Where do I stand on this?

the GALL

Any advice on this would be appreciated
I bought a mobile phone and entered into a contract for E60/18 months in Aug. I bought the phone over the web and rang into the company to confirm details. when I was talking to the Rep I was informed that I would not receive the phone until I gave my bank details. I queried this and was told that this was policy and all monies must be paid by direct debit if the contract was to be taken out over the internet.
I supplied my details to the Rep(bank acc/sort code). At the start of Sept I received a text message from the company to pay my bill within 3 days or your service will be ceased. I rang the company and asked them what the text message was all about. Their Rep to me I was an automated message that goes out if bill are late in being paid. I explained to the girl that my account was to be settled by Direct Debit as required by all accounts opened over the web(their policy). Their Rep informed me again that It was an automated message and sometimes happens. She asked me had I given the correct details, so we checked them and they were correct. So I checked my account and noticed that the company had not called/asked for them off my bank. Their rep instructed me to pay the bill in the post office, I informed her that I would not, as stated by their conditions of contract, all monies owed must be paid by Direct Debit if phone was taken out over the web. We came to the agreement that the company would collect double on the next bill(E120). This we agreed with, I asked the rep was the matter resolved and she informed me that it was and the text message was and automated message on all accounts not paid and to disregard it. Again I informed her that she had not requested the funds and therefore I could not pay the bill by the method stated to me when I initially took out the contract.
I received a second text message instructing me to pay my bill. This I ignored as I was instructed that this was an automated message sent out the company to all accounts not paid and the guarantee that the issue was resolved and the funds would be collected on the double at the next bill(E120).
On the 12 Sept the company denied me service. When I rang them they informed me that because I had not paid my bill I was in breech of contractI asked the girl to bring up the records of the last conversation I had with the company. She brought them up and still insisted that I was in breech of contract and the fact that the bill wasn't paid they were in the right. (Remember, direct debit, if phone taken out over the internet and that the company never requested/call for the money from my bank account). After an argument she said she would turn the phone back on, but the company were in the right to bar my number as I hadn't paid the bill, I informed her that I set up the direct debit and they hadn't asked for it so I couldn't pay the bill, again she asked me to pay the bill in the post office I told her I wouldn't be doing this as they had made an issue out of Direct Debits when I initially got the phone.
I feel that is company is in breech of contract by
1. Not collecting monies owed at the stated time
2. Denying me the use of the phone

I have been onto the company and they have informed me that they can 'Cut' me off if a bill is not paid or if they suspect that I cannot pay my bill. I find this quite insulting at no time have I refused to pay my bill. With all the Reps I talked to they have all agreed that the 'mistake' is on their end. They have offered me E242.(50ish) compensation(they informed me that the money is a gesture of good will E242:eek::eek:) which I have refused (It's not the money at this stage, it's their attitude. Which is, even though their system is at fault/wrong, it's my fault).

So has anyone any thought on this?

Mod, Please don't point me in the direction of Vodafone, O2. or 3, as this is where most of the problem started.
Cheers
Gall

seamus

My thoughts on this are that **** happens. People mess up, automated systems screw up and sometimes you end up being inconvenienced by it. The T's & C's of most of these contracts state that they can refuse service if your accounts goes into arrears. Other people have posted similar stories, but the contract is fairly tight in that it doesn't really matter if you've made a payment plan or whatever, sometimes the automated systems will cut you off, and the contract covers this. They're technically correct in saying that the contract alllows them to stop your service.

If you disagree with this, then read the contract that you signed.

The company in question have made you an offer of four months' free service for the hassle caused, which is well inside the realms of reasonable IMO. You had no service for a couple of hours at most, according to your story, so the inconvenience to you was a couple of phone calls, two text messages and a couple of hours without service? Big deal.
I would take their offer and forget about it. It's a simple mistake, this kind of thing happens, stop getting stressed out about a very minor thing, take the compensation and move on IMHO.

MagicMarker

Tell them to remove your d/d details and you'll pay in the PO/online in future, it sounds like this is what you wanted to do in the first place anyway.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

the GALL

Hi Seamus

I agree Sh1t does happen and as I said I accepted the rep's initial excuse about it being an automated response, and I also accepted her assurance that it was resolved and that she could collect the bill on the double. What I want to know is are they in breech of contract because
1. they havn't adhered to there terms of contract. re the direct debit
2. they cut me off because their system is in the wrong, not mine.

I know they wouldn't have cut me off if the bill was paid, but they gave me a date that they would collect the money and they didn't.
Cheers
Gall

crazyderk

Hey,

I used to work in the mobile phone biz, so I'll throw in my 2cents, I think there's a bit of an issue on both sides here, but before I explain them let me give you a little insight into how signing people up on contract works.

When I was signing people up before, it was in a store and I had the option on the system to pay by DD, CCDD and cash. now more than likely if someone asked to pay by cash they were asked for a deposit thus the sale would more than likely be lost so therefore I never really offered people that option of cash

I cant really comment on the whole you have to pay by direct debit while ordering online, as I don't know the company and they may have different procedure for signing up online.

I know the mobile phone operators really really prefer DD as its much much cheaper for them, (I think when I worked for a company they said that 80% pay by DD and it takes 1 person to collect them all and the other 20% of customers pay by cash and it takes a team of 12 to collect from them) so you can see their reasoning behind it.

The sales person you dealt with was just following procedure by asking for DD details and 95% of the time DD details go through fine, however the other 5% of the time they don't, your case is clearly in the 5% category.

The customer service person I will admit gave you some right and wrong info, I have seen where mobile phone operators have collected a second bill and I have seen where some have not.

ultimately regardless of payment method you have a responsibility to pay the bill by its due date or service will be cut off this would be in the T&C's of your contract, I think you were a bit foolish not to pay your bill in the post office or bank and to deny any other payment option other than DD because thats what you were told from the sales person, and because of it you have now been cut off, which they have a right to do.

So what are your options? quit moaning pay the bill and get switched back on, or dont wait another month for the DD to be set up when it gets paid twice get switched back on or take the gamble that the DD wont be set up again wait another month up to you, personally there are bigger things in life to worry about, but that's just me, and yes I know your response ive heard it a million times, its the principle, its the point of it blah blah, read my options again!

sorry to be blunt but build a bridge.....

seamus

the GALL wrote: »

1. they havn't adhered to there terms of contract. re the direct debit

The contract probably says nothing about direct debit. The terms of the contract wasn't that they would take payment by DD, but rather that the contract would only be offered if you would consent to DD. Fine line, I know, but if you read the contract you'll find that it probably says nothing about the provider having to take payment by DD.

As said above, the responsibility for ensuring that the bill is paid falls onto you (standard contract law), and although you gave direct debit details and could argue that this responsibility was taken from you, in reality that's not the case. It would still be your responsibility to ensure that the bill is being paid, regardless of payment method.

2. they cut me off because their system is in the wrong, not mine.

They don't seem to be disputing that, they're even offering you compensation. However, they were entitled to cut you off, regardless of who was in the wrong.

Read your contract, it'll all be in there.

whippet

in response to the OP's initial question ..'Where do I stand on this?'

Well in my opinion you have done well out of it. The company admitted a mistake and has offered you 4 months free service or 22% of you contract for nothing.

As other has said, sh1t happens from time to time and generally when it happens it has a habit of repeating itself, especially with multinationals and complex billing systems.

I would like to ask what exactly you want from your provider now?

the GALL

I would like to ask what exactly you want from your provider now?

I want out of the contract I agreed to.

seamus

the GALL wrote: »

I want out of the contract I agreed to.

Then you will need to read that contract to see if they have broken it. Nobody here will be able to tell you if this is the case, as we do not have the text of your contract.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

MagicMarker

TBH I'd want out of the contract too if I signed up to pay €60 a month for 18 months.

whippet

the GALL wrote: »

I want out of the contract I agreed to.

why? You obviously signed up for a contract as it was what you wanted.

Unless they change the actual terms of the contract or have an issue of non-performance you have no resource to get 'out of the contract'

The billing issue was exactly that. They have rectified the problem and offered compensation. Your service was briefly suspended as your account was in arrears (as per the contract).

Has anything else fundamentally changed with regards to the contract? or do you just have some buyer's remorse and decided to use this as leverage to get out of the 18 month contract?

foggy_lad

the GALL wrote: »

I would like to ask what exactly you want from your provider now?

I want out of the contract I agreed to.

Check the notifications page on the phone company's website regularly as any change to your contract even a change which may benefit you will present you with an automatic opt out without penalty if you do not agree to the change, sometimes these notifications are hidden away on the websites but they are there.

jor el

With regard to breech of contract, it's highly unlikely that paying by direct debit is a part of the contract (though you'll have to read this yourself to see if that's the case), but what is absolutely certain is that you paying the bill will be part of it. By refusing to pay, you are in breech of contract. They may also be in breech, by their actions or lack there of, but you can be 100% certain that you are. Their failure to honour the agreement you made on the initial call is probably not a breech, because that agreement won't be part of the actual contract either.

the GALL wrote: »

Their rep instructed me to pay the bill in the post office, I informed her that I would not

the GALL wrote: »

I informed her that I set up the direct debit and they hadn't asked for it so I couldn't pay the bill, again she asked me to pay the bill in the post office I told her I wouldn't be doing this as they had made an issue out of Direct Debits when I initially got the phone.

the GALL wrote: »

I find this quite insulting at no time have I refused to pay my bill.

You seem to be at odds with yourself here because you have said that you refused to pay the bill on two separate occasions. They are perfectly right to accuse of refusing to pay it, because that's exactly what you are doing. It seems to me that you're just being awkward out of stubbornness now. Why not just pay the bill, like a normal person, and be done with it.

I really fail to see what issue there is here. They made a mistake, they admit to this, they offered you compensation for the mistake, yet you still refuse to give any leeway for that mistake.

the GALL

Hi Jor el

Paying by direct debit is in the contract, I refused to pay in the post office because the company was adamant that I could not get the phone unless I signed up to a direct debit. Further to this, I have paid all monies owed to the company.
I know it looks like I'm being awkward, But I'm a strong believer that If you put your name to something you stick to it.
I entered into the deal on the companies terms, before the contract was into it's second bill the company had moved the goal post, twice. I want a service that I can rely on and that does what it says it's going to do.
I'm not looking for an argument with anyone here but I am a bit surprised by people attitudes about take the money and let it be,on a consumer issues forum.

tfitzgerald

The gall of him to want out of the contract

the GALL

tfitzgerald wrote: »

The gall of him to want out of the contract

Yea the Feckin cheek of me

cookie1977

I think consumer issues is about whats fair and reasonable. Not about catching either party out on any and all issues.

the GALL

Agreed cookie,

I made an offer to the company to resolve the issue(this is before I requested the contract be void) they refused my offer. At all stages they have admitted that it's their system that's at fault. I have asked their Rep to explain the system/logic to me and they can't.
I get the bit about the bill not being settled and barring the number, but I don't get the bit about not collecting the money after they made the issue about the direct debit and then insisting that I'm at fault, they even sent me a bill telling me what day they were going to collect it.
When I asked her about it she said sometimes it takes a month sometimes it takes longer, its not like they hadn't got enough time to get their system ready.

cookie1977

I read your first post but honestly I think you'd get this sorted quickly to your satisfaction if you posted about it on the vodafone section/forum or PM'd a vodafone rep

the GALL

I agree with that aswell cookie

But I like to know where I stand on this before I (really)throw the rattle out of the pram

cookie1977

A lot of the law is to do with fair and reasonable too. Hence why i said that. I think if you go and approach vodafone on here with your original proposal which they agreed to (double take on the DD) and see what the reps can organise. Their compensation sounded pretty fair to me and the "gesture of good will" is standard practice across the industry. it avoids them taking full blame (whether it's their fault or not).

Personally speaking, I think asking them to remove you from contract in light of their offer is a little excessive as errors do happen. But if you feel that is what you're entitled too I'd still go and discuss this with the reps on vodafone. Legally I dont think any one here can tell you for sure where you stand.

the GALL

I thought I was being reasonable.