Phone & Broadband Contract Query

DUBintheSTICKS

Recently (end of September) my household phone and broadband contract with a provider was up. I was looking to shop around and maybe move provider.

Two weeks ago my wife took a cold call from the providers sales team with regard to a 'savings to be made'. She agreed to a new 12 month contract after the sales pitch.

This bill is in my name solely and paid by direct debit from my own account not a joint account.

My query is can my wife give permission/authorisation to a new contact given she is not the named account holder or named on the bank account?

I have contacted the provider and they have said if she was asked 'Are you authorised.....' that the contact is correct!!

They are going to listen back to the call and will cancel if it was not done directly (though it will take 5 days to listen back to!!!!!)

How would they enforce this contract on me seeing as I never agreed to it??? The break out/cancellation fee is €500.

Bepolite

You may be able to break the contract within 14 days anyway. I suggest doing so anyway (write to them today if within 14 days).

Without knowing the specifics, it's difficult to tell you what will happen. They will enforce the contract in the courts if they enforce it at all. Various arguments exist on both sides for whether or not it would be valid, again it would be dependent on the circumstances.

Cabaal

Provided your wife is not named as a contact on the account and what you say is 100% true about this then the provider broke the data protection act by modifying your account as they were not speaking to the account holder, the contract is void for this reason.

Asking if your wife is authorized to act on your behalf is utter nonsense,

Your wife must be named on the account as a authorized person. If she is not named on your account on your providers systems then she cannot in anyway discuss any of the account details.

If the provider provided any details to your wife from the account and she is not listed as a authorized person on your account on their systems then they very much broke the data protection act.

DUBintheSTICKS

Unfortunately I am outside the 14 days as I was busy with work and never got around to it.

I am waiting to hear back from them after they have listened back to the call with my wife.

I fail to see how they could enforce the contract in the courts, I am the account holder yet I did not give my permission or authorisation to a new contract.

DUBintheSTICKS

Cabaal wrote: »

Provided your wife is not named as a contact on the account and what you say is 100% true about this then the provider broke the data protection act by modifying your account as they were not speaking to the account holder, the contract is void for this reason.

Asking if your wife is authorized to act on your behalf is utter nonsense,

Your wife must be named on the account as a authorized person. If she is not named on your account on your providers systems then she cannot in anyway discuss any of the account details.

If the provider provided any details to your wife from the account and she is not listed as a authorized person on your account on their systems then they very much broke the data protection act.

This was very much my train of thought on the matter, I don't believe my bank details were discussed as they had them on file from previous contract and my wife wouldn't know them.

Cabaal

DUBintheSTICKS wrote: »

This was very much my train of thought on the matter, I don't believe my bank details were discussed as they had them on file from previous contract and my wife wouldn't know them.

They don't have to discuss bank details,
If they even discussed what packages your account already has they are still in the wrong.

Its not much different to me calling your provider and claiming I'm authorised to deal with the account, they should never talk to me or anyone else unless they pass security checks.

Given it was a female voice when they spoke to your wife they very clearly knew it wasn't a male and as such it was extremely unlikely to be you so she could not have fulfilled all security checks.

Cabaal

Veronica Unimportant Surfboard wrote: »

If your wife confirmed she was authorised I think it stands that as your wife she acted as your agent.

Nonsense,
There are only two instances when his wife can act on his behalf when dealing with the company:
1 - She is actually named on the account.

2 - The op has supplied a power of attorney to the company which was signed by him stating she can act on his behalf in relation to his account.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Cabaal wrote: »

Nonsense,
There are only two instances when his wife can act on his behalf when dealing with the company:
1 - She is actually named on the account.

2 - The op has supplied a power of attorney to the company which was signed by him stating she can act on his behalf in relation to his account.

I deleted this before you replied (or probably as you replied) as I remembered a similar event in the past and reconsidered.

Bepolite

Cabaal wrote: »

Nonsense,
There are only two instances when his wife can act on his behalf when dealing with the company:
1 - She is actually named on the account.

2 - The op has supplied a power of attorney to the company which was signed by him stating she can act on his behalf in relation to his account.

While I'm sure you have good authority for believing this is true. There are a number of Telcos that don't follow the regulations as you state them. Now they could be wrong of course but I'm doubtful their legal departments are just being ignored by sales.