everywhere so unless the OP has, in writing, a guarantee that EE will work in their home then unfortunately they are unlikely to get any joy pursuing this.

Did you read the next sentence I wrote? 

As I said I believe that it SHOULD be a breach of contract, but whether it is or not is a different question. 

Why do you think it should be a breach of contract?

Because if you contract to provide a service (data for your phone) and you are unable to provide that service (your network is incapable of providing date for the phone) then I believe it should be considered a breach of contract. 

If a painter came round to paint my room but didn't do the ceiling because he didn't own a ladder I would say that should be a breach of contract. And saying 'well i didn't guarantee I could reach the ceiling' shouldn't really change that. 

I appreciate the law may say differently but if so then the law is flawed on this point in my opinion. 

I think there's a lot of things in the mobile/telephone/broadband space that are just downright dodgy practice and this would seem to be one of them. 

the problem is that all mobile companies are perfectly capable of providing data services but they are not capable of providing data services everywhere

this is despite the name of EE being everything everywhere!

it's not a breach of contract because they have never claimed or warranted to be able to provide data in every single part of the UK.

They contracted to provide a service to an individual resident at a given address and they are unable to provide the service to that address. 

TBH, I don't think any mobile phone network contracts to provide a service at any specific given address, they contract to provide a mobile service over (a not very well defined) xx% of the area of the country.

They contract with an individual resident at a given address to provide a service where it is 100% reasonable to expect that the service will be used at that address by the consumer. Whether it's legal or not, to try to hold someone to a contract where they can't provide the service to that address is utter BS. 

There is no contract to provide coverage at a specific address.  

With some easy research anyone can check coverage before entering into a contract. 

You really can't - it varies so much to a specific location. And if it was so simple to check then EE really should flag up at the time that the address on the contract has rubbish coverage. 

Mind you none of this debate helps the OP so I'll just leave it as agreeing to disagreeing. 

You really can.  Not by checking coverage maps online as they are not accurate but by putting a physical SIM into a phone and seeing what the coverage is actually like.  I do this when and if I change providers.

savergrant

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

d123 said:

tightauldgit said:

I km1500 said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

Has the service changed recently or have you moved? it seems a bit odd that you would raise an issue of poor coverage 6 months into a contract. Generally you would have had a 14 day cooling off period on the contract where you could have changed your mind, 6 months into the contract I think things are more restricted. 

You'd have to look at the terms and see exactly what you were promised but I absolutely agree that on the face of it if you can't access data at your home address then it should be a breach of contract. Whether it is or not legally though is a different question

I think the options you have would be either to keep plugging away at them in the hope they see sense. Or you look to see if there is an option to reduce your contract to something cheaper and write it off. 

If you want to push the matter then you could write to them and tell them that you consider the lack of data to be a breach of contract and you will no longer be making payments on the contract until data is reinstated, cancel your payment method and then see if they come after you for the debt. 

Or if you want a less risky approach, cancel the contract and pay the exit fee under protest and then raise a small claims action to recover it.

Looking at the advice offered online then you need to look and see if your contract offers a network guarantee - if it does you're on stronger ground, if not then I think it's a shakier position. 

Other ways to exit the contract? - if they raise the prices you may well have the option to terminate, or you might be able to get another provider to buy you out.

I would doubt that very much.  The companies do not provide coverage everywhere so unless the OP has, in writing, a guarantee that EE will work in their home then unfortunately they are unlikely to get any joy pursuing this.

Did you read the next sentence I wrote? 

As I said I believe that it SHOULD be a breach of contract, but whether it is or not is a different question. 

Why do you think it should be a breach of contract?

Because if you contract to provide a service (data for your phone) and you are unable to provide that service (your network is incapable of providing date for the phone) then I believe it should be considered a breach of contract. 

If a painter came round to paint my room but didn't do the ceiling because he didn't own a ladder I would say that should be a breach of contract. And saying 'well i didn't guarantee I could reach the ceiling' shouldn't really change that. 

I appreciate the law may say differently but if so then the law is flawed on this point in my opinion. 

I think there's a lot of things in the mobile/telephone/broadband space that are just downright dodgy practice and this would seem to be one of them. 

the problem is that all mobile companies are perfectly capable of providing data services but they are not capable of providing data services everywhere

this is despite the name of EE being everything everywhere!

it's not a breach of contract because they have never claimed or warranted to be able to provide data in every single part of the UK.

They contracted to provide a service to an individual resident at a given address and they are unable to provide the service to that address. 

TBH, I don't think any mobile phone network contracts to provide a service at any specific given address, they contract to provide a mobile service over (a not very well defined) xx% of the area of the country.

They contract with an individual resident at a given address to provide a service where it is 100% reasonable to expect that the service will be used at that address by the consumer. Whether it's legal or not, to try to hold someone to a contract where they can't provide the service to that address is utter BS. 

There is no contract to provide coverage at a specific address.  

With some easy research anyone can check coverage before entering into a contract. 

You really can't - it varies so much to a specific location. And if it was so simple to check then EE really should flag up at the time that the address on the contract has rubbish coverage. 

Mind you none of this debate helps the OP so I'll just leave it as agreeing to disagreeing. 

You really can.  Not by checking coverage maps online as they are not accurate but by putting a physical SIM into a phone and seeing what the coverage is actually like.  I do this when and if I change providers.

With some providers it is. However not all providers will send out a sim, and saying 'they run on such and such' isn't a reliable guide as not all providers have access to all bandwidths.

PHK

tightauldgit said:

d123 said:

tightauldgit said:

I km1500 said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

oldernonethewiser said:

tightauldgit said:

Has the service changed recently or have you moved? it seems a bit odd that you would raise an issue of poor coverage 6 months into a contract. Generally you would have had a 14 day cooling off period on the contract where you could have changed your mind, 6 months into the contract I think things are more restricted. 

You'd have to look at the terms and see exactly what you were promised but I absolutely agree that on the face of it if you can't access data at your home address then it should be a breach of contract. Whether it is or not legally though is a different question

I think the options you have would be either to keep plugging away at them in the hope they see sense. Or you look to see if there is an option to reduce your contract to something cheaper and write it off. 

If you want to push the matter then you could write to them and tell them that you consider the lack of data to be a breach of contract and you will no longer be making payments on the contract until data is reinstated, cancel your payment method and then see if they come after you for the debt. 

Or if you want a less risky approach, cancel the contract and pay the exit fee under protest and then raise a small claims action to recover it.

Looking at the advice offered online then you need to look and see if your contract offers a network guarantee - if it does you're on stronger ground, if not then I think it's a shakier position. 

Other ways to exit the contract? - if they raise the prices you may well have the option to terminate, or you might be able to get another provider to buy you out.

I would doubt that very much.  The companies do not provide coverage everywhere so unless the OP has, in writing, a guarantee that EE will work in their home then unfortunately they are unlikely to get any joy pursuing this.

Did you read the next sentence I wrote? 

As I said I believe that it SHOULD be a breach of contract, but whether it is or not is a different question. 

Why do you think it should be a breach of contract?

Because if you contract to provide a service (data for your phone) and you are unable to provide that service (your network is incapable of providing date for the phone) then I believe it should be considered a breach of contract. 

If a painter came round to paint my room but didn't do the ceiling because he didn't own a ladder I would say that should be a breach of contract. And saying 'well i didn't guarantee I could reach the ceiling' shouldn't really change that. 

I appreciate the law may say differently but if so then the law is flawed on this point in my opinion. 

I think there's a lot of things in the mobile/telephone/broadband space that are just downright dodgy practice and this would seem to be one of them. 

the problem is that all mobile companies are perfectly capable of providing data services but they are not capable of providing data services everywhere

this is despite the name of EE being everything everywhere!

it's not a breach of contract because they have never claimed or warranted to be able to provide data in every single part of the UK.

They contracted to provide a service to an individual resident at a given address and they are unable to provide the service to that address. 

TBH, I don't think any mobile phone network contracts to provide a service at any specific given address, they contract to provide a mobile service over (a not very well defined) xx% of the area of the country.

They contract with an individual resident at a given address to provide a service where it is 100% reasonable to expect that the service will be used at that address by the consumer. Whether it's legal or not, to try to hold someone to a contract where they can't provide the service to that address is utter BS. 

They don't. The contract is to allow the subscriber access to the network for a certain number of minutes, texts and data.

By its nature a mobile device is mobile and not for use at one particular address. All contracts say they don't guarantee coverage or a fault free service.