Mobile Network claims I'm on contract; Is small claims an option?

dalta5billion

I went online (business account) to upgrade to a new phone through my network. Saw a great price, couldn't believe that they weren't asking me to extend the contract, so I printed out all steps of the checkout showing I didn't click "accept" on anything and that no contract extension or anything was mentioned at any stage, no t&cs were displayed, no checkbox was offered etc.

Any ways, a few days ago I went to switch networks, was told by my network that I had 3 months left on my "contract" for that particular phone. After pressing them further they told me that by purchasing an upgrade, I must have signed a contract for 12 months. I told them I hadn't, produced the printouts etc. I also found in my email inbox a confirmation of the contract which leaves the contract period as blank, 12 months is not mentioned anywhere on the contract, all that is mentioned is the one-off upgrade price for the new phone.

Obviously not asking for legal advice here, but does the Small Claims process deal with cases where there's a dispute over whether a contract actually exists? I can't stop direct debits as one of the other phones on the business account is (correctly) still on contract. It seems like I'd have to go after it retrospectively, which gets complicated with regards to not actually using the service and porting of phone numbers, and if I'd have to go through the main courts and hire a lawyer etc I don't think it would be worth it.

GerardKeating

dalta5billion wrote: »

I went online (business account) to upgrade to a new phone through my network. Saw a great price, couldn't believe that they weren't asking me to extend the contract, so I printed out all steps of the checkout showing I didn't click "accept" on anything and that no contract extension or anything was mentioned at any stage, no t&cs were displayed, no checkbox was offered etc.

Any ways, a few days ago I went to switch networks, was told by my network that I had 3 months left on my "contract" for that particular phone. After pressing them further they told me that by purchasing an upgrade, I must have signed a contract for 12 months. I told them I hadn't, produced the printouts etc. I also found in my email inbox a confirmation of the contract which leaves the contract period as blank, 12 months is not mentioned anywhere on the contract, all that is mentioned is the one-off upgrade price for the new phone.

Obviously not asking for legal advice here, but does the Small Claims process deal with cases where there's a dispute over whether a contract actually exists? I can't stop direct debits as one of the other phones on the business account is (correctly) still on contract. It seems like I'd have to go after it retrospectively, which gets complicated with regards to not actually using the service and porting of phone numbers, and if I'd have to go through the main courts and hire a lawyer etc I don't think it would be worth it.

If any of your printouts/emails, does it have a mention something like "Subject to standard T&C"

dalta5billion

GerardKeating wrote: »

If any of your printouts/emails, does it have a mention something like "Subject to standard T&C"

Only in the email I received after the transaction, as a hyperlink. Those t&cs basically say " contract length is as stated on agreement" but contract length is blank on the agreement.

No t&cs were presented during ordering as well, no check box either, no hyperlink. No reference to contract, or contract length at all. As I understood, I was making a purchase, not a structured agreement.

Peregrinus

dalta5billion wrote: »

bviously not asking for legal advice here, but does the Small Claims process deal with cases where there's a dispute over whether a contract actually exists?

There's no dispute over whether a contract exists; it absolutely does. You have a contract under which they provide you with mobile telophony and you pay for it. The dispute is over the terms of the contract; whether you are free to terminate it immediately without notice, or whether you have a contractual commitment to a minimum term which has not expired. So, yes, I don't see why this can't be litigated in the small claims process.

Claw Hammer

There are also writing requirements for contracts for the sale of goods of the value of more than £10 now about €13 under the Statute of Frauds Ireland Act 1695 as amended by the Sale of Goods Act 1893. Conditions can't be inserted into a contract after it is made.

dalta5billion

Thanks for the help everyone; company saw sense today, matter resolved.

Peregrinus

Claw Hammer wrote: »

There are also writing requirements for contracts for the sale of goods of the value of more than £10 now about €13 under the Statute of Frauds Ireland Act 1695 as amended by the Sale of Goods Act 1893. Conditions can't be inserted into a contract after it is made.

The provision of a mobile telephony service is not "sale of goods".

Claw Hammer

Peregrinus wrote: »

The provision of a mobile telephony service is not "sale of goods".

It is the supply of a service.