News - Mid-contract telecoms price hikes to be a thing of the past?

[HEXUS]

New Ofcom ruling provides “fairer deal” and more transparency to customers.

Read more.

[3dcandy]

Mine rose because of VAT changes, that will still be allowed of course...

[cheesemp]

About time. Never seemed fair to me that they could just stick 5% on half way through with no come back. Its not like we as consumers get 5% extra call time/data etc as a result (cost of comms pretty much always go down not up).

[jimbouk]

Progress! When you sign up for a fixed cost, fixed term contract the user does not expect the price to change. Well done Ofcom, it's taken a little while but not bad considering how slow progress is on other issues (nuisance calls/texts for example).

[Kumagoro]

Is it mobile only or will it apply to virgin media and their bundles etc.

[crossy]

Remember this ruling will come into effect only on new contracts, signed after 23rd January 2014.

Wonder if the telcom's companies will trot out the same line as the power companies - namely that the "increased regulation" will result in the cost of these new contracts being higher than the current ones?

Change itself, from a pure man-in-the-street common-sense point of view, is long overdue. After all, if you sign up for a £30/month contract and then that becomes £31/month then that's not the same contract you signed up for. At least now (well next year at any rate) it'll be up to you as a customer to decide whether that's a reasonable change or not.

[crossy]

Is it mobile only or will it apply to virgin media and their bundles etc.

Mobile and broadband - so if they change your TV costs then you're outta luck. On the other hand if the cost of your M, L, XL broadband goes up then you'd get to walk away.

Remember though that this only applies to new contracts, it appears that us with current contracts will continue to be under the old regime. Which does raise the interesting question of whether you should seek to get a new contract from your provider when the current one ends - even if you're quite happy with the current terms - just so you can get that "walk away" provision/protection.

[virtuo]

When I was with Orange on a 2 year contract, they upped what I had to pay about 6-7 months in for the same service. According to them, it was a "small increase" so they were allowed to do it.

Not much I could do, but what was really annoying is they were still selling the same plan (Panther 35 iirc) at the non-increased price for new customers, the only ones they seem to care about.

[mporcas]

What happens to your handset? Are you forced to return that when you cancel early or do you get to keep it? Would you have to pay a small fee to retain it?? As the device is marketted as free or you pay a small fee for it does that then mean it's yours???

I'd make sure you know the answer's to the above before you cancel...

[MorrisR]

My understanding is that this relates to "fixed term" contracts, not "fixed cost, fixed term".
So it is allowing you to walk away from a fixed term contract without paying penalties if you don't like the price increase. Fixed cost should still mean fixed cost (although there are still likely to be exceptions such as changes in law - i.e. VAT).

[crossy]

My understanding is that this relates to "fixed term" contracts, not "fixed cost, fixed term".
So it is allowing you to walk away from a fixed term contract without paying penalties if you don't like the price increase. Fixed cost should still mean fixed cost (although there are still likely to be exceptions such as changes in law - i.e. VAT).

Excellent point - all the contracts I've seen out there are "fixed term", although with a stated cost, e.g. to borrow virtuo's point - "Orange Panther 35: 24 months @ £35/month". And pretty much everyone assumes that the "@ £35/month" is part of the contract ... i.e. "fixed cost".

But it ain't.

As was pointed out to me (by a Three "support" person) that "£35/month" is merely the current cost to you to supply that service that your contract specifies. He also pointed out (twisting the knife) that this is why the teleco's change the prices, not the allowances. The allowances ARE part of that contract, so you'd have justification for walking away if they suddenly lopped 25% off of your data allowance etc.

My hope - naive as it probably is - being that the potential of previously-locked in customers switching might persuade some of the more cavalier companies (i.e. all of them!) to be a bit more "customer focused" and, dare I say it, honest with us poor punters.

Timing is good because I'm thinking of ditching T-Mobile for Virgin, purely for the mercenary reason that VM can offer me an "unlimited" contract for £4.50/month less than my current T-Mobile one. Although T-Mobile does give me Openzone access and I'm allowed to tether.

[McEwin]

So what if a provider takes a different tack and instead of nudging up your price instead decides to reduce your call, text or even data allowances?

Or... What if they up the price AND up the allowances in line? Then (technically) the value hasn't changed...

E.g. £20 pm 200 mins => £22 pm 220 mins.
---
Like everyone says - long overdue. But I'm sure operators will find new ways to squeeze more money out of people.

[eatonm62]

About flipping time this was sorted out, long overdue but welcomed.

[krazy_olie]

Didn't even realise this was allowed in the first place... languishing on PAYG

[eatonm62]

Didn't even realise this was allowed in the first place... languishing on PAYG

I first found out about this when myself and my sister got a price hike when we were both with Orange, I was shocked at the time and made a complaint to them, as it didn't seem above board, I subsequently moved to Tesco Value :-)