Calling Legal Eagles

Blacktemplar

Need a bit of advice chaps (and chapesses)....

Teenage son took a 24-month contract out with Carphone warehouse that ended in August last year. From about March he was bombarded with "you can upgrade your phone 3 months before your contract ends" messages, so naturally he wanted a better phone and in late May we went in and did just that.

So far so good.

Wind forward to yesterday, he's now working part-time and wants his own contract (previous one was in my name) so we go back in to Carphone undr the impression that his previous contract had ended last August and he could take a new one out.

Should've known better.

It transpires that when you "upgrade" you are effectively taking out a new contract which runs from the point at which you take the new phone, so in this case 27 months from end May 2010, and the next time he can "upgrade" is May 2012 :evil:

Back in May we were only given the usual Carphone printed receipt, with the customary "light" printing. I checked it last night and fair enough, in small text near the bottom (mixed in with a load of other gubbins) it says "minimum contract period 24 months". On the T's & C's on the back (which you need a microscope to read) it says the contract cannot be cancelled. However, at no time were we actually advised by the sales person that we were effectively entering into an entirely new 24-month contract with the "upgrade" phone. Had we known that, we wouldn't have renewed as there were better deals to be had.

My question is this - do we have a leg to stand on legally? The only thing I could think of was "mis-selling of a product or service" but as it's my word against theirs I have my doubts as to whether it would make the slightest bit of difference. The laugh is he'd be happy to take on a new 24-month contract with them as the current deals are good.....

Apologies for the rambling post, but would appreciate views from the assembled might of the forum.

Thanks.

CiB

I'll have a go then.

Contracts like this example do have a dubious standing legally. From my memories of the legal fellow on Jimmy Young's show and progs like You & Yours etc, the contract has to be clearly explained, esp if there are significant changes to an existing contract. Extending it by another two years probably counts as significant.

I reckon you need proper legal advice. Try the CAB [not CiB], or get Spen on here to have a better stab than I can. Legally though I'd bet that Carphone Warehouse are on a sticky wicket with this sort of thing, if it is as you've described.

Zachariah

Your son is lucky to have received a valuable lesson so early in life - always read the small print!

clarkey cat

have a look at the Ofcom document "Guidance on unfair terms in contracts for
communications services". a minimum cointract period is a core term and as such should be prominent and transparent etc. otherwise it is unfair and unenforceable against a consumer.

Good luck though.

bigmat

Why would they give you a brand new phone 3 months before your contract expires if they weren't extending the contract? And 24 months is pretty much standard these days isn't it? No leg to stand on I fear...

dhope

Hrm, when starting to read this I assumed that you expected the new 24 month contract to start in May 2010 when he renewed, rather than Aug 2010, thus ending in May 2012 rather than Aug 2012.

If you expected them to just give him a free phone in May with no strings attached then I can see why you're disappointed but I don't think the expectation was ever reasonable. My common sense and not in any way legally informed opinion would be to take this as a lesson to read the small print and that if it looks too good to be true then it likely is.

lost_in_thought

dhope wrote:

Hrm, when starting to read this I assumed that you expected the new 24 month contract to start in May 2010 when he renewed, rather than Aug 2010, thus ending in May 2010 rather than Aug 2012.

If you expected them to just give him a free phone in May with no strings attached then I can see why you're disappointed but I don't think the expectation was ever reasonable. My common sense and not in any way legally informed opinion would be to take this as a lesson to read the small print and that if it looks too good to be true then it likely is.

+1

Blacktemplar

Alas, 'twas as I expected.

Legless.

Still, as a matter of principle it should be made clearer to customers what they're signing up for.

UndercoverElephant

Ring them up, be polite but tell them that you've taken advice* and have been told that as they didn't mention the term of the contract, they have effectively mis-sold you. You should have a right to be informed of the major features of anything you are signing up for, especially if you don't need to sign anything, just agree over the phone. If you didn't have to sign the contract and send it back, then you should also point out that silence does not amount to acceptance under contract law.

Stand by your guns and they may let you out of it as a "gesture of good-will".

*They don't need to know that the advice was from some random bloke on t'internets.

mudcow007

true story

i was with O2 many years ago, came to the end of my contract and told them i was leaving to go to another provider, the following week a spanking new phone arrived. strange...i phoned them an told them an they said oh just send it back

i mentioned this on a forum i use to frequent, when one of the other users told me (and sent me a link) that if a company sends you an item that you didnt request it can be seen as a gift.

so i kept the phone. an never heard another thing from O2.

i think i sold it on fleabay for about 300 clams

snooks

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Ring them up, be polite but tell them that you've taken advice* and have been told that as they didn't mention the term of the contract, they have effectively mis-sold you. You should have a right to be informed of the major features of anything you are signing up for, especially if you don't need to sign anything, just agree over the phone. If you didn't have to sign the contract and send it back, then you should also point out that silence does not amount to acceptance under contract law.

Stand by your guns and they may let you out of it as a "gesture of good-will".

*They don't need to know that the advice was from some random bloke on t'internets.

They may point out the OP had a 14 day cooling off period, and 10 months is a tad late to start looking at the small print.

@Blacktemplar are you sure there was nothing in the literature that your son was sent that mentioned a new contract? Really sure? :?

spen666

Blacktemplar - just seen this thread and your conclusion thereon.

so as the matter seems to be resolved, let me just deliver my fee note to you


to perusing & considering the tricky legal issue of blacktemplar junior v Carphone Warehouse, to considering all relevant legislation and caselaw my fee is £2346 inclusive of VAT, but discounted to £2000 plus VAT


Cash only please

greg66_tri_v2.0

What did you think you were signing up to in May?

Let me preface that: I would have thought most people understand how mobile phone contracts work: you pay a few hundred quid for the handset and a fee for airtime. The few hundred quid for the handset is either paid up front (eg you buy an unlocked phone for lots of hundred quid, and then buy airtime as and when you need it without a contract) or over time (eg you pay £59 for the same phone, but are locked into 24 months of contract, and each month you're paying off the handset and paying for airtime).

So, you get to the end of your contract, and the phoneco offer your the newest shiny phone for £59. Did you really think you'd paid off handset #1 over 21 months, and you'd be able to pay off handset #2 over the last three months of your contract?

The lesson from this is to be the buyer. Never allow yourself to be sold to. Phone companies offer you deals with are lucrative to them, but have the thinnest possible layer of sugar coating to attract you.

hatbeard

you can still usually change the tariff on the contract without extending it further. so if you have a younger child or the wife doesn't have a mobile you could change to the cheapest tariff and just use it for the duration of the contract which would allow him to get his own phone elsewhere.

not ideal but a workable solution.

Blacktemplar

I stand duly chastened in the harsh light of this forum's luminaries. :oops:

I shall of course send spen666 his discounted fee in Libyan Dinars (exchange rate is a bit all over the place just now, so hope you have room for a 40ft container at Casa Spen) - I presume non-sequential notes.

Thanks to all for their variously sympathetic, constructive, scathing and "fnarr, fnarr" responses Let's face it, when confronted with "free" bling how many of us actually read the (very) small print? (Don't answer that, it was rhetorical)

I will try to appeal to Talk-Talk's sense of justice and fairness, failing that I shall roll about on the showroom floor, wailing, crying and tearing what's left of my hair out until they give in through embarrassment. Or call the Police.

redvee

mudcow007 wrote:

true story

i was with O2 many years ago, came to the end of my contract and told them i was leaving to go to another provider, the following week a spanking new phone arrived. strange...i phoned them an told them an they said oh just send it back

i mentioned this on a forum i use to frequent, when one of the other users told me (and sent me a link) that if a company sends you an item that you didnt request it can be seen as a gift.

so i kept the phone. an never heard another thing from O2.

i think i sold it on fleabay for about 300 clams

This is called unsolicited goods

Under the Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, (as amended) it is an offence to demand payment for goods known to be unsolicited, in other words, they were sent to a person without any prior request made by them or on their behalf.

Someone who receives goods in these circumstances may retain them as an unconditional gift, and does not have to pay for or return any unwanted goods. Anyone who receives a demand for payment for unsolicited goods should report the matter to their local Trading Standards Department.

However, in the case of unsolicited goods received before 1 November 2000, the recipient is required to give notice to the sender to collect them within 30 days, or otherwise to wait for 6 months, before being able to treat the goods as their own property.

Zachariah

<Columbo> Oh one more thing - You said your son was a teenager but didn't elaborate. If he's under 18, he can't actually enter into a mobile phone contract!</Columbo> You didn't sign up to it on his behalf, did you?

dhope

Zachariah wrote:

<Columbo> Oh one more thing - You said your son was a teenager but didn't elaborate. If he's under 18, he can't actually enter into a mobile phone contract!</Columbo> You didn't sign up to it on his behalf, did you?

he's now working part-time and wants his own contract (previous one was in my name) ...

Columbo, you're fired.

Zachariah

It's all been downhill for me since the original series.

shouldbeinbed

Talk talk are a commercial company they don't have a sense of fairness & justice. TBH I'm struggling to see how you've been unfairly or unjustly treated with this one. I suggest their response will be 3 pronged

1) why on earth would we send you hundreds of pounds worth of new phone totally free in return for 3months contract

2) on what basis do you think we've been supporting your continued use of this phone/number/network after the 24 months you refer to.

3) you have continued without coercion to avail yourself of these services which means either you have understood your contract extended & if you didn't ask then, how is that our fault, you're a big boy now, stop trying it on. Or you have sought to defraud us by deliberately continuing to use our service when you believed the contract to have ended, our lawyers will be in touch.

Blacktemplar

shouldbeinbed wrote:

TBH I'm struggling to see how you've been unfairly or unjustly treated with this one. blah... blah... blah.

Actually, I never said I was "unfairly or unjustly treated" - I just realised I had got it wrong and was asking for advice from the assembled might of the forum;

I stand duly chastened in the harsh light of this forum's luminaries :oops:

Having asked the question in hope more than expectation, and having subsequently received the full panoply of considered answers and unsympathetic commentary from the forum, I accept my naievety and lack of understanding of the machinations of the murky world of mobile phone contracts.

Now can we all just give it a rest, or must I have my seconds call on you all?

Time to lighten up. Nobody died, and I'm sure there aren't any folks in Sendai at the moment worrying about their mobile phone contracts.....

shouldbeinbed

Blacktemplar wrote:

I will try to appeal to Talk-Talk's sense of justice and fairness, failing that I shall roll about on the showroom floor, wailing, crying and tearing what's left of my hair out until they give in through embarrassment. Or call the Police.

Blacktemplar

Irony, anyone? Or even sarcastic humour?

Get a life

dhope

Blacktemplar wrote:

Irony, anyone? Or even sarcastic humour?

Get a life

Time to let it lie. You looked silly, people poked fun. If you continue to prod the horse people might think it's still alive. If you had any sense you'd be pursuing Wiggle for compensation.

EKE_38BPM

dhope wrote:

Blacktemplar wrote:

Irony, anyone? Or even sarcastic humour?

Get a life

Time to let it lie. You looked silly, people poked fun. If you continue to prod the horse people might think it's still alive. If you had any sense you'd be pursuing Wiggle for compensation.

Yep, blame Wiggle.

Blacktemplar

dhope wrote:

Blacktemplar wrote:

Irony, anyone? Or even sarcastic humour?

Get a life

Time to let it lie. You looked silly, people poked fun. If you continue to prod the horse people might think it's still alive. If you had any sense you'd be pursuing Wiggle for compensation.

Guilty as charged m'lud.

I did look silly, people did poke fun. Lesson learned - don't ask for advice in the forum if you've done something daft.

I was trying to let it lie, and as you'll have noted from the thread I poked as much fun at myself as anyone else. Doesn't seem to register on some folks unfortunately.

[/grumpypants]