UPC

dmoor4

I have a query regarding contracts running out. I had a year contract with UPC which was due to end on the 5th of this month. I tried to cancel my contract in June because I was moving house and they could not offer the same service but it ended up cheaper to just let the contract run out so when I found this out on the phone I informed her that I will not be renewing my contract. She said that was no problem so it ended at that.

I thought no more about this as I thought it was sorted until I checked my account and saw that they are still charging me even though the 12 month contract is over. I rang them straight away and It ended being a total waste of time. I was 2 hours on the phone, spoke to every single department and got hung up on twice. Each department just simply repeated themselves. That I was supposed to ring back 30 days before my contract ended and then send written confirmation to cancel my account. For some reason it was so easy for all of them to tell me today about this but they couldn't tell me this in June. So now I am going to be charged for two months extra than I signed up to for a service I am no longer using due to moving house.

I am just wondering can they actually do this? Can they continue charging me even though my contract was finished and they did not contact me to ask whether I wanted to start a new contract? Even though I told them in June that I did not want to continue my contract.

They keep repeating themselves saying that my contract was up but my account was still open. Can they legally do this?
Thanks.

Losty Dublin

On the contract that you signed up to with UPC, it will tell you how to end the contract with them. What does it say?

dmoor4 wrote: »

Hi my name is Dylan Moorhouse and I have a query regarding contracts running out. I had a year contract with UPC which was due to end on the 5th of this month. I tried to cancel my contract in June because I was moving house and they could not offer the same service but it ended up cheaper to just let the contract run out so when I found this out on the phone I informed her that I will not be renewing my contract. She said that was no problem so it ended at that.

I thought no more about this as I thought it was sorted until I checked my account and saw that they are still charging me even though the 12 month contract is over. I rang them straight away and It ended being a total waste of time. I was 2 hours on the phone, spoke to every single department and got hung up on twice. Each department just simply repeated themselves. That I was supposed to ring back 30 days before my contract ended and then send written confirmation to cancel my account. For some reason it was so easy for all of them to tell me today about this but they couldn't tell me this in June. So now I am going to be charged for two months extra than I signed up to for a service I am no longer using due to moving house.

I am just wondering can they actually do this? Can they continue charging me even though my contract was finished and they did not contact me to ask whether I wanted to start a new contract? Even though I told them in June that I did not want to continue my contract.

They keep repeating themselves saying that my contract was up but my account was still open. Can they legally do this?
Thanks.

source

As with most utility services, your service will continue and you will still be charged as normal even though your contract will be finished. This is called being out of contract, you are still a customer but are no longer contract bound to stay with the provider.

The terms and conditions of the contract will tell you how to cancel your service, usually by way of written request with 30 days notice.

slimjimmc

See Paras 3.1 and 11.6 of the General Terms and Conditions, your contract is very likely to be identical:

3. Duration 3.1 Unless otherwise stated in our Price List or other documentation that we provide to you, the minimum period (the “Minimum Period”) of the Services is twelve (12) months starting on the date we activate the Services. You can only terminate this Agreement during the Minimum Period as specifically detailed in this Agreement, otherwise we may charge you a cancellation charge of up to €200, or a charge consisting of all relevant charges which would have been payable to the end of the minimum period, whichever is the lesser amount. If you want to terminate this Agreement after the Minimum Period, one month’s written notice is required.

11.6 After the Minimum Period expires this Agreement will continue until it is terminated by either of you or us giving the other one month’s prior notice. You must pay all relevant Charges up to the end of that one month notice period.

January

It's in the terms and conditions, so yes they can. Sometimes it pays to read the T&C's...

234

source wrote: »

As with most utility services, your service will continue and you will still be charged as normal even though your contract will be finished. This is called being out of contract, you are still a customer but are no longer contract bound to stay with the provider.

The terms and conditions of the contract will tell you how to cancel your service, usually by way of written request with 30 days notice.

This doesn't really make any sense; usually utility contracts provide for automatic renewal after the initial term has expired if use continues. In that case there is still a contract in place by implication.

goz83

234 wrote: »

This doesn't really make any sense; usually utility contracts provide for automatic renewal after the initial term has expired if use continues. In that case there is still a contract in place by implication.

It becomes a rolling contract on a monthly basis. This is so you can continue to avail of the service, without committing to a long period contract.

OP, you could have given them written notice in june to terminate on the final day of your contract. Just so you know in future.

Little CuChulainn

If I'm reading this correctly the op gave 3 months notice and UPC are saying he should have called them again and given notice when there was 30 days left. This would be clearly wrong as the contract states a minimum of 30 days.

BornToKill

Well, it says 30 days notice is how you cancel after the minimum period (12 months). Not during.

slimjimmc

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

If I'm reading this correctly the op gave 3 months notice and UPC are saying he should have called them again and given notice when there was 30 days left. This would be clearly wrong as the contract states a minimum of 30 days.

The contract says "written notice", which the OP did not give.

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, it says 30 days notice is how you cancel after the minimum period (12 months). Not during.

The doesn't mean wait until the 12 months is up before giving 30 days notice, it means you can give 30 days notice in order to terminate the contract as soon as the 12 months is up, i.e. you can send notice before month 12 to terminate immediately after month 12. The word "after" refers to the contract termination not the giving of notice.

Little CuChulainn

BornToKill wrote: »

Well, it says 30 days notice is how you cancel after the minimum period (12 months). Not during.

Yes he gave notice that he would not be continuing it at the end of the minimum period but as slimjimmc points out

slimjimmc wrote: »

The contract says "written notice", which the OP did not give.

Cushie Butterfield

dmoor4 wrote: »

I have a query regarding contracts running out. I had a year contract with UPC which was due to end on the 5th of this month. I tried to cancel my contract in June because I was moving house and they could not offer the same service but it ended up cheaper to just let the contract run out so when I found this out on the phone I informed her that I will not be renewing my contract. She said that was no problem so it ended at that.

I thought no more about this as I thought it was sorted until I checked my account and saw that they are still charging me even though the 12 month contract is over. I rang them straight away and It ended being a total waste of time. I was 2 hours on the phone, spoke to every single department and got hung up on twice. Each department just simply repeated themselves. That I was supposed to ring back 30 days before my contract ended and then send written confirmation to cancel my account. For some reason it was so easy for all of them to tell me today about this but they couldn't tell me this in June. So now I am going to be charged for two months extra than I signed up to for a service I am no longer using due to moving house.

I am just wondering can they actually do this? Can they continue charging me even though my contract was finished and they did not contact me to ask whether I wanted to start a new contract? Even though I told them in June that I did not want to continue my contract.

They keep repeating themselves saying that my contract was up but my account was still open. Can they legally do this?
Thanks.

Telling a CS advisor that you won't be renewing your contract isn't the same as specifically informing them that you wish to give 30 days notice to cancel your contract.

UPC don't operate on a contract renewal basis. As soon as you have satisfied a 12/18 month contract you either continue on the basis of a rolling 30 day contract (which is described as being 'out of contract') or give them 30 days cancellation notice. You can also give your 30 days notice when you reach the final 30 days of the contract.

[There are instances whereby a customer can renew a 12 month contract e.g. if they have negotiated a discount on their package they will be entered into a new 12 month contract - in this case it's up to the customer to contact UPC towards the end of that contract to agree to a new 12 month contract in order to continue to receive their discount or a similar discount. If they don't do this their subscription will increase after the 12 months as the discount would have expired, & they then continue on a 30 day rolling contract basis. In some cases when a customer adds to, changes or ugrades their current services they also agree to a new 12 month contract.]

It used to be the case that if you were moving address & UPC couldn't supply you with the same services that you already had they would release you early from a 12 month contract without any penalty. This policy has changed. The situation now is if they can't supply you with services or any elements of services & are still tied into a 12 month contract you either have to pay a €200 early termination fee or your subscription charges up to when your contract ends (whichever is less). You also have the option of just taking what they can supply & losing the other services. This also involves entering a new 12 month contract but you avoid the €200 penaly fee. In your case you opted to just keep paying the bill rather than cancel & pay the €200/three months charges as a penalty for cancelling your contract early. It's all there in their T&Cs.

It's obviously a case of misunderstanding/miscommunication/crossed wires,& considering there was a change of address involved probably led to more confusion, but no matter what it was you didn't abide by the terms & conditions of your contract as regards the cancellation procedure. if you haven't already done so you will still have to give them 30 days written (or emailed) notice. There is a specific email address to use for notices of cancellation.

You have the option of raising a complaint & getting them to listen to a recording of the call you made in June. If it transpires that you were given false or misleading information you should be refunded any payments you made since your contract expired.

domark

UPC are trying to make it difficult to terminate contracts for their cash cows ("customers").
Here are the addresses to cancel your contract:

Electronic address
resolutionteam at upc dot ie

Postal address
PO Box 11419
Blackrock
Dublin

According to T&Cs you are expected to give thirty days notice).

MarkAnthony

Why does everyone think that TV/broadband should be some sort of free/cost next to nothing service without a contract period? If you laid thousands of miles of cable infrastructure would you not expect to make a profit?

If you don't like it get a library card read by candle light and drink your own... anyway.

hullaballoo

I rang them after this unilateral change of terms issue and after just 35 minutes of contractual negotiations, I got money off my current bill instead of paying an extra €10 for a service I don't get.

You have to put things to them in the right way.

MarkAnthony

hullaballoo wrote: »

I rang them after this unilateral change of terms issue and after just 35 minutes of contractual negotiations, I got money off my current bill instead of paying an extra €10 for a service I don't get.

You have to put things to them in the right way.

A shame that 35 minutes wasn't billable

domark

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Why does everyone think that TV/broadband should be some sort of free/cost next to nothing service without a contract period? If you laid thousands of miles of cable infrastructure would you not expect to make a profit?

If you don't like it get a library card read by candle light and drink your own... anyway.

To me the question is why old customers are paying more for less when newly subscribed ones get more for less.

There is in fact no advantage at all being a longtime customer.

Better terminate at the end of the mandatory contract period and shop around, being trusted and loyal in the world of commerce with corporations does not lead to anything beneficial.

hullaballoo

MarkAnthony wrote: »

A shame that 35 minutes wasn't billable

What do you mean? I gave them plenty of legal advice in that time. :pac:

hullaballoo

domark wrote: »

To me the question is why old customers are paying more for less when newly subscribed ones get more for less.

There is in fact no advantage at all being a longtime customer.

Better terminate at the end of the mandatory contract period and shop around, being trusted and loyal in the world of commerce with corporations does not lead to anything beneficial.

Again, you need to bargain with them. You do have bargaining power, you just need to identify where that lies and how to put it to them. Yes, some companies will just cut you off and say, "good luck" but that's fine.

FreudianSlippers

hullaballoo wrote: »

I rang them after this unilateral change of terms issue and after just 35 minutes of contractual negotiations, I got money off my current bill instead of paying an extra €10 for a service I don't get.

You have to put things to them in the right way.

Did you just threaten to switch? I think unilateral material change is permitted under the primary contract for things like price?

MarkAnthony

domark wrote: »

To me the question is why old customers are paying more for less when newly subscribed ones get more for less.

There is in fact no advantage at all being a longtime customer.

Better terminate at the end of the mandatory contract period and shop around, being trusted and loyal in the world of commerce with corporations does not lead to anything beneficial.

The same reason shops open on St. Stephen's day - someone else did it.

Of course there are better deals for new customers, otherwise no one would ever move. Loyal long term customers is for your butcher, breadmaker and candlestick maker. Hard facts for this type of company. Shop around at each opportunity to break the contract, work out the average of any 'deal' over the contract period. Phone your current supplier and say I can get X at Y from Z what can I get from you?

Compare like with like, but also make sure you know what you need. No one needs 240Mbit broadband. Maybe a family of 10 with 8 teenagers. Conversely 5Mbit DSL is going to be crap in almost all situations, cheaper isn't always better. Don't get obsessed with 'bundles' Irish customer are mental for 'bundles' if its better value for money (note not necessarily cheaper) to have things from different suppliers then do it. The very basic of basic money management and budgeting is required to make sure direct debits go out on time.

Prices will always rise, unless the Eurozone enters (it may have already) deflation. Don't get in a tizzy just shop around. Finally don't just shop on price yes you can get 'TV' cheaper from UPC than Sky but you're going to miss out on the decent shows - not bothered about decent shows and just want to watch the same crap like Eastenders and X factor? Go freeview. Need TV in 100 rooms because you can't sit on the toilet without the box being on? Would proper cabling be a better one off investment over dozens of boxes.

Sorry for the semi-rant but it's not a charity it's a business, polite negotiation once/twice a year will pay dividends.

domark

hullaballoo wrote: »

Again, you need to bargain with them. You do have bargaining power, you just need to identify where that lies and how to put it to them. Yes, some companies will just cut you off and say, "good luck" but that's fine.

I did try but all they had to offer where next to nothing (one or two euros per month).

Could have hoped that in the current economic and social situation UPC would give more consideration to loyal, non-annoying, customers. It's not like if I had requested discount each year for the past decade with them.

Could be that I am not rough enough but I prefer to keep calm because the people to whom we speak are not that often at fault. They work for a management that are there to make sure that bankers and investment funds suck the maximum dividends.

I am now canceling and UPC think I am *trying* because they ignored my first termination of service email (sent to correct department). They replied with the same generic email as when I asked who to email for canceling.
Sent them another one even clearer just to be legally safe on my side.

domark

Thank you, that's good advice.

hullaballoo

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Did you just threaten to switch? I think unilateral material change is permitted under the primary contract for things like price?

The contracts tend to stipulate that price changes are permitted but if you de-construct those clauses, they are invariably provisions allowing for unilateral termination with notice with an option for novation of terms. I.e., The "notification of price change" means that they can no longer provide you with what you are getting at the set price. Because of the commercial realities, this is an acceptable clause.

Look at it like this, you enter a fixed-term contract at a price for a service for one year. In my case, something like TV, Broadband and phone for one year for €x per month plus usage over and above the contracted allowances. After a year, what you have in effect is a rolling one-month contract that either party can give 30 days notice of intention to terminate.

As such, under the price changes, they are terminating the contract. They are providing a new offer of the same (or similar) service on the rolling one-month basis but at a higher price. You have thirty days within which to accept the new offer. Here's the thing. If you don't indicate your unwillingness to accept, you are automatically adjudged to have accepted. Under this new rolling one-month contract, you can still notify termination. Importantly, as a customer, you are no longer bound by the terms of the contract (beyond what money is due up until termination) upon receipt of the notice. That can be hugely important, particularly where the contract provides for arbitration in case of disputes etc. as well as other provisions that might otherwise limit your recourse to the courts.

(Brief aside: Something similar happens all over the place with these types of contracts when due for "renewal". It's very much something that catches people out and its lawfulness is questionable at best. It could be argued either way but I don't know that this particular practice has ever been challenged.)

Anyway, on receipt of the notification, you can do one of three things. 1. Accept the new offer (by doing nothing); 2. Not accept and terminate the contract and service; or, 3. Negotiate new terms.

Under the last of these, consumers are in a weak but not hopeless position. The weakness isn't from the point of view of your own capacity to enter contractual discussions but because the people you speak to have limited authority to deviate from the standard. They simply cannot do something ultra vires their role without the contract being voidable ab initio which doesn't suit the customer.

As such, you sort of have to do the best you can.

I also got a little bit shouty. :pac:

hullaballoo

Just to note in relation to the above, neither side can alter the terms (including price) within the first twelve months, as a general rule (with caveats, of course!) However, after this, once the rolling one-month contract kicks in, either side can unilaterally terminate.

Mr. Incognito

Just ring the bank and cancel their direct debit at source.

Simple.

Once the bank are not honouring the direct debit let them take you to small claims court and argue it there. They wont.

caissa007

UPC customer care have not improved from NTL days. You wouldnt believe the amount of my time they wasted in the last week when ordering Horizon. They finally offered me €80 credit which I told them was only a token. They came back with €120 & I told them to keep it.

They are a terrible organisation to deal with. I was repeatedly promised call backs which never happened & left holding for hours. In addition their support line was completely out of action for long periods as well. They sent me out two dud boxes & had delivery failures etc.

I dunno why I'm still with them .....

MarkAnthony

caissa007 wrote: »

UPC customer care have not improved from NTL days. You wouldnt believe the amount of my time they wasted in the last week when ordering Horizon. They finally offered me €80 credit which I told them was only a token. They came back with €120 & I told them to keep it.

They are a terrible organisation to deal with. I was repeatedly promised call backs which never happened & left holding for hours. In addition their support line was completely out of action for long periods as well. They sent me out two dud boxes & had delivery failures etc.

I dunno why I'm still with them .....

I've never had an issue with their broadband guys in over 10 years.

Horizon is pretty crap from all accounts.

Little CuChulainn

caissa007 wrote: »

UPC customer care have not improved from NTL days. You wouldnt believe the amount of my time they wasted in the last week when ordering Horizon. They finally offered me €80 credit which I told them was only a token. They came back with €120 & I told them to keep it.

They are a terrible organisation to deal with. I was repeatedly promised call backs which never happened & left holding for hours. In addition their support line was completely out of action for long periods as well. They sent me out two dud boxes & had delivery failures etc.

I dunno why I'm still with them .....

In all fairness, the same can be said of nearly every provider of every service.

Marcusm

caissa007 wrote: »

UPC customer care have not improved from NTL days. You wouldnt believe the amount of my time they wasted in the last week when ordering Horizon. They finally offered me €80 credit which I told them was only a token. They came back with €120 & I told them to keep it.

They are a terrible organisation to deal with. I was repeatedly promised call backs which never happened & left holding for hours. In addition their support line was completely out of action for long periods as well. They sent me out two dud boxes & had delivery failures etc.

I dunno why I'm still with them .....

On the flip side, I've had a great experience signing up with them. Agreed a 1-6pm installation window. Technician called me he Night before and offered to instal between 8:30 and 9am if I referred. It's likely similar with all such organisations, all customer experiences are different.

RM8849

We decided to leave UPC as although we were on a premium package, our broadband was slow and tv was not great. We gave 30 days notice and they cut our service off on Day 29, on a Saturday. Despite numerous calls to the technical team nobody could reactivate our service, despite them admitting their mistake. I am now delayed in submitting a very important piece of work and this will reflect badly on me in my job. Another person in my house will be late submitting a piece of college work and will lose 10% in grades due to UPC's negligence. When a company is in serious breach of contract you would imagine they would react to a complaint pretty quickly, however I had to follow up numerous times this weekend to see if they would resolve the issue (as promised when the original complaint was made). Serious waste of my time and am very disappointed. Word of warning to anyone considering using UPC in the future.

Little CuChulainn

I'm not sure what the issue is. Did they cancel your service a day early?

Losty Dublin

RM8849 wrote: »

We decided to leave UPC as although we were on a premium package, our broadband was slow and tv was not great. We gave 30 days notice and they cut our service off on Day 29, on a Saturday. Despite numerous calls to the technical team nobody could reactivate our service, despite them admitting their mistake. I am now delayed in submitting a very important piece of work and this will reflect badly on me in my job. Another person in my house will be late submitting a piece of college work and will lose 10% in grades due to UPC's negligence. When a company is in serious breach of contract you would imagine they would react to a complaint pretty quickly, however I had to follow up numerous times this weekend to see if they would resolve the issue (as promised when the original complaint was made). Serious waste of my time and am very disappointed. Word of warning to anyone considering using UPC in the future.

If these projects were so critical on having broadband in the house then surely you should have had an alternative broadband service in place until they were submitted if you knew you were disconnecting from UPC. Cutting you off a day early didn't help, granted, but it's hardly the reason why they were all late.

FreudianSlippers

RM8849 wrote: »

We decided to leave UPC as although we were on a premium package, our broadband was slow and tv was not great. We gave 30 days notice and they cut our service off on Day 29, on a Saturday. Despite numerous calls to the technical team nobody could reactivate our service, despite them admitting their mistake. I am now delayed in submitting a very important piece of work and this will reflect badly on me in my job. Another person in my house will be late submitting a piece of college work and will lose 10% in grades due to UPC's negligence. When a company is in serious breach of contract you would imagine they would react to a complaint pretty quickly, however I had to follow up numerous times this weekend to see if they would resolve the issue (as promised when the original complaint was made). Serious waste of my time and am very disappointed. Word of warning to anyone considering using UPC in the future.

I think you'll find in the contract that it is 30 days notice to them, not 30 days service after notification. They are only obliged to provide service for the next billing month (not the 30 days)

Calahonda52

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Why does everyone think that TV/broadband should be some sort of free/cost next to nothing service without a contract period? If you laid thousands of miles of cable infrastructure would you not expect to make a profit?

If you don't like it get a library card read by candle light and drink your own... anyway.

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/net-results-consumers-face-unequal-battle-doing-business-online-1.2091428
Seems to suggest that its big FDI being supported by Government to screw the consumer, just as on medicines, fuel,electricity, gas, drink,food, the list goes on

MarkAnthony

Calahonda52 wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/business/technology/net-results-consumers-face-unequal-battle-doing-business-online-1.2091428
Seems to suggest that its big FDI being supported by Government to screw the consumer, just as on medicines, fuel,electricity, gas, drink,food, the list goes on

Interesting article but the the reason it's 'difficult' to cancel in the telco sector is all of them have a retention team to try and stop people leaving. If legislation was brought in to remove these I'm sure the likes of Sky, UPC etc would allow cancellations online. As it is deals are individually negotiated to keep customers.

As it stands people who can negotiate get good deals. If it wasn't that way we'd see a couple of quid difference if cost, a couple of small differences in service and people would pay largely the same. I'm sure the telco's would be delighted.

There already is a 'new provider only contact' system in place for eircom based broadband services. In all honesty the hype surrounding people getting screwed over is exactly that for the most part.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

Why on earth would you want legislation to remove retention teams? If I was a business and wanted to keep a customer, how on earth am I supposed to try and retain you if I don't have properly skilled staff to do so?

Deals being negotiated individually is a plus for me. Every year I get a better package or discount from various providers because I bother my arse to contact them to negotiate. If you are not bothered to ring them, that's your own fault.

I do think that the whole area of notice periods should be regulated better. As it is stands, it is a bit of a grey area. But a lot of issues are because people don't bother to read the contract they sign. Look at the OP as an example.
RM8849's example above is more a common sense issue IMHO. If I had something that was so critical to send, I'd make sure I had a backup solution. I mean what would he/she had done if there was a technical fault?
How many threads have popped up along the lines of "I paid for year and that's it, why are they still billing me. I never agreed to a rolling contract. etc. etc." Again this can't be covered by legislation and shouldn't need to be. It's generally covered in the contract you signed!

beauf

MarkAnthony wrote: »

Interesting article but the the reason it's 'difficult' to cancel in the telco sector i...As it stands people who can negotiate get good deals. ......

I suspect you happy with this, until you find out someone is getting a better than you, then you might no be so happy.

its not just about cancelling, or just getting a new contract. Trying to get companies to stick to a deal when you've no records of the deal. Every year how much time is wasted sitting on a phone to renegotiate something with should a standard price for the same service. I assume that most people don't sign up to BB to UPC to practise their negotiation skills.

Then what if you have a problem. Trying to sort out a problem with UPC, either technical or billing, is a nightmare. Wastes loads of time for no reason at all.

MarkAnthony

Edgar Brave Boat wrote: »

Why on earth would you want legislation to remove retention teams? If I was a business and wanted to keep a customer, how on earth am I supposed to try and retain you if I don't have properly skilled staff to do so?

Deals being negotiated individually is a plus for me. Every year I get a better package or discount from various providers because I bother my arse to contact them to negotiate. If you are not bothered to ring them, that's your own fault.

It's a better deal for me too but the reason a legislative solution is needed is is one won't get rid until they all get rid. I suppose the idea option would be to give customers a choice but it would give the game away somewhat if you were phoning rather than just sticking in a cancellation online.

That said many consumers are literally terrified of being on the phone. I dunno why but as many people as possible need to be accounted for.

Edgar Brave Boat wrote: »

I do think that the whole area of notice periods should be regulated better. As it is stands, it is a bit of a grey area. But a lot of issues are because people don't bother to read the contract they sign. Look at the OP as an example.

Yes and no imho. 30 days notice is fairly standard and people just like to gove out about it. Really all that needs to be covered off is:

(i) Notice periods should be allowed to be given within the contract period - they are at the moment but better consumer awareness is needed, enforcement needs to happen for companies that obfuscate this.

(ii) Cooling off should be extended and ideally have an element of service active before it expires. This is problematic because who foots install/activation costs?

Edgar Brave Boat wrote: »

RM8849's example above is more a common sense issue IMHO. If I had something that was so critical to send, I'd make sure I had a backup solution. I mean what would he/she had done if there was a technical fault?
How many threads have popped up along the lines of "I paid for year and that's it, why are they still billing me. I never agreed to a rolling contract. etc. etc." Again this can't be covered by legislation and shouldn't need to be. It's generally covered in the contract you signed!

Yes but there is an element of contracts being so complicated, standard and non-negotiable hence why consumer legislation is needed. There is also all sorts of little shenanigans that go on.

beauf wrote: »

I suspect you happy with this, until you find out someone is getting a better than you, then you might no be so happy.

This is the common issue and why so many people get pissy. Mr. Jones is getting a better deal than Mr. Smith. I just worry about me, if I think a deals is better for me I go for that deal. The solution is to prevent deals happening though legislation, through introductory deals or through retention deals; thus making pricing transparent.

The problem is they'll be no churn in the industry because of the perceived 'hassle' of switching. This could, I suppose, be over come by educating the customer.

beauf wrote: »

its not just about cancelling, or just getting a new contract. Trying to get companies to stick to a deal when you've no records of the deal. Every year how much time is wasted sitting on a phone to renegotiate something with should a standard price for the same service. I assume that most people don't sign up to BB to UPC to practise their negotiation skills.

No but its exactly the same bollocks you go through with home, car, life insurance. Again the telcos would be delighted if there was a fixed, transparent price but everyone needs to get on that bandwagon or they all need to continue as is to maintain a level playing field.

beauf wrote: »

Then what if you have a problem. Trying to sort out a problem with UPC, either technical or billing, is a nightmare. Wastes loads of time for no reason at all.

But people don't buy on service they buy on price. But again a lot of this is overhyped. I've never found UPC's broadband CS to be anything other than excellent.

Other providers are well known for being an absolute nightmare but if it saves €3 a month people will flock to them.

beauf

MarkAnthony wrote: »

I...No but its exactly the same bollocks you go through with home, car, life insurance. Again the telcos would be delighted if there was a fixed, transparent price but everyone needs to get on that bandwagon or they all need to continue as is to maintain a level playing field.

With those others I can get a written quote before I commit. Not agree one thing over the phone and get something else on your first bill. You don't have anything like the billing issues with those other services. Ever tried to get a refund from UPC. Nigh impossible.

MarkAnthony wrote: »

But people don't buy on service they buy on price. But again a lot of this is overhyped. I've never found UPC's broadband CS to be anything other than excellent..


Other providers are well known for being an absolute nightmare but if it saves €3 a month people will flock to them.

I think you are wrong grossly exaggerated. Lots of people are getting UPC over cheaper BB. Because it faster. Many are getting UPC for BB and Sky for TV. When its dearer combination. Many people buy different health insurance or car insurance packages because they include other features then base package.

MarkAnthony

beauf wrote: »

With those others I can get a written quote before I commit. Not agree one thing over the phone and get something else on your first bill. You don't have anything like the billing issues with those other services. Ever tried to get a refund from UPC. Nigh impossible.

I've never needed too. I've had my share of consumer issues but it seems some people attract them!

beauf wrote: »

I think you are wrong grossly exaggerated. Lots of people are getting UPC over cheaper BB. Because it faster. Many are getting UPC for BB and Sky for TV. When its dearer combination. Many people buy different health insurance or car insurance packages because they include other features then base package.

People rarely consider their needs. I'm in a relatively good position to comment on this. People don't consider what they watching and frequently lie/don't realise what they do actually watch. Why people are paying for Sky when they want RTE and a bit of background noise is beyond me!

Why people insists on bundling is beyond me, especially when they have the Sky/UPC combo available.

Who actually uses >50Mbit of speed? The only time I go near that is when I'm downloading a game off steam. If I can afford €50 for something to waste hours on I can afford to buy broadband.

People will see something slightly cheaper and they jump on it, despite it being crap. E-vision and Sky's bundled DSL out in certain areas of Dublin (3 Mbit Hello!!!) are two examples.

People will go further and say well I can download Game of Thrones etc. some truth to that but to my mind it's not a great idea to pirate a great show if you expect more of the same to be made. Just me and my odd ideas I like getting it off Sky Atlantic.

Bet your arse I have Netflix though! Better Call Saul

beauf

If you haven't a wide range of experience, of different problems and different types of user, you're not going to be best placed the appreciate the various issues.

MarkAnthony

beauf wrote: »

If you haven't a wide range of experience, of different problems and different types of user, you're not going to be best placed the appreciate the various issues.

I do, daily, including today

beauf

You've become normalised to dire service then if think this kind of poor customer service is normal. Or that bartering as if on a market stall for a standard service is normal for a major tech company in 2015.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n3LL338aGA

MarkAnthony

beauf wrote: »

You've become normalised to dire service then if think this kind of poor customer service is normal. Or that bartering as if on a market stall for a standard service is normal for a major tech company in 2015.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3n3LL338aGA

What part of me saying I think it should probably be stamped out by legislation did you miss? However telco's would be delighted with that as it would be massively more profitable.

It's also not bad service to try and keep a customer if they have a genuine issue with payment. That said few actually do IMHO.

I'm sorry but you strike me as the sort of person who thinks everyone is against them in in sort of thing and that probably why you experaince so many issues. In over 20 years of having internet and TV I've had a billing issue once - Eircom and that was only becuase of the cack handed way they bill.

beauf

By your logic its your fault not Errorcom's that they billed you incorrectly. Its a perception that everyone is out to get you, and not really fault of their system.

I must explain that to the elderly neighbour that the reason their monitored alarm no longer works is not because UPC switched off their phone line, but because they've got a persecution complex.

Because I never had a problem with UPC it stands to reason no one else would either.

MarkAnthony

I really don't know where you're going with this. It's strayed so far off the topic of a legal discussion at this stage. In short:

Given the lack of many consumers ability to negotiate 'retentions' should probably be stamped out by legislation. Comreg have already indicated they weren't happy with the process in relation to Eircom. That said some would object to that see the posts furthur up.

Processes should be streamlined to allow people to move more freely and generate longterm transparent pricing and real competition. That said a large number of the issues are caused by user error in not reading contracts/notice periods. Yes misselling goes on and a good company will do one of to things;

(i) admit they are wrong and stand over it
(ii) admit they are wrong and release the customer from the contract

there should not be a requirement for a company to stand over a genuinely costly mistake except where they have caused the customer real cost in a missell incidental to the services offered.

The reason this needs legislation, or atleast a code of practice is if one continue all need to continue to keep a level playing field.

beauf

Its got nothing to do with an ability to haggle.

If you can order online, get though to sales immediately. But can't do other support issues specifically where its to the companies advantage for a slow resolution. It's at best happy coincidence, at worse a deliberate policy.

MarkAnthony

beauf wrote: »

Its got nothing to do with an ability to haggle.

If you can order online, get though to sales immediately. But can't do other support issues specifically where its to the companies advantage for a slow resolution. It's at best happy coincidence, at worse a deliberate policy.

Sorry what are you talking about now?

Of course companies make you wait to get through to the cancelations teams. Thats easily resolved by impsoing a CoP of allowing customers to canx by giving notice in writing. AFAIK UPC allow that by email and letter.

beauf

That would work well for that elderly couple wouldn't. 30 days notice to get your alarm back.

MarkAnthony

beauf wrote: »

That would work well for that elderly couple wouldn't. 30 days notice to get your alarm back.

So that needs to be managed through - if the company one is dealing with won't do that then don't give them the business. Again I'm not seeing you point from a legal discussions perspective.

There is also a regulator to make a complaint to if the product was missold.