CROSSED LINES ON PHONE DEAL
RELIEVED: Ian Coombs won't have to pay a £400 fee
By Maisha Frost
Problems with phone bills piled on the pressure for two customers struggling with ill health and the fallout from the recession.
Ian Coombs and Susan Lilleyman contacted Crusader individually about their tussles with telecoms company Unicom.
However though their cases were unrelated, the two shared striking similarities. Both had small family firms that were no longer trading and had disputed contracts outstanding with Unicom - a hangover from the time when still in business.
Manchester-based Unicom, part of energy giant Universal Utilities, concentrates on supplying companies not residential customers, focusing on commercial deals that offer competitive rates in return for long contracts - typically three years.
Ian, 75, from Burley in Wharfedale, west Yorkshire, signed up to one in 2006 on behalf of his wife’s fashion company Yvonne Coombs Knitwear which produced hand-crafted cashmere jumpers for top designers like Calvin Klein.
|
The legal protections in place for consumers are stricter than for companies because they are considered more able to take care of themselves
|
|
|
Ian says he inquired about switching providers before the three years was up but the £900 break fee deterred him. Then the company hit hard times and his wife became ill. A bad debt from a distributor in the American Rockies resort of Aspen, who failed to pay for a consignment of ski sweaters, was the final blow.
After 30 years Yvonne Coombs Knitwear folded. “Our knitters lost their jobs, there was a lot to cope with,” recalls Ian. His Unicom deal required him to cancel three months before the term expired.
He says he does not recall being warned. “I thought once the first three years were up, we were then free to pull out when we chose without further restrictions.”With no longer any commercial overheads to consider Ian then found a better deal with BT, but discovered he was now in a second three-year cycle with Unicom.
This time he was offered a £400 severance charge.He asked Crusader for advice about the same time as did Susan Lilleyman, a sole trader from Carmarthenshire, who became a Unicom customer in 2006 when she ran a dog walking and pet sitting service. But she stopped a year later to care for her elderly parents.
However she was still contracted to Unicom and continued, she says, because she couldn’t afford its £300 cancellation charge.Once her term was up in 2009 Susan switched to a residential provider, and thought the fact she had let Unicom know two years before she was going to quit would be enough notice. But it wasn’t.
Her contract was renewed, Susan refused to pay the £300 fee and her debt ballooned into £700. Otelo, the telecommunications disputes resolution Ombudsman, did not consider she had justifiable grounds against Unicom and, with a total of £900 now owing Susan approached Crusader.
The legal protections in place for consumers are stricter than for companies because they are considered more able to take care of themselves.
But that leaves the smallest firms the most vulnerable. In the upset that often accompanies a closure, long-standing agreements can easily get overlooked.
Small firms uncertain of the future as they fight their way through the downturn may also need to look further ahead and consider the wisdom of locking themselves into long-term deals. If they do shut down, and need to negotiate an opt-out they may well find they have to provide formal financial proof that they have ceased trading.
Unicom managing director Chris Earle explained: “We are only interested in business customers and giving the best service possible. We believe our prices are highly competitive but to achieve that we keep overheads low and that includes subscription-based contracts. But we make our terms clear and certainly warn clients about renewal times.”
Mr Earle said he sympathised with the business struggles Ian had gone through and immediately wiped off the £400 cancellation fee, leaving him free to pursue a better residential package. †As a gesture of goodwill he also confirmed he had cleared the £900 demand hanging over Susan. “We are hugely relieved and grateful,” responded Ian.
THE RENEWAL SCAM
10.08.10, 11:22am
Far too many scam artists are using small print and obscure and contradictory terms and conditions to fool the customer into thinking they can terminate a contract when in fact they are locked in. Tricks like these ensure these companies get at least another years premiums and in the worst cases they can construct a contract to make it almost impossible to break.
I thought there was a ruling that only fair terms and conditions were legal but it seems that too many companies are playing this despicable game.
• Posted by: Costa_Blanca_Mike • Report Comment
UNICOM CONTRACTS
30.07.10, 2:12pm
I have questions for Mr Earle of Unicom:-
When exactly do you "warn clients about renewal times"? Why was I informed by your customer services that "it is not Unicom policy to send out reminders"?
If your "terms are clear" as you say they are, why are there so many complaints from competent business customers who find themselves unable to terminate their contract after 3 years?
No Mr Earl - your terms are not at all clear and transparent - in fact - they are quite the opposite.
Type 'Unicom contract complaints' into Google and see for yourself.
• Posted by: RMJ • Report Comment
To view all 'Have Your Say' comments, click this button...