Eyelife eye care subscription 17% increase

Bungly_2

Hi

In August I took out an eye care subscription with a local independent optician. It cost £18 a month and you are committed to it for 18 months. 

They have just advised that the price will be increasing to £21 a month. I was concerned about a 16.67% increase so double checked the terms. It says:

"Alteration of monthly fee

The monthly fee may be altered at any time, but you must be given at least 10 working days' notice of any increase. The net amount payable each month will also change according to any variation in discount available to you."

Is this a fair clause? It seems they could increase by any amount and I'd still be committed for the remaining time up to 18 months. 

I feel a 16.67% increase is not reasonable and if I had known it was to be this amount the plan was not value for money. 

Any thoughts?

Mark_d

There is nothing unfair about this clause...provided that there are also clauses about termination of the agreement if you're unhappy about a price rise, or clauses defining how much the price can increase by.

Bungly_2

Thanks for the reply. There is nothing about being able to cancel in these situations. I've attached the conditions

XRS200

Don't think this is insurance - more like a consumer rights issue

Bungly_2

Yes, I think you're right. I could not find where to put it and have now seen that option. Can an admin move it for me?

MSE_ForumTeam5

Moved as suggested

born_again

Bungly_2 said:

Thanks for the reply. There is nothing about being able to cancel in these situations. I've attached the conditions

Term 13 seems to cover it nicely.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

This is covered by the CRA under terms which may be unfair, notably:

14 A term which has the object or effect of giving the trader the discretion to decide the price payable under the contract after the consumer has become bound by it, where no price or method of determining the price is agreed when the consumer becomes bound.

15 A term which has the object or effect of permitting a trader to increase the price of goods, digital content or services without giving the consumer the right to cancel the contract if the final price is too high in relation to the price agreed when the contract was concluded.

The CMA has the following to say:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/450440/Unfair_Terms_Main_Guidance.pdf

Any purely discretionary right to set or vary a price after the consumer has become bound to pay is obviously objectionable. Paragraph 14 of the Grey List particularly highlights the potential unfairness of terms which have the effect of leaving the trader free to calculate or determine the price so that the consumer cannot work out in advance of entering the contract how much they will have to pay under it.

5.23.3 Any term which can be relied on as a basis for varying the price should set out clearly the circumstances in which a variation may occur, and the method of calculating the price variation, so that the consumer can foresee, on the basis of clear, intelligible criteria, the alterations that may be made and evaluate the practical implications for them. Similarly a price determination clause should clearly set out the information to enable the consumer to foresee what price will be payable depending on the circumstances. 

A degree of flexibility in pricing is more likely to be achieved fairly in the

following ways:

 Where the level and timing of any price increases are specified (within

narrow limits if not precisely) they may effectively form part of the

agreed price. As such they are acceptable, provided the details are

clear and adequately drawn to the consumer’s attention before entering

into the contract in a way which allows the consumer to foresee and

evaluate the practical implications on them of the variation.

Terms which permit increases linked to a relevant published price index

such as the Retail Prices Index are likely to be acceptable, as Part 2 of

Schedule 2, paragraph 25 of the Act indicates, subject to the same

proviso as above.

Any kind of variation clause may in principle be fair provided that, in line

with what is said in paragraph 5.21.8 above, consumers are genuinely

free to escape its effects by ending the contract, and that transparency

criteria have been met so that they are able to make an informed choice

whether to enter the contract in the first place. 

IMO their terms fail to meet this and they can't impose any price increase during the period of the contract. You could advise them their terms (both 8 and 13) allowing them to vary the contract is unfair and so they have to stick to the original agreement. Pragmatically is it worth bad feelings for £3 a month over someone performing something important such as eye care (not that this makes their actions acceptable of course but it is worth considering)   

born_again said:

Term 13 seems to cover it nicely.

Not even close to doing so for prices, or anything else they want to change  

Bungly_2

Wow, thanks for the detailed reply.