Angry UPC customer...

SanMah

I have been a customer of UPC since 2006 when I moved into my new 2 bed apt..I rang UPC about 4/5 weeks ago to Change my package and was advised by one of their customer care agents that UPC have been charging me for 4 boxes since 2007.

Considering I live in a 2 bedroom apt and clearly don't have a need for 4 boxes this is obviously a mistake and the agent agreed.

4 weeks later UPC have admitted the mistake however won't return a full refund and will only offer a refund for the last 13 months and not the last 7 years...

I've more or less been told tough take the 13 months or nothing even though they brought it to my attention then today I get another offer my bill reduced by 50% for the next 12 months to compensate for the invoicing mistake on my account.

To say I'm angry stressed is an understatement so the message here is check your bills people although probably won't get a refundðŸ˜ðŸ˜

A Dub in Glasgo

Did it not occur to you over the 7 years to check your UPC bills?

Trimm Trabb

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Did it not occur to you over the 7 years to check your UPC bills?

Did it occur to UPC to check were the billing someone for something they hadn't ordered?!

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Did it not occur to you over the 7 years to check your UPC bills?

I don't understand how people do not check every bill and statement they receive. I check every transaction and charge.
OP, I doubt you will get all 7 years refunded. Accept the best offer they make.

A Dub in Glasgo

Dup

A Dub in Glasgo

Trimm Trabb wrote: »

Did it occur to UPC to check were the billing someone for something they hadn't ordered?!

Maybe they did or maybe companies leave it alone until contacted by the customer although that is absolutely no excuse for being lazy when checking your own bills

Cabaal

It may be worth following their customer charter in relation to your complaint http://www.upc.ie/pdf/154585UPCCustomerCharter%28Residential%29Jan13.pdf

What may be worth doing is requesting documents/calls for your initial signup which will of course show that you never requested the additional boxes.

I would imagine that they may have a clause in their Terms & Conditions which state something along the lines of "you have x amount of time to query bills/charges".

I would say that there is without a doubt a level of responsibility on you to check your bills, not checking bills in 7 years shows a lack of responsibility on your part. As far as UPC are concerned you actually could have had all those boxes at that address, customers make some very odd requests after all. They are only aware of the fact you don;t when you query your bill and highlight that you do not infact have more boxes.

Guy:Incognito

Trimm Trabb wrote: »

Did it occur to UPC to check were the billing someone for something they hadn't ordered?!

In fairness, the only way that's probably going to get picked up is if someone happened to manually check the op's bill and then ask them if they have 4 boxes for some reason. They have a couple of hundred thousand bills automatically going through. The op only has their own.

Batzoo

First thing the OP should do is check a couple of old bills and see if the charge for the 4 boxes is explicitly mentioned on the bill as an extra to the TV package that is supplied. Make sure it is not an ambiguously described service charge or lumped in with and "entertainment package".

If it is not clearly described as an extra charge and what it covers the OP may have a case. It would not be the first time UPC made a "mistake" with billing. Over the last couple of years I have had to contact them on 4 separate occasions regarding incorrect billing which was passed off as a computer error and a refund would be issued in the next billing period. It was only a couple of euro in each case that may not be noticed coming out of an account. It cost me a lot more in time and effort to resolve.

Its at the point now where I only contact them through email so I have records of the responses, as each representative gives different information for my account, even though I was assured by a supervisor that they all have access to the same information. If it was not for their Broadband I would be rid of them.

Slippin Jimmy

It really is up to the customer to keep track of their bills and finances. Did you not think you were paying too much for what you had? I'm not blaming you, but upc can only charge you for what they have on your account, seven years is a long time not to notice this. Try for the refund and half price.

Oryx

While I realise it is up to the customer to check bills, I fail to see why this absolves UPC from having to provide a more substantial refund. The mistake is on their side, after all, and has now been pointed out to them. It seems to me they are hoping to fob this customer off with the easiest option.

crazygeryy

Go to a solicitor and get some advice on it. What have you got to lose?

Cabaal

crazygeryy wrote: »

Go to a solicitor and get some advice on it. What have you got to lose?

money that you'll have to pay the solicitor? :pac:

Flippyfloppy

Nah, go for it OP. Send them a letter of complaint, ask for your initial sign up documents/contract in the letter. Quote the amount you were overcharged from the exact date it began. Do everything in writing from here on out. In fact contact comreg, they may help you out.

Allyall

Comreg may be able to help you. They may be able to squeeze that bit extra out of UPC, and then maybe accept the best offer.

Del2005

Oryx wrote: »

While I realise it is up to the customer to check bills, I fail to see why this absolves UPC from having to provide a more substantial refund. The mistake is on their side, after all, and has now been pointed out to them. It seems to me they are hoping to fob this customer off with the easiest option.

A year refund would be OK but the OP has been ignoring their bills for 7 years, there has to be some responsibility on the consumer if they ignore bills for 7 years.

Flippyfloppy

It's not like the OP was getting a full movie & sports package without saying anything. They were being charged for something they hadn't requested or received. No matter what UPC have in their contracts there has to be some form of legislation governing this!

beauf

Allyall wrote: »

Comreg may be able to help you. They may be able to squeeze that bit extra out of UPC, and then maybe accept the best offer.

Have comreg actually helped anyone out on an individual basis like you are suggesting.

beauf

This is over charging. Would the small claims not deal with it?

timetogo

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

They were being charged for something they hadn't requested or received. No matter what UPC have in their contracts there has to be some form of legislation governing this!

Was it shown on their bill?
I don't know what the multiroom appears like on the bill. I have UPC internet and everything is broken down. It's complicated and I didn't understand mine but like most adults if I'm paying for something I don't understand I rang and asked them to explain it to me.

Flippyfloppy

This is overcharging and seems very similar to the whole 'Missold PPI' stuff. OP you gotta bring this further.

Comreg has helped me out before , something to do with Vodafone, can't remember the exact situation!

A Dub in Glasgo

These things will happen from time to time and it is the reason people should check what they are paying for. It not like the OP only noticed after about 6 months, it was 7 years and was only pointed out to them from the adviser from UPC. It is about time people took personal responsibility for their own affairs. I often meet people in work who have no interest in checking receipts and bills, they just pay... they are lazy

Slippin Jimmy

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

This is overcharging and seems very similar to the whole 'Missold PPI' stuff. OP you gotta bring this further.

Comreg has helped me out before , something to do with Vodafone, can't remember the exact situation!

How is it similar to ppi being missold?

Cuddlesworth

Duffff-Man wrote: »

How is it similar to ppi being missold?

I'm wondering the same. If the OP has 84 bills which all clearly state the extra charge there is a level of personal responsibility he needs to take onboard.

Slippin Jimmy

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

I'm wondering the same. If the OP has 84 bills which all clearly state the extra charge there is a level of personal responsibility he needs to take onboard.

I totally agree. Overcharging can happen sometimes by mistake. I very much doubt the company did this on purpose. It is reasonable for a company to expect a customer to check their bills once in a while. Its like going back to a shop after 7 years and saying you were overcharged.

Flippyfloppy

Duffff-Man wrote: »

How is it similar to ppi being missold?

Because people had it for years and didn't realise.

timetogo

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Because people had it for years and didn't realise.

There's a stage when people should realise they shouldn't be allowed sign up to stuff. The op had it for 7 years and didn't think to check the UPC website once to see if they had new or better plans.
After 7 years UPC offered him a years refund and a year at half price and still people tell him to get onto Comreg. I'd be telling him to get on to his bank as he's not paying sufficient attention to where his money is going.

endacl

beauf wrote: »

This is over charging. Would the small claims not deal with it?

No. You may be thinking of Judge Judy. Common misconception here.

ebbsy

Open yellow pages, and look for the solicitors section with the full page ad.

The ones that are wheelchair friendly and are open on Saturday should be the ones to look for.

Slippin Jimmy

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Because people had it for years and didn't realise.

The two have absolutely no relation. We don't have all the facts here because the op has not updated us in a while. It really is their own fault for not checking what they had. If they could afford to let this money be taken out for 7 years then they must have too much of it on their hands.

Upc have been more than fair in their solution here. If it wasn't pointed out to the op then they would be none the wiser and still paying the full amount.

beauf

endacl wrote: »

No. You may be thinking of Judge Judy. Common misconception here.

What has a TV show got to do with it?

Who does this fall under. Banks for taking more than agreed? Civil case who?

Del2005

Duffff-Man wrote: »

How is it similar to ppi being missold?

Flippyfloppy wrote: »

Because people had it for years and didn't realise.

I thought the PPI miss selling was that people where sold something they couldn't actually claim from as they didn't qualify.

The OP could have had the 4 boxes but choose not too look at their bill for 7 years so didn't take them or cancel them. UPC are at fault for sticking the extra boxes on the bill but not checking in 7 years and expecting it all back, when the tax man doesn't even refund that long.:eek:

Allyall

Duffff-Man wrote: »

It really is their own fault for not checking what they had. If they could afford to let this money be taken out for 7 years then they must have too much of it on their hands.

Upc have been more than fair in their solution here. If it wasn't pointed out to the op then they would be none the wiser and still paying the full amount.

I'm pretty sure consumer rights should/would protect OP.
By your reckoning, because the OP didn't check their bank account, and/or was oblivious, ignorant, naive or just too trustworthy, that it's okay for UPC to rip them off for 7 years, and then offer some money back, and credit for their services so that they continue to benefit.
Somebody in UPC was eventually honest enough to point this out, but how did it go that long unnoticed by them?
If the OP is to blame for having too much money on their hands, then maybe UPC are to blame for taking on too many customers, and not having enough staff to monitor mistakes like this.
There's no excuse for ripping someone off for that long and then citing that the consumer was the stupid one.

A Dub in Glasgo

This was a mistake, maybe the application from the OP 7 years ago was unnecessarily vague, maybe UPC were providing what they thought the OP asked for and since the OP never queried it, why would they think there is an issue?

The OP has been lazy as hell in not checking bills and is now expecting to return to 7 years ago and make someone else accountable for their sloppiness and laziness. The problem nowadays is the lack of personal responsibility for their own affairs

Slippin Jimmy

Allyall wrote: »

Nonsense.
I'm pretty sure consumer rights should/would protect OP.
By your reckoning, because the OP didn't check their bank account, and/or was oblivious, ignorant, naive or just too trustworthy, that it's okay for UPC to rip them off for 7 years, and then offer some money back, and credit for their services so that they continue to benefit.
Somebody in UPC was eventually honest enough to point this out, but how did it go that long unnoticed by them?
If the OP is to blame for having too much money on their hands, then maybe UPC are to blame for taking on too many customers, and not having enough staff to monitor mistakes like this.
There's no excuse for ripping someone off for that long and then citing that the consumer was the stupid one.

Upc didn't rip them off. For some reason there was 4 boxes on the account and that is what they have been charged for. 7 years later the op finds out there was an error and is unhappy with the solution given. As we do not have the full facts you cannot blame upc.

Upc were not aware of the error until the op said they were in a 2 bed accommodation. They can only go with what they have on their customers accounts (4 boxes). I don't know why you are saying they should monitor mistakes, it would be impossible to do. They charged for what they believed was correct.

Allyall

Duffff-Man wrote: »

Upc didn't rip them off. For some reason there was 4 boxes on the account and that is what they have been charged for. 7 years later the op finds out there was an error and is unhappy with the solution given. As we do not have the full facts you cannot blame upc.

Upc were not aware of the error until the op said they were in a 2 bed accommodation. They can only go with what they have on their customers accounts (4 boxes). I don't know why you are saying they should monitor mistakes, it would be impossible to do. They charged for what they believed was correct.

For some reason there was 4 boxes and that is what OP was charged for. 7 years later UPC found out there was an error - OP Correctly, is unhappy. No 'Solution' has been given. Without full facts you cannot blame OP.
OP was not aware of their error until UPC said that they were charging for 4 boxes.
It would be very easy to monitor their mistakes. Definitely not 'Impossible'.
They may have charged for what they thought was correct, the OP paid for what they thought was correct.
The fact is, UPC have the OPS money, and took it by accident.
I have no idea why you would think that the OP is to blame, nor why they shouldn't get their money back. Unless it expired.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

A Dub in Glasgo

Melendez wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Maybe there should, I mean not checking your bills for 7 years is the norm in your world

Edit, If UPC had not noticed that they undercharged for 7 years, I would be saying the same thing, they should have checked. I doubt UPC, in that circumstance, would be expected or allowed to recover the money they thought they were due but did not due to their laziness and sloppiness

Slippin Jimmy

Allyall wrote: »

For some reason there was 4 boxes and that is what OP was charged for. 7 years later UPC found out there was an error. Without full facts you cannot blame OP.

Nor can you blame upc.

It would be very easy to monitor their mistakes

How?

The fact is, UPC have the OPS money, and took it by accident.

They took it because in 7 years it was not questioned once. If you want to be lazy and not check your bills then fine, but you can't expect a company to pick up on a mistake that they don't know they're making.

Say it wasn't extra boxes, but instead they were charged extra for sports and movies. Would you think the op should be given a full refund for 7 years?

Allyall

Duffff-Man wrote: »

Nor can you blame upc.

That quote was actually in reply to saying that already.

Duffff-Man wrote: »

How?

In this particular case, quite easily. They had 7 years, I'm sure the bill was reviewed many times.

Duffff-Man wrote: »

They took it because in 7 years it was not questioned once. If you want to be lazy and not check your bills then fine, but you can't expect a company to pick up on a mistake that they don't know they're making.

Yet you blame the OP for not knowing the mistake was being made.
Not knowing the correct pricing, or not realising you are overpaying, should result in you losing your money?

Duffff-Man wrote: »

Say it wasn't extra boxes, but instead they were charged extra for sports and movies. Would you think the op should be given a full refund for 7 years?

Completely different and hypothetical, it wasn't Sports and Movies. UPC/OP would have to go back over each day and prove OP didn't watch any of those at any time. Which isn't practical and wouldn't happen.
Say it was you who overlooked pricing on something, and it amounted to quite a substantial amount, would you not think you were entitled to have your money back? Especially if the mistake was not made by you, but was made by the people who now have your money.

Batzoo

OK the OP seems a bit shy and has not clarified some of the points raised. But all the posts saying they are lazy or it's their own fault for not checking is a bit harsh.

Some facts to note are an engineer would have delivered and installed the original box. They would have filled out a work sheet for that box and only that box. This should have been cross referenced by UPC to the OP's account.

If it was a self install, 4 boxes would have been dispatched at the same time to the customer. UPC should have a record of each box and the details.

Most likely for a 4 box install an engineer would have to be dispatched to install the extra points.

Any of the above should have raised a flag on the UPC billing system that the user is paying for four boxes but only has one registered to their account. I would expect this due diligence to be applied by UPC to all bills issued to customers. Obviously it was only noticed when the customer rang UPC and the rep could see straight away that they were being overcharged.

The onus should not be on a customer to read a 30 page legal agreement/terms and conditions, to sign up to a basic TV service. UPC and the big service companies should be more responsible in these situations to their customers.

A Dub in Glasgo

Batzoo wrote: »

The onus should not be on a customer to read a 30 page legal agreement/terms and conditions, to sign up to a basic TV service.

I would like to see an example of the bill

Slippin Jimmy

Allyall wrote: »

In this particular case, quite easily. They had 7 years, I'm sure the bill was reviewed many times.

Can you explain this a bit better please?

How can you be sure the bill was reviewed?

Yet you blame the OP for not knowing the mistake was being made. Not knowing the correct pricing, or not realising you are overpaying, should result in you losing your money?

If they didn't look at the original contract which they would have recieved, then yeah it is their fault. I think they should get some money back, which they have been offered.

Completely different and hypothetical, it wasn't Sports and Movies.

I'd still like an answer. It is a relevant question.

Say it was you who overlooked pricing on something, and it amounted to quite a substantial amount, would you not think you were entitled to have your money back?

If it was me, it wouldn't happen because I would have researched what im getting vs what im paying for. Check my bank account regularly and also any bills that I am paying, as im sure the majority of people do.

Allyall

Duffff-Man wrote: »

Can you explain this a bit better please?

How can you be sure the bill was reviewed?

Batzoo explained it perfectly here

Duffff-Man wrote: »

If they didn't look at the original contract which they would have recieved, then yeah it is their fault. I think they should get some money back, which they have been offered.

UPC aren't to blame at all?
13 months refund is nothing compared to the 84 or so months that UPC have been charging for.

Duffff-Man wrote: »

I'd still like an answer. It is a relevant question.

I did answer.

Duffff-Man wrote: »

If it was me, it wouldn't happen because I would have researched what im getting vs what im paying for. Check my bank account regularly and also any bills that I am paying, as im sure the majority of people do.

That's not an answer, and is basically saying that you don't/won't make mistakes.
Everyone is different, and just because you are sure that this in particular wouldn't happen to you, doesn't mean the OP should be penalised because it did happen to them.

Slippin Jimmy

Allyall wrote: »

I did answer.

Yeah you edited your post to answer it.

Would you expect them to be refunded for them?

That's not an answer, and is basically saying that you don't/won't make mistakes.

It is an answer. I would make sure any mistakes that were made were brought to the attention of said company in a timely manner. Not 7 years down the line.

Allyall

Duffff-Man wrote: »

Yeah you edited your post to answer it.

Would you expect them to be refunded for them?

Five minutes before you posted.
I answered.

Duffff-Man wrote: »

It is an answer. I would make sure any mistakes that were made were brought to the attention of said company in a timely manner. Not 7 years down the line.

It wouldn't have to be the same scenario. But apparently that wouldn't make a difference either, because you just don't make mistakes full stop.

Pity you don't work in UPC.

Slippin Jimmy

Allyall wrote: »

Five minutes before you posted.
I answered.


It wouldn't have to be the same scenario. But apparently that wouldn't make a difference either, because you just don't make mistakes full stop.

Pity you don't work in UPC.

Everyone makes mistakes. But you can minimize them by simple checks. Ie bills, contracts, bank statements etc.

Wouldn't make a difference if I worked for them or not.

Allyall

There are tons of examples of people being overcharged. In the UK alone, there always seems to be an example of a customer or customers being overcharged for long periods of time.
Hard to prove, but it wouldn't be a big shock to learn that it wasn't by accident.

Apart from that, here makes some interesting reading that I'm sure the big Companies are aware of, and don't make it easier.
http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/latest-news/confusion-over-bills-costs-families-up-to-220-a-year-29535868.html

I'm sure there would be many similar article if they were worth looking for.

paulheu

This is really a non issue. Sure, UPC made a billing mistake but it is not _only_ their fault this went on for so long. UPC does not see, check or verify every bill that goes out, as this is an automated process with no eyes on these bills. You, as the customer, can and should check every bill you receive however.

They agreed to refund you for 13 months AND give you a 50% discount for the next 12 months. How much does that leave as far as you having paid too much?

To be honest I think this arrangement seems quite reasonable to me.

Melendez

This post has been deleted.

paulheu

So you're saying I should be able to claim overpaid tack from before 2009 as well then? And I can quote you on that?

WE have not heard from OP since his/her initial post so we have no real idea of what happened in the past 7 years. IF the extra boxes were on the bill all the time and OP did not do anything about it it's likely that at least some of the over payment is now unrecoverable.

Assuming the OP has two boxes in use , the offer was a refund of 13x2 boxes which comes out at around €275 and a 50% discount on the next 12 bills which (assuming a 240Mb contract with 2 boxes) means another €575. So that would come to a total of around €850 which would be very reasonable.