"Sorry, it's company policy"

D3PO · 21-08-2014 12:01pm

FamousBelgian wrote: »

Whew! I'm glad someone believes me.

They expire after 180 days without any notice (except one SMS amid a sea of spam SMS's).

your words not mine ?

Orion · 21-08-2014 12:03pm

I took that as notice of the expiry not a T&C change.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:05pm

slimjimmc wrote: »

Thanks for the clarification, at least we can see what your complaint is and it seems you certainly do have grounds.
Your best approach is to send a written a complaint to Vodafone by registered post. In your letter be factual and concise, outline the above, state what you want and request a resolution within 10 working days. You should first confirm with your bank that the ATM transaction was successfully completed and money transferred to Vodafone. If you continue to get an unsatisfactory response you have the necessary records to go to Comreg. Yes they deal on a case by case basis (which is important to you) but if they find systemic issues they can deal with those too.

Thanks for the reply. I don't live in Ireland and I am maintaining this prepaid number for an elderly disabled relative. It will be a few weeks before I can get my hands on the original of the ATM receipt and the bank statement but I think I will go straight to Comreg just because it's easier to do online.

Vodafone do try to help to a certain extent on the phone but it is a lot of trouble to pursue such a simple matter. When they rectify a problem they caused themselves they do so as a 'goodwill gesture'. Part of this is company culture, I assume, but I suspect it's just a combination of slipshod business and massive laziness on the part of the management. Clearly the CEO is more interested in things other than making sure that someone is dotting i's and crossing t's on the business side of things.

In my case I've just lost a lot of time and very little money. It's a systemic issue that I find is common in Ireland and these things won't start to get fixed unless people complain. Where I live people may not be as nice or friendly as in Ireland but one thing is for sure no major company would ever get away with doing business like this.

Orion · 21-08-2014 12:08pm

I wouldn't get to excited by the use of "goodwill gesture". That's standard practice in many industries. It gives them the means to right a wrong without admitting legal liability. If they said "yes we screwed up - here's your money back" it admits liability and therefore opens avenues to litigation. Call it goodwill means they can still fix it but you can't take them to court saying they admitted anything.

D3PO · 21-08-2014 12:10pm

Orion wrote: »

I took that as notice of the expiry not a T&C change.

ok maybe i read it wrong. Then again notice of expiry would that also constitute notice of a change in the t&c's i dunno its unlikely Im just playing devils advocate here.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:11pm

Orion wrote: »

I took that as notice of the expiry not a T&C change.

I believe the notice of expiry was sent in an SMS on one occasion (I don't use this phome myself; it's for a disabled elderly relative). It was never sent for the second expiry two weeks after the ATM payment. But what good is an SMS if the phone is switched off or the number is inactive. How do you sufficiently communicate the termination of a contract or the expiry of a service in 160 chars when you have no idea how it will be received? Why do you think companies use PDF's? Why can't they use email like a properly run business would do? How do I show an SMS in court?

How can a communications company not be able to send email to its customers?

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:12pm

D3PO wrote: »

ok maybe i read it wrong. Then again notice of expiry would that also constitute notice of a change in the t&c's i dunno its unlikely Im just playing devils advocate here.

Mr Advocate for the Devil, just please tell me which Irish phone provider you use because I'm going to switch to them ASAP!

D3PO · 21-08-2014 12:14pm

FamousBelgian wrote: »

I believe the notice of expiry was sent in an SMS on one occasion (I don't use this phome myself; it's for a disabled elderly relative). It was never sent for the second expiry two weeks after the ATM payment. But what good is an SMS if the phone is switched off or the number is inactive. How do you sufficiently communicate the termination of a contract or the expiry of a service in 160 chars when you have no idea how it will be received? Why do you think companies use PDF's? Why can't they use email like a properly run business would do? How do I show an SMS in court?

How can a communications company not be able to send email to its customers?

They can but choose not to it appears.

I know there is legal precident of text messages being accepted as having served legal notice in regards to property rental and as such Its probably fair to assume that any legal challenge against text message notice would fail., but then again thats just an assumption.

D3PO · 21-08-2014 12:14pm

FamousBelgian wrote: »

Mr Advocate for the Devil, just please tell me which Irish phone provider you use because I'm going to switch to them ASAP!

I use O2 & Vodafone both bill pay though

Bcak on topic the framework is there for you anyway.

1) Make a formal written complain to Vodaphone and let them go through their complaints procedure
2) If not happy go to Comreg at that point and or take a case to small claims court.

Going that way is the only way you will be able to really get this resolved.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:15pm

Orion wrote: »

I wouldn't get to excited by the use of "goodwill gesture". That's standard practice in many industries. It gives them the means to right a wrong without admitting legal liability. If they said "yes we screwed up - here's your money back" it admits liability and therefore opens avenues to litigation. Call it goodwill means they can still fix it but you can't take them to court saying they admitted anything.

I agree with you and Vodafone uses this term very liberally. It's only human nature of course and you get this everywhere; who hasn't had a boss that probably once generously told you you could have the weekend off.

But, yes, this is my issue. I want to get past the goodwill nonsense and tie them down on their own T's+C's. So far I've had no response to my request in the Vodafone forum.

Sheldons Brain · 21-08-2014 12:17pm

The expiry after 8 months is one thing, although Vodafone handle this badly. The acceptance of the money from the ATM, but providing nothing in return is surely more serious. If you paid something towards a product or service, where the service provider decided not to provide that service, then surely the shop would have to refund your money.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:20pm

D3PO wrote: »

I use O2 & Vodafone both bill pay though

I ordered a prepaid phone online from O2 last Xmas for an, yes, elderly relative. Ended up having to go straight from the airport to the O2 shop in Grafton St to buy one there. It took some trouble to get the first one refunded.

Maybe prepay is considered infra dignitatem in Ireland. I dunno. But from what I've seen billpay is hugely pricey in Ireland. It used to be cheaper for me to use my Dutch subscription phone in Ireland than Vodafone IRL prepaid. Only when I saw what people were paying to ring me did I switch to Vodafone IRL.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:24pm

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

The expiry after 8 months is one thing, although Vodafone handle this badly. The acceptance of the money from the ATM, but providing nothing in return is surely more serious. If you paid something towards a product or service, where the service provider decided not to provide that service, then surely the shop would have to refund your money.

Yes, you're right. This is the thing I want to get them on. I just don't know how far I can go with this in Ireland.
Where I am you only have to mention the F-word: Fraud. Once you show that you paid for something you didn't get, no matter how little, then you're in the right. Works every time. If you have the time.

Paulw · 21-08-2014 12:46pm

I think you're missing something here - everything is automated.

You put through an ATM topup - your bank sends money to Vodafone bank, with a mobile number tag. The banking system sends an update to the billing system with the mobile number. If the mobile number isn't active, then the topup fails. The whole transaction hasn't failed though.

If your phone is inactive or not topped up regularly, then the services are revoked, and eventually, the credit cleared. After a further period of the number being disabled, the number is recycled.

Your path - complain to Vodafone. If no success, complain to ComReg, and after that Small Claims Court.

ash23 · 21-08-2014 12:52pm

I think the issue though is that because it's pre-pay, it's not a contract.
If you were bill pay, you would have signed or agreed to a contract with Vodafone and they would not be able to change the terms and conditions without notifying you in that instance.

However, because it's pre-pay, you're using a service and agreeing to the terms and conditions of the company providing that service. Much like if your local salon puts up their prices, or your dentist brings in a cancellation fee for appointments.
They are entitled to make changes to the t&c of their service and they probably made the changes to their published t&c online. They also notified the user of the service of the imminent discontinuation of the service by SMS.

I don't think you have a contract OP. Therefore I don't think you have to be notified about changes.

I'm open to correction as I'm no legal eagle. Just going by my own work.

We have contracts and terms and conditions but they are two separate things. The terms and conditions are basically what we offer and the circumstances we offer them in. We can change these whenever we want.

However, when someone agrees to a 12 month contract with us, they agree the contract based on the terms and conditions at the time they enter the contract. We can only change the t&c for them when their contract expires, even if the t&c have changed in the meantime.

As it's prepay I don't think you have much hope in terms of arguing that they should have notified you of the change of t&c. I'd imagine that somewhere in the t&c it says they are subject to change.

I think you'd fare better by asking them to refund the money that was paid as it was paid in good faith and explain the situation to them.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 12:59pm

Paulw wrote: »

I think you're missing something here - everything is automated.

You put through an ATM topup - your bank sends money to Vodafone bank, with a mobile number tag. The banking system sends an update to the billing system with the mobile number. If the mobile number isn't active, then the topup fails. The whole transaction hasn't failed though.

If your phone is inactive or not topped up regularly, then the services are revoked, and eventually, the credit cleared. After a further period of the number being disabled, the number is recycled.

Your path - complain to Vodafone. If no success, complain to ComReg, and after that Small Claims Court.

I understand that the ATM payment is automated but somewhere along the way in the Vodafone system the payment is accepted but it is not applied to the account. However, they say that in order to re-activate an account you must top up; this is how it is in store and through the website if you make a credit card payment.
When I raised the issue they just said that the money is not applied to the account. No mention of a refund. Just kept. You can't do that in a developed country. When I pressed the issue they eventually made a goodwill gesture of the same amount as the ATM payment but without ever acknowledging the payment. They refused to confirm this in an email. That is not goodwill.

I've pursued the issue on the Vodafone forum here but I've had no reply when I called them out on the exact text of their T's+C's. Depending on time available I may just go straight to Comreg.

Had I done the topup with my credit card and the same thing happened I would have simply filed a fraud report and Vodafone would now have all the explaining to do and I would have a refund.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 1:09pm

ash23 wrote: »

I think the issue though is that because it's pre-pay, it's not a contract.
If you were bill pay, you would have signed or agreed to a contract with Vodafone and they would not be able to change the terms and conditions without notifying you in that instance.

However, because it's pre-pay, you're using a service and agreeing to the terms and conditions of the company providing that service. Much like if your local salon puts up their prices, or your dentist brings in a cancellation fee for appointments.
They are entitled to make changes to the t&c of their service and they probably made the changes to their published t&c online. They also notified the user of the service of the imminent discontinuation of the service by SMS.

I don't think you have a contract OP. Therefore I don't think you have to be notified about changes.

I'm open to correction as I'm no legal eagle. Just going by my own work.

We have contracts and terms and conditions but they are two separate things. The terms and conditions are basically what we offer and the circumstances we offer them in. We can change these whenever we want.

However, when someone agrees to a 12 month contract with us, they agree the contract based on the terms and conditions at the time they enter the contract. We can only change the t&c for them when their contract expires, even if the t&c have changed in the meantime.

As it's prepay I don't think you have much hope in terms of arguing that they should have notified you of the change of t&c. I'd imagine that somewhere in the t&c it says they are subject to change.

I think you'd fare better by asking them to refund the money that was paid as it was paid in good faith and explain the situation to them.

I see your point but their T's+C's online are out of date and they cancelled the service two weeks after the ATM payment. They have never ever once informed my any changes to the T's+C's. I would also think that there is an implied contract based on the T's+C's in force at the moment of payment but the question here is how much can a company imply with such vague, variable terms, and how much can a company invoke 'policy'.

For instance I have a very advantageous phone subscription in Holland. It was such a good deal that the company stopped selling it during the crisis. However, it was grandfathered for all existing subscribers so I keep the same deal, on a month to month basis, probably because there was something in the nature of the subscription that made it difficult for them to cancel. If I try to change the subscription I immediately move to a worse deal. I didn't even think I had anything after the initial contract expired so I am a happy camper. just wish I could get a mortgage like that...

Paulw · 21-08-2014 1:49pm

FamousBelgian wrote: »

I understand that the ATM payment is automated but somewhere along the way in the Vodafone system the payment is accepted but it is not applied to the account. However, they say that in order to re-activate an account you must top up; this is how it is in store and through the website if you make a credit card payment.

Maybe up to a certain date after deactivation it is possible to topup to reactivate it, but after that date it is not, so the payment topup can't be applied, and the account is in a holding phase, before it's removed. Just guessing here.

It's not a payment being accepted, as such, it's you sending them money, to apply credit to your account.

slimjimmc · 21-08-2014 2:51pm

FamousBelgian wrote: »

I understand that the ATM payment is automated but somewhere along the way in the Vodafone system the payment is accepted but it is not applied to the account. However, they say that in order to re-activate an account you must top up; this is how it is in store and through the website if you make a credit card payment.
When I raised the issue they just said that the money is not applied to the account. No mention of a refund. Just kept. You can't do that in a developed country. When I pressed the issue they eventually made a goodwill gesture of the same amount as the ATM payment but without ever acknowledging the payment. They refused to confirm this in an email. That is not goodwill.

I've pursued the issue on the Vodafone forum here but I've had no reply when I called them out on the exact text of their T's+C's. Depending on time available I may just go straight to Comreg.

Had I done the topup with my credit card and the same thing happened I would have simply filed a fraud report and Vodafone would now have all the explaining to do and I would have a refund.

Have they even received the ATM transaction? They can't be expected to offer a refund if their system doesn't show payment was made. This is why I previously advised you to check with your bank, you need to establish where the money went. Without this knowledge you cannot even be certain the problem lies with Vodafone, the money could be stuck at your bank and if that is the case what VF have done is very much a gesture of good will.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 2:58pm

slimjimmc wrote: »

Have they even received the ATM transaction? They can't be expected to offer a refund if their system doesn't show payment was made. This is why I previously advised you to check with your bank, you need to establish where the money went. Without this knowledge you cannot even be certain the problem lies with Vodafone, the money could be stuck at your bank and if that is the case what VF have done is very much a gesture of good will.

The money was deducted from the account after the ATM transaction and never refunded. I PM'ed all the details from the ATM receipt (on Vodafone's request) and when I called them up on the phone they never said they didn't receive the money. But they were so quick to make a goodwill gesture for the same amount I can only assume that they did indeed find the transaction. Later they said in the Vodafone support forum that such payments are not applied to the account when the account is inactive (but payments by cc and in-shop are, apparently). Not once did they ever say that they didn't receive the money. And another customer had the same problem in the forum so my logical deduction is that if I sent them the money then they got it.

slimjimmc · 21-08-2014 3:25pm

@FamousBelgian, I have removed some words from your earlier posts which could be construed as allegations. Please take care in how you phrase your posts so as to avoid this recurring.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 3:47pm

slimjimmc wrote: »

@FamousBelgian, I have removed some words from your earlier posts which could be construed as allegations. Please take care in how you phrase your posts so as to avoid this recurring.

OK, I see your <SNIP> modifcations now. I was trying to be as careful as possible and I didn't even want to name the company in question. People who wanted to help had asked for specifics otherwise they couldn't give an opinion.

If it's the word 'purloin' I just thought that that was the least contentious word to describe the payment at the heart of this case. I'm open to suggestions on a better word...

keithclancy · 21-08-2014 10:46pm

ash23 wrote: »

I think the issue though is that because it's pre-pay, it's not a contract.
If you were bill pay, you would have signed or agreed to a contract with Vodafone and they would not be able to change the terms and conditions without notifying you in that instance.

Vodafone would disagree with you on that one:

http://www.vodafone.ie/terms/prepay/

Your Obligations
You are responsible for the acts and omissions of all persons using the equipment and password protected accounts. Without prejudice to any provision of this Contract, you agree:

Payment can also form a contract.

FamousBelgian · 21-08-2014 11:48pm

keithclancy wrote: »

...
Payment can also form a contract.

Yes, I think so too. Payment must imply a contract, even in Ireland.

I've just checked Comreg.ie and I have to go through the Vodafone escalation process first which has four stages, the last one of which involves writing a letter on paper (it's 2014 ffs). They then say that the decision of the last stage is final. Final? Are they the law?

I also found this: http://www.vodafone.ie/aboutus/notifications/ in which they make quite clear that the prepaid service is equal to the bill pay service in terms of consideration as a contract. But they don't even follow this procedure because I have never once received a notification of any impending change in the T's+C's.

zagmund · 22-08-2014 11:37am

I've nothing specific to offer on the Vodafone side, but the concept of T&Cs which say "you agree to be bound to these, but we can change them at any time and you will still be bound to them" is a favourite bugbear of mine. As is the "goodwill gesture". I'm in the middle of a regulatory complaint about another company who have trotted out the same lines to me - "it's in the T&Cs" and "as a goodwill gesture" instead of just saying "we were wrong, you were right, thanks for setting us on the straight & narrow". Instead they say "we didn't do anything wrong, but we're changing our procedures and as a goodwill gesture . . ."

On the issue of whether the payment made it through to VF or not - unless there's a reason to believe it didn't (like you had never used the ATM mechanism for a payment before) then the onus is on VF to prove that they didn't receive it. This is another one of my bugbears. Assume that for some reason VF received the money and couldn't apply it to your account - account closed, incorrect details, etc . . . then why isn't there a procedure in place to reverse the bank transaction and let the bank refund it to your bank account. Why is it that there's never any problem receiving money and sticking it in a suspense account, but companies always seem to have problems going in the opposite direction.

z

3rdDegree · 22-08-2014 12:42pm

OP, having read this entire thread, it seems that Vodafone have actually refunded the amount that you sent via the ATM? Is that true? If not, move on and ignore the rest of this post!

But if they HAVE refunded that amount (regardless of calling it a "goodwill gesture"), then it seems you have no outstanding issue with them, and thus no reason to go to Comreg, small claims court or anywhere else?

Granted, I think you are getting appalling customer service and that whole "money disappearing into a black hole when you top up an inactive account via ATM" is very, very poor on Vodafone's part; but if they have refunded the money, legally, what more recourse do you think you can get?

zagmund · 22-08-2014 1:48pm

3rdDegree wrote: »

OP, having read this entire thread, it seems that Vodafone have actually refunded the amount that you sent via the ATM? Is that true? If not, move on and ignore the rest of this post!

But if they HAVE refunded that amount (regardless of calling it a "goodwill gesture"), then it seems you have no outstanding issue with them, and thus no reason to go to Comreg, small claims court or anywhere else?

Granted, I think you are getting appalling customer service and that whole "money disappearing into a black hole when you top up an inactive account via ATM" is very, very poor on Vodafone's part; but if they have refunded the money, legally, what more recourse do you think you can get?

It sounds similar to the issue I had with a different provider - just because they refunded the money doesn't mean they won't do exactly the same (keep the money in a black hole until you complain . . . which takes weeks, saps energy & will to live, etc . . .) to the next person and the next person and the next person.

Escalating it to the regulator is an attempt to address the broader problem and not just the fact that one individual got done.

Saying someone got their money back and should move on is the same as saying "I'm alright Jack" when there's actually a problem which still remains.

z

3rdDegree · 22-08-2014 2:29pm

zagmund wrote: »

Saying someone got their money back and should move on is the same as saying "I'm alright Jack" when there's actually a problem which still remains.

z

That isn't what I was saying at all! I agree we definitely should complain more in this country, and I think we can see that the OP is doing his best in that area.

But that wasn't the point of my original post. The point of my post was that the OP has no more legal recourse. This is, after all, the legal forum, not the consumer issues forum.

Cheers

zagmund · 22-08-2014 2:47pm

Looks like consumer issues to me, but it seems we're in agreement in general terms.

z

slimjimmc · 22-08-2014 3:12pm

3rdDegree wrote: »

That isn't what I was saying at all! I agree we definitely should complain more in this country, and I think we can see that the OP is doing his best in that area.

But that wasn't the point of my original post. The point of my post was that the OP has no more legal recourse. This is, after all, the legal forum, not the consumer issues forum.

Cheers

The refund may be settled but there is still the issue of which terms apply to his contract. The OP is entitled* to know when contract was changed and for evidence to show this change was notified (public/personal notice) as it materially affects his contract. If VF are not forthcoming with this information the OP has grounds for complaint.

* assuming the OP is the subscriber or authorised to act on behalf of the subscriber.

"Sorry, it's company policy"

Comments