This is the unfair bank charges thread, just applied to a different scenario of Virgin Media cancellation.
Just because something is written into a contract, does not mean that it is indeed fair and legal with regard to other legislation. A company may well have had lawyers pour over the contract, but unless it get's tested by a court, they don't really know do they. After all whenever a case goes to court there is usually a winning and loosing lawyer.
Bottom line, most VM customers just roll over when confonted with a big corporation claiming it's lost out.
I reiterate that whilst there may be some charges to pay, they should relate only to the actual losses being incurred by the cancellation, and that in no way should equate to the full unused contract price.
If it did equate Virgin would effectively be saying that they operate at a loss. Oh hang on, maybe that's why there are so many comments about poor network investment, STM and the like
