Legal Action Against NTL

[hotscotchbonnet]

I raised a point in another thread about the standard NTL policy of crediting back excess charges against future bills...

Ok - bear with me if I give a bit of background waffle first...In my case NTL issued a new unrequested 12 month contract to me 6 month into my exisitng 12 month agreement. I moved house at this point, but that should not have changed the contract as NTL specifically state that contracts and direct debits continue as usual. Interestingly, the new 12 month contract they sent had a 40% tariff increase. Unbeknown to me NTL also cancelled my direct debit.

When I phoned customer services to complain I was told the bill sent with the new contract would be rectified and a new contract would be sent reaffirming my exisiting agreement. However, before this occured NTL disconnected me for non payment.

A couple of points:

• NTL had debited my account under the terms of my existing (signed by me) contract only one month previous to the disconnection
• If I paid the bill relating to the new contract it would signal my acceptance of the new 12 month agrement with 40% price hike. Paying that bill would make that contract legally binding. Hence, I was not prepared to do that.
• I went to great lengths to pay for the month's services under the original contract terms but NTL made this impossible, refusing to resissue the bill and telling me I had to pay the incorrect bill in order to be reconneceted.

Now, in later weeks after I had been disconnected, NTL suggested that I must pay the original incorrect bill in full as the excess had been/would be credited against subsequent months service. So, what they wanted was for me to pay the initial overcharge, and then continue paying slightly reduced amounts for the months in which i was disconnected - despite the disconnection being due to their error! So they were trying to force me to pay according to the unrequested new contract and pay for months of non-service too!

Q. What is this NTL policy of crediting back excess charges over time all about?

Is it simply that the company are refunding genuine errors and thus behaving responsibly?

Say NTL overcharge me or you £15, and return that £15 over 3 months in the form of phone services offered at a reduced rate.

• NTL are not returning the £15 as such, but telecom services valued by them as equivalent to £15. Meanwhile the obliging customer must continue paying for other services in order to receive the refund due. From NTL's point of view, this therefore largely cancels out the cost of issuing a refund.

• In the meantime NTL have your £15 - effectively on interest free loan. In 2005 NTL had an estimated 2 million active broadband subscriptions. If they overcharge 1 in every 20 customers £15 then we are looking at 100,000 x £15 on interest free loan. That is £1.5 million pounds.

• That £1.5m would not be static but earning interest. If NTL were to pay back the initial overcharge through services rather than direct refunds, the cost of repayment would be less than the £1.5 they earned from overchaging, plus there would be a significant profit on interest.

In civil cases hearsay is admissable before the court (in civil cases proof is about probability rather than beyond resonable doubt). I am sure there a fair few numbers of disgruntled customers with cases regarding overcharging against NTL. If complaints are collected (say on this forum) then they can be submitted before the court and presented as evidence backing up individual cases. Of course, it will be the merit of the individual case that counts, but my point is that a dossier of similar complaints may add weight to the individual case and show that consumer complaints placed before the court are not just one off occurances but a direct result of company policy.

Thoughts anyone?

Whatever the " overcharge " is I would guess you are legally entitled to a " cash " refund if you want to push the matter.

I mean if you bought a tin of beans from joe bloggs shop and they charged you £1 instead of 50p and you protested is it ok to just palm you off with another tin of beans?

You state the new contract was " unrequested " as far as I know NTL can send you new conracts as they seem fit.
Whether you stay with NTL or any company for that matter is up to you.
The contracts are a size fits all cases thing, where say you may have fulfilled your minimum 12 months, mr smith down the road may not have, you can cancel if you so wish, if the changes in the contract relate to service charges then you can cancel the account even if you have not had them for 12 months, but you must inform them within 30 days of you receiving the increase demand.

[hotscotchbonnet]

Any other company I have dealt with do offer a cash refund on overcharges.

NTL meanwhile refused to correct the overcharge and attempted to force me to pay it and agree to a new 12 month contract with 40% price hike.

A contract is a legally binding document and this is why people have such trouble cancelling services - NTL have a right to keep billing you for the duration of the contract whether you want the services or not.

However, a contract is only legal if it is assented to by both parties - so NTL's new 12 month contract with 40% rise is not binding on me - unless I signal assent by paying the bill relating to it .

I did inform NTL in writing by registered mail that they had breached their own terms and conditions and that I was not under obligation to be bound to the pre-existing contract (this is my right under the supply of goods act). I received no reply and they continue to bill me.

I also sent a formal complaint asking for the complaint to be sent to ADR, to which they also have neglected to respond.

The matter has since been referred to consumer direct, various media sources, regulatory bodies and ombudsmen.

Your best bet would have been on getting no joy from NTL contacting your local consumer protection department which should be based in your local council, they could tell you for sure how you stand, which is what happened when my sister had an issue with NTL that NTL couldnt sort.

[hotscotchbonnet]

Consumer Direct advice was basically to do everything that I already have done.

They did point out that I can phone ofcom ( i was under impression ofcom would not deal with individual cases) and also recommended CISAS - The Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme

I do recommend CISAS to anyone seeking dispute resolution outside the court, but who have no joy joy getting NTL to refer the matters to arbitration directly.

---------- Post added at 13:09 ---------- Previous post was at 12:24 ----------

I just checked throught the companies registered under the CISAS arbitration scheme and NTL isn't listed, so I am not sure if CISAS can help after all (although Consumer Direct put me on to them). I will update if I find out more.

---------- Post added at 13:49 ---------- Previous post was at 13:09 ----------

To get thread back on track - anyone have thoughts on collating complaints as background evidence for civil cases?

It could be a useful resource available for anyone seeking damages.

[Shaun]

If I paid the bill relating to the new contract it would signal my acceptance of the new 12 month agrement with 40% price hike. Paying that bill would make that contract legally binding. Hence, I was not prepared to do that.

You should ahve paid the normal amount and asked them to put the rest in dispute untill they could get it sorted.

In addition if they aren't members of the CISAS scheme then they may be memebers of OTELO.

In addition OFCOM don't take on individual cases tehy old do somehting when they get a long list of complaints

[hotscotchbonnet]

Originally Posted by Shaun

You should ahve paid the normal amount and asked them to put the rest in dispute untill they could get it sorted.

Yes that is good advice!

Sadly in my case NTL told me to await a new bill, and then cut me off! They cut me off 4 weeks after the incorrect bill arrived, and just over a month after they had debited my account as usual according to existing contract. They then told me I would only be reconnected if I paid the incorrect bill in full. So paying the normal amount wouldn't have resolved the problem. I do see your point as in hindsight it would have been a point in my favour, but at the time I lived in hope that NTL would sort it out and reissue the bill according to my original terms and reconnect me.

N.B In normal cases disconnection for non-payment happens at a point considerably after 4 weeks from the date an intial bill is received. Normally several warning letters are sent first!

In actual fact disconnection occured less than 2 weeks after that months direct debit was due. Not only that, but NTL had not informed me that the DD was cancelled, and whilst I noticed they were 10 days late in collecting the money, i assumed it was because they were adjusting the billing figures as that is what I had been led to believe by customer services.

[hotscotchbonnet]

Update:

I received an intial response from Sir Richard's Branson's office this morning, following my letter to his office regarding NTL's business policy. I sent that letter only two days ago. It occured to me that I would be much more likely to get a response from Branson's office than I ever am to get a returned call/acknowledgement letter etc from NTL. How true that has proved!

Meanwhile the staff at NTL head office haven't been able to pull their finger out to respond to a formal notice of intended legal action that I sent to them by registered post.

[Neil]

Where's my friend Mr Angry?

He would be a worthwhile addition to this thread....

[Russ]

Originally Posted by hotscotchbonnet

Update:

I received an intial response from Sir Richard's Branson's office this morning, following my letter to his office regarding NTL's business policy. I sent that letter only two days ago. It occured to me that I would be much more likely to get a response from Branson's office than I ever am to get a returned call/acknowledgement letter etc from NTL. How true that has proved!

Meanwhile the staff at NTL head office haven't been able to pull their finger out to respond to a formal notice of intended legal action that I sent to them by registered post.

We have high-level contacts directly in to ntl - PM me if you want us to intervene.

[Fingy]

I think Mr A may be on holiday.

[N00N00]

What a superb thread. I hate it how NTL refuse to give refunds when they overcharge you. I've previously been in the position where I've had to agree to a new contract to get the money I was owed. Fortunately this contact was cancelled when I got my latest deal so I won't be joining in with any legal action just yet.

Anyway good luck - this could be rather expensive for NTL if you win

[hotscotchbonnet]

Originally Posted by Russ D

We have high-level contacts directly in to ntl - PM me if you want us to intervene.

Well, thankyou I do appreciate the time spent by everyone on these forums in sorting out problems, and it is a great forum.

However, I did follow up that option when I first posted my case a month ago and sent off my a/c details, and NTL declined to get back to me.

I do think that it is top level company policy (rather than resource restricted Customer service reps trying to keep their jobs) that is the main problem, so I guess county court judgements are more likely to bring about changes in the long run.

---------- Post added at 16:54 ---------- Previous post was at 16:49 ----------

Originally Posted by N00N00

Anyway good luck - this could be rather expensive for NTL if you win

Well, it could certainly be expensive for them if they had to stop overcharging people!

[Russ]

Originally Posted by hotscotchbonnet

Well, thankyou I do appreciate the time spent by everyone on these forums in sorting out problems, and it is a great forum.

However, I did follow up that option when I first posted my case a month ago and sent off my a/c details, and NTL declined to get back to me.

There have been some issues recently which may have meant our requests to ntl have not been recieved - this now appears to have been resolved and I can guarantee you a response if want me to get involved.

[lostandconfused]

obviously i have no idea around your account, however you say it should be way after 4 weeks of the bill being produced that you were disconected, however there may have been a credit limit on the account, often people with direct debits are completly unaware it is on there as it wont have affected them before.

also you said your letters of pending legal action went ignored, the ntl legal department wont respond to any letters of this sort.

they are there purely for legal procedings, if you take them to court then they will get involved, however you do need to take it all the way, not just threaten action