Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob C
So yep the area is not serviced, and the is a weakness on the cableco's part.
But it isn't ntl's fault that the customer is moving before the contract minimum term.
On that basis ntl only partly fail the above clause.
|
NTL fail totally under the above clause in that they are the service provider.
What I quoted above was only one element of the "unfair terms" legislation. There are others which apply equally - should the OP wish to research them.
NTL are neither estate agents nor landlords. As such they have no right to determine, restrict, or attempt to restrict someones right to elect to move address. If you (the OP) wanted to be truly pedantic you could point out the fact that there is nothing in the T&C's that says a customer must live at a particular address and not move house.
The services, according to the T&C's, are provided to a particular address and there is
no mention anywhere that customers may not move house / address. Moving address does not, therefore, constitute a part of or breach of the contract on your part. If you are still keen to receive the services but they cannot supply them than they are in breach of the contract, not you. Again the OP would need to research this.
Do they also do "student deals" for term time students? Assuming they do then if they can facilitate contract terms which have negotiable timeframes outside of the oft referred 12 month contract on the basis of a temporary occupancy one would have to question why they can't waive the remainder of
any 12 month contact where occupancy of a particular address is the issue.
The key is in the word "may". If someone were to stick to their guns and cite consumer contract law I suspect, once NTL determined that they were serious and aware of their rights, that NTL would be very reticent to try and force the issue.
*Trust that bitch to butt in with a one sentence sensible answer!!