I have to pay for a wireless router that is free to new customers?

[BenMcr]

Contracts are different to terms and conditions though.

By continuing to recieve the service, you are legally agreeing to be bound by the Terms and Conditions of the service.

These Terms and Conditions specify that each side must provide 30 days notice of any change

It is like whenever you buy a Train ticket. By buying the ticket and getting on the train you are agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the train network, however you don't stand there for 1/2 an hour at the Ticket Office whilst they get read out to you. You wouldn't however, be able to claim that you didn't know they existed if you were taken to court for breaking them.

Originally Posted by JethroUK

Technically (and hence legally) impossible to enter into a verbal contract without 'knowing' you have

judge will look for evidence of 'agree'ment - & you can't 'agree' if you dont even 'know'

If you are paying for the services from a provider then you have an agreement in the eyes of the law, no if's or buts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Your Day in Court!!!

You stand up in court and say "I have no agreement with that company"

Magistrate says " Are you or have you been paying for their services then?"

You say "Well yes but I never signed anything"

Magistrate says " You paid in full every month, every bill they sent"

You say "Well yes I always pay my bills"

Magistrate says "You are fulfilling the terms of your contract, I find for the company and you must pay a fine and all legal fees, plus any monies owing"

A short version of any court proceedings but probably quite accurate.

[cook1984]

The simplest thing to do is edit the contract, sign it and send it back. I'm pretty sure VM won't bother checking it or complain about the edits.

Most people don't realise but in order for a contract to be legal, it must be negotiable. Of course, one party can refuse any and all changes, but the option must at least be there. So, when you get any kind of contract for anything you can just delete or edit the bits you don't like and then sign it. The other party may decide not to agree, but I find that most of the time they do.

If you do edit the contract, make sure you keep a copy for yourself.

[popper]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Contracts are different to terms and conditions though.

By continuing to recieve the service, you are legally agreeing to be bound by the Terms and Conditions of the service.

These Terms and Conditions specify that each side must provide 30 days notice of any change

It is like whenever you buy a Train ticket. By buying the ticket and getting on the train you are agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the train network, however you don't stand there for 1/2 an hour at the Ticket Office whilst they get read out to you. You wouldn't however, be able to claim that you didn't know they existed if you were taken to court for breaking them.

your a little confused there Ben, it is in fact the Terms and Conditions that constitute the contract clauses, to put it simply the T&Cs are the consumer contract.

CONSUMER contracts (I.e the T&C clauses) are given extra legal protections as so called generic contracts, giving the consumer more automatic protections and rights that any other type of contract might not automaticly receave.

a simple example being the consumer Vm broadband T&C contract gets these extra considerations, however the business virgin media/NTL/TW broadband T&C contract would not, something to consider if you want more than one Cable Modem at your address and chose to take the business contract to get them offically.

any consumer T&C contract clause that is deemed unlawful,not in "good faith,as defined in legal terms", or inequitable (not equitable; unjust or unfair: an inequitable decision. )to the consumer , is an invalid contract term and so not valid or enforceable in law.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

Good companies should look after long serving customers, I have been with the AA for 20 years, I get Relay free with my Home Start & Roadside pack.

Customers who've been with UK cable for a long time definitely deserve something, either parole or a psychiatric exam.

Joke! Honestly, I was joking but it had to be done

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by popper

your a little confused there Ben, it is in fact the Terms and Conditions that constitute the contract clauses, to put it simply the T&Cs are the consumer contract.

Ah, was confusing the T&Cs with a minimum term

But the whole argument over 'I've never signed nothing' doesn't hold water

The last time Virgin changed their T&Cs was in Feb 2007. By now I reckon that even the most relaxed court would judge a customer to have accepted them. Therefore the 30 day rule would be enforceable (especially as it applies to both side and therefore is not 'unfair')

[popper]

Originally Posted by whydoIneedatech

If you are paying for the services from a provider then you have an agreement in the eyes of the law, no if's or buts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Your Day in Court!!!

You stand up in court and say "I have no agreement with that company"

Magistrate says " Are you or have you been paying for their services then?"

You say "Well yes but I never signed anything"

Magistrate says " You paid in full every month, every bill they sent"

You say "Well yes I always pay my bills"

Magistrate says "You are fulfilling the terms of your contract, I find for the company and you must pay a fine and all legal fees, plus any monies owing"

A short version of any court proceedings but probably quite accurate.

a very bad assumption and not very likely im afraid , VM and many other Uk companies sell off their valid and invalid delinquent accounts to 3rd party debt recovery agencys so your day in court would be more like this, if it even got to court that is.
Your Day in Court!!!

Magistrate asks, is the defendant in court?, yes sir/madam.

is the plaintiff in court , no sir/madem.

Magistrate asks the defendant (you) do you owe this company this money?

you reply NO, the DRA has NOT provided me with a valid and signed contract, infact they cant as they doesnt have a valid legally signed contract signed by me sir/madam.

Magistrate to plaintiff council (if they even bothered to pay and send anyone in there to represent them),
is this correct, do you have a valid and legally binding signed contract?

plaintiff council, NO sir/madam, we cant seem to locate it at this time.

Magistrate case dismissed, i order the plaintiff (them) to pay the defendant (you) all costs as layed out in his/her counter claim (you MUST mention the CRAs records or the court cant rule on this part etc.... i also order that all references to the plaintiff as regards any and all CRA (Credit Reference Agency) records be removed, not mearly marked as payed etc....

[BenMcr]

So that would probably also apply to Sky, BT, be broadband, and quite a few other companies then?

As none of them have asked for to send back a written contract, and be broadband never sent anything in hard copy (was all done through the net)

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:31 ----------

Oh and if you are saying that you can get out a contract if the company can't produce a written and signed contract, does that mean that Virgin can't be sued for loss of services etc for the same reason?

[popper]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Ah, was confusing the T&Cs with a minimum term

But the whole argument over 'I've never signed nothing' doesn't hold water

The last time Virgin changed their T&Cs was in Feb 2007. By now I reckon that even the most relaxed court would judge a customer to have accepted them. Therefore the 30 day rule would be enforceable (especially as it applies to both side and therefore is not 'unfair')

thats ok Ben, loads of people forget these basic rules, the best bet to get upto speed is to seriously look at the old bank charges cases and legal avenues it helped educate the consumer masses to these county court small claims and court rules etc.

CAG is a very good thing for this purpose have a read some time
http://search.virginmedia.com/result...er+contract&cr=


sure the 30 day rule clause is perfectly valid as it is legaly binding on both partys, not just the consumer, VM are just as tied to it as you are.

the fact some silly VM executive signed off on the removal of the official "Electronic notice" was a very bad thing for VM though,

as NOW, legally Virgin Media cant send you a simple EMail as an official 30 day notice of contract change for instance

only written signed and delivered paper/fax counts now and most consumers dont have or give out their fax No.s but VM do

Originally Posted by popper

a very bad assumption and not very likely im afraid , VM and many other Uk companies sell off their valid and invalid delinquent accounts to 3rd party debt recovery agencys so your day in court would be more like this, if it even got to court that is.
Your Day in Court!!!

Magistrate asks, is the defendant in court?, yes sir/madam.

is the plaintiff in court , no sir/madem.

Magistrate asks the defendant (you) do you owe this company this money?

you reply NO, the DRA has NOT provided me with a valid and signed contract, infact they cant as they doesnt have a valid legally signed contract signed by me sir/madam.

Magistrate to plaintiff council (if they even bothered to pay and send anyone in there to represent them),
is this correct, do you have a valid and legally binding signed contract?

plaintiff council, NO sir/madam, we cant seem to locate it at this time.

Magistrate case dismissed, i order the plaintiff (them) to pay the defendant (you) all costs as layed out in his/her counter claim (you MUST mention the CRAs records or the court cant rule on this part etc.... i also order that all references to the plaintiff as regards any and all CRA (Credit Reference Agency) records be removed, not mearly marked as payed etc....

Maybe it would not end up in court but having bailiffs after you and any of the Major ISP's on the case is a sure fire way to destroy your credit history.

So why don't you prove us otherwise, oh and by the way you will need provide written documentary proof to the contrary, not hot air, actually stop paying your bill to whoever your ISP is and tell them all the above and see how far it actually gets you.

I have nothing to prove you are the one stating otherwise so prove it!

[popper]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

So that would probably also apply to Sky, BT, be broadband, and quite a few other companies then?

As none of them have asked for to send back a written contract, and be broadband never sent anything in hard copy (was all done through the net)

---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:31 ----------

Oh and if you are saying that you can get out a contract if the company can't produce a written and signed contract, does that mean that Virgin can't be sued for loss of services etc for the same reason?

thats a very good question

its a general rule OC that the courts always try and favour the consumer over any companies and their legal teams, as your not as learned as these payed council in the ways of the law.

hence the special attention to the above consumer to business contracts, wereas the business to busines contract is another kettle of fish altogether.

if virgin Media did ever get taken to (small claims)court by the consumer rather than Ofcom that usually has to deal with these unlawful/invalid consumer T&C contracts.

and VM was foolish enough to let it get to court day without agreeing to the consumers terms or comeing to an agreement with them, i guess VM could try it and see if the magistrate sees it that way and throws it out too.

---------- Post added at 21:51 ---------- Previous post was at 21:06 ----------

Originally Posted by whydoIneedatech

Maybe it would not end up in court but having bailiffs after you and any of the Major ISP's on the case is a sure fire way to destroy your credit history.

So why don't you prove us otherwise, oh and by the way you will need provide written documentary proof to the contrary, not hot air, actually stop paying your bill to whoever your ISP is and tell them all the above and see how far it actually gets you.

I have nothing to prove you are the one stating otherwise so prove it!

its bit OT for the thread but you asked the quiestion so OK ill give you and any interested readers a starting point IF YOU care to read it.

im also sure you REALLY beleve all your saying here as perfectly valid assumptions on what you know and learned in your life, if you cant accept my posts as true and researched, just read and learn,ill gladlly hold my hands up and learn by it when im wrong as Ben knows.

im only trying to help you and other readers discover new things, and how it all fits together , its your choice to take it and learn or leave it, but CF has been getting real boreing of late and im only really come here and helping out of habit now, although the tech stuff is interesting the last few days OC , so ill not take to much effort to prove anything as i dont need to ,iv done my research and know what i know and test my assumptions with more research every day, if you chose to show me links to read i may take the time and see if you have a point and change my stance if its proves out .

the old company bailiff like official letter scare tactic doesnt work so well today with all the help out there to guide your consumer actions and responses to these bogus bailiff things sent through the post.

first of all to make it clear in your head, A COURT ORDERED bailiff is one thing, any other type are something totally different.

as a court ordered bailiff, YOU as the consumer have all the rights to submit your papers to the courts outlining why they are wrong BEFORE any such Bailiff order is granted and you are advised to make sure you do follow it through without fail.


http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-can-cant.html


as for the likes of Vigin Media etc using the CRAs to try and destroy your credit history by passing any and all (including invalid closed accounts that are wrongly still being billed by the Vm systems that many here and elsewere post about) defaults, thats another popular UK company scare tactic today.

the Credit Reference Agences DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO STORE YOUR PERSONAL DATA IN LAW other than court ORDERED rulings,WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT END OF STORY.

thats why its always included in any company T&C contract to grant them this required permission, you can remove that right AT ANY TIME by sending an "official notice" on writing to the data controller of said companies, see my link in all my posts below to find that address.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...d-removal.html

you might need to sign in there as for some strange reason it didnt work without, as it did before.

its a REALLY GOOD thread to learn why the CRAs are conning YOU into thinking they have some law that states they must collect/retain your data today, and how you can stop them in their tracks with this tryed and trusted rule of thumb .

as for "having the Major ISP's on the case" is just plain silly, the Uk major banks that hold this countrys long term finantial viability in it hands, and keeps vast armys of legal teams on retainer,(that the ISPs cant even begin to finance) couldnt justify the "unlawful charges" under the existing UK common law , so the so called UK major ISPs like the debt encumbered Virgin media dont hold any scary thoughts or real serious finantial risk to any consumer considering taking them to 'civil' small claims court for whatever reason.

infact the likes of VM and BT are hopeing that the UK consumers dont infact get a clue and finally get off their backsides and take on the broadband STM and fair use policys to the courts as they did with the far more powerful UK banks, the ISPs will surely loss if they ever gave the consumers real reason to finally say enough is enough and fill in the D1 small claim form rather than do the easy option and run away to another ISP.

if BT are so mighty and legally sure of their plans and past actions, dont they just run the new Phorm trials and get it over and gone with without a care of what the Uk consumers might then do to them in court.... why dont virgin Media and CPW also do the same trials,the answers obviously they are not so sure of their legal positions.

[akira]

Originally Posted by popper

as for the likes of Vigin Media etc using the CRAs to try and destroy your credit history by passing any and all (including invalid closed accounts that are wrongly still being billed by the Vm systems that many here and elsewere post about) defaults, thats another popular UK company scare tactic today.

the Credit Reference Agences DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO STORE YOUR PERSONAL DATA IN LAW other than court ORDERED rulings,WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT END OF STORY.

Not acording to the leflet I got from Experian when I ordered a copy of my credit file. It said that licended credit agencys are allowed to collect info about you and there nothing you can do about it. You can't even get them to correct something unless the company agrees with you, if they don't the only rights you've got is to have a explaination attached to your credit file.

For a company to search your credit file you've got to give permission but not for the credit agencys to keep the info.

Otherwise I could take out loads of loans, defualt on them, withdraw my permission for the data to be collected, have my credit file wiped of the bad debt and then start the process all over again. Ummm its a massive loophole don't you think to be left open.

[popper]

hehe Experian dont you just love em, ask them to show you this UK law that says they can collect,process or store your data info without your consent or agreement , it does not exist.

they cant show you this law, so will give you the run around, without your data they cant profit from it, thats why they are also looking to use DPI kit to collect your online data too and add it to their ever growing databanks without once paying you for its use.

its YOUR PERSONAL DATA, YOU OWN IT,you say what can and cant be done with it,not them or anyone else for that matter.

seriously, make the time to read that link and his other posts there, it explains it ALL in plain english,and how he got Experian to finally admit they DONT INFACT HAVE THAT RIGHT without your consent, its a real eye opener...

[BenMcr]

No, they don't have the right without your consent, but the consent is built into the Terms and Conditions of the credit agreement, and I'm sure it would be an either/or situation

Either you accept the Terms and Conditions in full (which would include passing information the Credit Reference Agencies) or you accept none of it, and therefore don't get whatever it is you were applying for

Even if you withdraw consent at a later date, the CRA would still legally be allow to keep the data you had previously given consent to, it just would not be able to update it from that point. After six years, the data would expire as it does at the moment

Also, even if you withdrew consent for updates, and then had a CCJ found against you, I'm sure that would be entered onto the credit file anyway (as it would be a matter of public record which I think means the DPA would allow it to be entered by the court)

---------- Post added at 23:57 ---------- Previous post was at 23:47 ----------

Originally Posted by popper

if BT are so mighty and legally sure of their plans and past actions, dont they just run the new Phorm trials and get it over and gone with without a care of what the Uk consumers might then do to them in court.... why dont virgin Media and CPW also do the same trials,the answers obviously they are not so sure of their legal positions.

I'm sure that is question for another thread, but I will say I'm not quite sure who your target is here.

Neither Virgin or CPW have ever said they would run trials without first gaining consent from the people involved.

If that is the case, and full consent was gained, then it would be legal.

[popper]

yes its OT, so i dont want to post reams of text, i dont have a target, it was just WDINATs contention or implication that consumers cant and shouldnt fight the big and brave UK ISPs and their legal teams, as they are always right in their legal thinking and implimentations of the law.

Phorm being the current in voge legal subject and a perfect example to show why these companys can infact be influenced by little old you and me without needing to withdraw our cashflow and run away to another ISP instead.

at some point VM and CPW will have to officially trial it or dump it.

they cant just install it and switch it on one day hopeing it works first time every time, assuming if they do have another lapse in corporate judgement, install and run it over consumers and websites generated dataflow, and forget the real possibilitys they the executive team signing it off, can potential face real jail time under current RIPA (existing UK executive stanford case law etc).

that potential legal threat comeing from any single uk person or world wide website owner taking the company to court and getting a guilty ruling at any time.

---------- Post added at 00:46 ---------- Previous post was at 00:21 ----------

yes as i already said any court orders such your CCJ example would be public record and so a viable entry for the CRA database, if its in the courts official public data its a valid order.

your other personal data not covered by the courts rulings IS NOT legally retainable without consent as you say,and we need to look at the EU and UK DPA laws as already covered by the Phorm thread so we all know these facts if you followed that OC.

the 6 years is again a made up rule the private CRA companys made up to keep their profits running, no data no profits to charge the other companys for access.

as the official court rules (as in some court ruleing somewere,i looked and found some once way back, so this case law already exists if you care to look and learn more)made clear, once a consumer contract is finished any and all right that gave the company to collect,process and/or store your data is also null and void see DPA,so they cant legally retain it, with the EXCEPTION they can retain money owed data UNTIL that account is payed in full.

the laws not difficult to understand, no current valid contract in place,
no rights to retain data of a person can be legally enforced by said private company.