UPC & upc intrum justitia

Stanzen

Hi, there have been a couple of posts about intrum justitia, but there haven't really gone anywhere so in an effort get some advice I'll try to keep it brief.

After numerous calls to UPC about sub par speeds (in fiber area) and modem reception problems, I cancelled by direct debit and cancelled my account. So about a month later I get a letter from intrum justitia saying I owe €248. €58 for the last months bill and €200 for a cancellation fee because I am still in contract. While cancelling my account on the phone I told them I was not going to pay a cancellation fee because I was not getting the service promised, hence why I was cancelling. The contract must have been a verbal one because I didn't sign anything.

I have no problem paying the €48, as that was what the last bill was, but I flat out refuse to pay the €200 for cancelling and sub standard service. Since then I got another letter saying next step is legal action etc etc.

Does anyone know can they really come after you for €200, or is that just scaremongering? Since then I signed up for Vodafone broadband and it's great.

beauf

Well you broke the contract. Some people have paid the 200 to get out of the service.

You could open a case with the Small Claims Court to recover your costs thus far. That might make them drop it.

How is the Vodafone broadband better?

Stanzen

Surely the 'contract' is broken by them not supplying speed and service as advertised?

Vodafone speeds are in line with that they say and reception from the modem is much better then the upc one

leeroybrown

Have you read this contract in detail? Can you actually prove that your speeds were below the minimum contractually stipulated terms? If not you're out of luck.

Stanzen

Good point, there was no written contract to read in detail. It was on the phone, where they said I would get speeds of 50mb/s. But that is not what I got.

There were no terms used like 'speeds of up to...". I'm in a fiber area, which means I should be getting speeds they advertise. I'm now getting the speeds with vodafone and their router (which I suspect may the original problem).

But going back to my original question, are intrum justitia scaremongering, or is this something that could be brought further?

leeroybrown

Don't mess with Intrum Justitia. They're clearly UPC's debt recovery agency at the moment. They'll pursue it.

beauf

Stanzen wrote: »

... speed and service as advertised...

Which was?

dudara

Stanzen wrote: »

Good point, there was no written contract to read in detail. It was on the phone, where they said I would get speeds of 50mb/s. But that is not what I got.

There were no terms used like 'speeds of up to...". I'm in a fiber area, which means I should be getting speeds they advertise. I'm now getting the speeds with vodafone and their router (which I suspect may the original problem).

The fact is you did not cancel the contract according to the T&Cs. I don't know what steps you took with UPC support to resolve the speeds, but you cannot unilaterally declare yourself out of contract.

Will Intrum pursue this? Quite possibly.

PropJoe10

What you will need to do regarding the cancellation fee is be able to prove to UPC that you contacted them and gave them an opportunity to fix whatever issues you were having. Generally with ISP's, speeds are advertised as "up to 50mb" etc rather than guaranteeing you a specific speed, which means they are covered at their side. How many times did you contact them roughly? Did you have engineers out etc?

Paulw

Stanzen wrote: »

Good point, there was no written contract to read in detail. It was on the phone, where they said I would get speeds of 50mb/s.

There were no terms used like 'speeds of up to...". I'm in a fiber area, which means I should be getting speeds they advertise.

From the UPC terms and conditions, on their website -
2. Provision of Services
2.2 In supplying the Services we will always use our reasonable skill and care but are unable to guarantee fault free performance. The Services are provided on a best efforts basis and we do not warrant that any connection to, transmission over, or results of the Equipment or the Services will meet your requirements or will provide uninterrupted use or will operate as required or at any minimum speed, or error free. We can not guarantee minimum bandwidth delivered to you and we can not guarantee that all data traffic can be transported complete and without delay. If a fault occurs you should notify us by contacting our customer management centre. If you are unable to access the Services, you remain liable to pay all Charges that would otherwise apply.

11. Termination and Suspension of Services
11.5 As well as your other rights, you shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by notice to us in writing if we fail to perform or observe any material obligation under this Agreement and (in the case of a breach capable of remedy) we fail to remedy the breach within a reasonable time from receiving from you a written notice specifying such breach and requiring us to remedy it.

So, if you didn't terminate the contract by written notice, within the terms, then you are in breach of contract, and they will come after you for the fee.

former legend

Stanzen wrote: »

There were no terms used like 'speeds of up to...". I'm in a fiber area, which means I should be getting speeds they advertise. I'm now getting the speeds with vodafone and their router (which I suspect may the original problem).

Just to point out: being in a "fibre area" refers to the Eircom service (Vodafone runs on the same wires), UPC BB is totally separate. Router probably not to blame.

To answer your question; UPC aren't in the debt collection business, that's why they brought in this crowd, they will pursue it I'd imagine. It reads like you broke the contract so are liable, the question now is how much you dig your heels in.

Stanzen

@beauf 60mbs is what I thought I would be getting. It actually got anywhere between 2mbs and 30mbs.

@PropJoe10 I rang them about 8 times. Same problem each time. After the 6th time an engineer called out. Said set up in house was fine and that he needed to check the nearby junction box. Rang about 2 more times after that, then cancelled.

@Paulw Going by that I didn't cancel on their terms. But I think that they may still have wanted their cancellation fee if I did cancel on those terms.

I've no problem paying what I owe. But to have to pay a cancellation fee because I'm breaking a verbal contract for a service that I wasn't getting, seems a little beyond the pale.

my3cents

OP, you can get a copy of any information that UPC hold on you under data protection legislation. UPC would need to have a recording of you clearly agreeing to a contract before they could enforce any cancellation fee. So you could pay the administration fee (about €6.50) and request that UPC's data administrator provide you with all the information they hold on you including any recordings and signed contracts. They have 40 days to reply to a valid request. If they can't come up with the voice contract then there is no contract.

former legend

my3cents wrote: »

OP, you can get a copy of any information that UPC hold on you under data protection legislation. UPC would need to have a recording of you clearly agreeing to a contract before they could enforce any cancellation fee. So you could pay the administration fee (about €6.50) and request that UPC's data administrator provide you with all the information they hold on you including any recordings and signed contracts. They have 40 days to reply to a valid request. If they can't come up with the voice contract then there is no contract.

No no no no no no.

Like, the guy comes on here for advice and this is so unbelievably wrong that it's, well, unbelievable.

Verbal contracts are legally binding, there is no onus on them to have a recording of it.

Edit: and as soon as he started using the service and presumably paid a couple of months' bills, there absolutely is a contract.

Paulw

Stanzen wrote: »

@Paulw Going by that I didn't cancel on their terms. But I think that they may still have wanted their cancellation fee if I did cancel on those terms.

Nope, if you cancel according to the contract, then there is no fee to pay. You just must give the proper notice.

Failure to do so has resulted in the charge they are chasing you for.

beauf

Stanzen wrote: »

@beauf 60mbs is what I thought I would be getting. It actually got anywhere between 2mbs and 30mbs.

@PropJoe10 I rang them about 8 times. Same problem each time. After the 6th time an engineer called out. Said set up in house was fine and that he needed to check the nearby junction box. Rang about 2 more times after that, then cancelled.

@Paulw Going by that I didn't cancel on their terms. But I think that they may still have wanted their cancellation fee if I did cancel on those terms.

I've no problem paying what I owe. But to have to pay a cancellation fee because I'm breaking a verbal contract for a service that I wasn't getting, seems a little beyond the pale.

Is that the speed connected to their box via Ethernet?

You're getting a fee because you didn't follow the correct process to cancel them.

Its not that we are not sympathetic, they are a horrible company to deal with. But the simply fact is you have to follow the the agreement. If you don't you walk yourself into the fee.

Stanzen

They want the cancellation fee because I cancelled within 12 months of the so called verbal contract. Not because I didn't give them notice.

my3cents

former legend wrote: »

No no no no no no.

Like, the guy comes on here for advice and this is so unbelievably wrong that it's, well, unbelievable.

Verbal contracts are legally binding, there is no onus on them to have a recording of it.

No recording no contract!

Try doing some research on "Voice Customer Authorisation" (VCaf) its the official process for making a contract over the phone in Ireland and requires a recording.

rubberdiddies

former legend wrote: »

No no no no no no.

Like, the guy comes on here for advice and this is so unbelievably wrong that it's, well, unbelievable.

Verbal contracts are legally binding, there is no onus on them to have a recording of it.

Edit: and as soon as he started using the service and presumably paid a couple of months' bills, there absolutely is a contract.

My wife was with Vodafone mobile for years. One day Vodafone rang her telling her they were reviewing her account and she could save money on international calls by changing such and such. At no point was she told she would be entering into a new 12 month contract.

A month later a new bill arrives which was almost double her average bills. She rang and was told she was in a new contract. She said she wanted to cancel. They said no. She asked them to produce the recording where she agreed to enter into this new contract. A week later they rang back and said it was unavailable. They cancelled the contract and refunded her the money she overpaid.

Long story short, ring UPC and ask for a copy of the recording where you agreed to the contract.

beauf

former legend wrote: »

...Verbal contracts are legally binding, there is no onus on them to have a recording of it.

Which is why UPC (an ISP) don't communicate via email, or letter. Its almost impossible to refute a verbal conversation afterwards.

It speak volumes about the companies approach to customer service.

beauf

rubberdiddies wrote: »

My wife was with Vodafone mobile for years. One day Vodafone rang her telling her they were reviewing her account and she could save money on international calls by changing such and such. At no point was she told she would be entering into a new 12 month contract.

A month later a new bill arrives which was almost double her average bills. She rang and was told she was in a new contract. She said she wanted to cancel. They said no. She asked them to produce the recording where she agreed to enter into this new contract. A week later they rang back and said it was unavailable. They cancelled the contract and refunded her the money she overpaid.

Long story short, ring UPC and ask for a copy of the recording where you agreed to the contract.

That they did cancel it does not mean they had to cancel it.

rubberdiddies

beauf wrote: »

That they did cancel it does not mean they had to cancel it.

so are you saying that UPC can ring me up right now say "hello, how's it going.....are you happy with your service?", put the phone down, then enter me into a 12 month contract, the only proof being that they made a phone call to me? But because they claim I entered into a contract, they don't have to prove it?

I highly doubt that

EDIT: PS: and in the case of my wife and Vodafone, of course they had to cancel it because she most definately didn't enter into a contract with them. Whether they had the recording, listened back to it and realised that, or whether they didnt have a recording at all I'll never know. Though comreg did hassle them about it for a few weeks after.

With the OPs issue, strictly according to the Ts and Cs he probably cannot cancel as he didnt deny entering into a contract. But I'd love to see a test case where a provider isnt providing a service as described, or where a provider doesnt have proof of a verbal contract. Would be interesting

beauf

The problem with verbal contacts, is proving that they exist or didn't exist.

http://theselfemployed.com/law/dealing-with-and-enforcing-verbal-contracts/
http://www.lawyers.com.au/legal-articles/verbal-agreements-explained/

that’s why Samuel Goldwyn famously said, “A verbal contract isn’t worth the paper it’s written on.”

leeroybrown

beauf wrote: »

The problem with verbal contacts, is proving that they exist or didn't exist.

http://theselfemployed.com/law/dealing-with-and-enforcing-verbal-contracts/
http://www.lawyers.com.au/legal-articles/verbal-agreements-explained/

While your general point is true neither of those links appear to be of direct relevance to Irish law.

beauf

rubberdiddies wrote: »

...EDIT: PS: and in the case of my wife and Vodafone, of course they had to cancel it because she most definately didn't enter into a contract with them....

The issue here was not that she didn't enter a contract. A change of anything usually requires a new contract. But that they didn't inform you, which they are required to.

From experience companies almost never tell you. When I used to get cold calls about offers from my mobile provider. I used to wait for them to mention its a new contract. They never did. What O2 used to was only activate your upgrade
for a short time period. So when you rang back to ask for an upgrade, they say its expired and you're in a new contract now. Because you agreed to some change in conditions, like free txts for a month or two. Some drivel like that.

No one cold calls to you at the door or on the phone with a deal thats in your favour. They do it to catch you out. Off guard etc.

beauf

leeroybrown wrote: »

While your general point is true neither of those links appear to be of direct relevance to Irish law.

How so?

leeroybrown

beauf wrote: »

How so?

You've posted links from US and Australian sites. While some of what they say may be true here the information does not directly refer to the Irish legal system and precedent here. It's not relevant from a legal point of view.

beauf

Have you checked its not true or have you an objection to the general point.

goodlad

I had this exact issue with Vodafone.

Look up "Frustration of Contract". Essentially if they cannot provide the agreed service then the contract can be broken without issue.

Once i spoke to comreg and then spoke to vodafone and mentioned the legal term Frustration of Contract they agreed to cut my contract. In saying that, they cut the contract and then still went and billed me and then had debt collectors onto me but after months they magically found the recordings of them agreeing to cut the contract.

By the sounds of it you just took it upon yourself to change provider.
Deffo the wrong way to go about it.

beauf

Its odd how UPC you can sign up without it being in writing. But to cancel it has to be in writing. Nice.

carltonleon

Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know if you have one of those typed conversations with the online help personnel, are they kept ?

my3cents

beauf wrote: »

Have you checked its not true or have you an objection to the general point.

Calls are recorded

Once the customer has agreed to purchase the Product the customer is taken through the verification script. This process is recorded and stored.

From http://www.askcomreg.ie/tell_us/phon...cts.247.LE.asp

Recorded calls are used to verify if there is a valid contract

In two of these recordings it appeared to ComReg that the customers did not fully understand the TPV process and the TPV agents both actively encouraged the customers during the verification process and provided marketing information to the customers

The above is the well know example where TalkTalk got into trouble by changing over customers without the customers consent http://www.comreg.ie/_fileupload/publications/ComReg0730.pdf

The same process should be used to make all binding verbal online contracts.

leeroybrown

beauf wrote: »

Have you checked its not true or have you an objection to the general point.

My objection is to you posting links from two foreign sites (one based on Portland, Oregon, USA and the other based in Melbourne, Australia) without in anyway clarifying how the relate to contract law in Ireland. What matters here is the law in Ireland not in either of these foreign jurisdictions with their own legal systems.

beauf

My point was the practicality of verbal contracts.

beauf wrote: »

The problem with verbal contacts, is proving that they exist or didn't exist....

If you want to refute that this does not apply to this situation, or in Irish law, then go ahead.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

beauf

Melendez - thks. I wasn't aware of that. That explains a lot.

leeroybrown

beauf wrote: »

My point was the practicality of verbal contracts.



If you want to refute that this does not apply to this situation, or in Irish law, then go ahead.

I've no problem with your comment now that you've clarified it properly.