Issue
06
Case Studies Compensation Summary
September 2011
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
Compensation to £500.00
1
2011
Bill shock
C was shocked by a bill for £2,975.00 for use of 3G services to download data whilst on holiday. She acknowledged her son used
the phone whilst the family were on holiday and that she had received a warning about the high charges being incurred. T
highlighted information on charges, setting up the 3G phone and warning services they provided.
Found. T’s evidence about all the information they provided, particularly about setting up the 3G device, was compelling. C’s
claim to be released from an obligation to pay the charges failed.
0.00
2
2011
Bill shock
C ran up a bill of £4,000.00 for data roaming in Egypt. He said that he had never authorised international roaming and the
charges were exorbitant, especially as much of the activity had been 'unintentional'. The EU regulations on roaming applied so
the charges should be capped. T maintained that C did authorise it, he had been charged for and paid for international roaming at
the same rates on an earlier trip abroad (Columbia), the charges applied were the company's published charges, C was
responsible for the phone settings (e.g. checking emails and social networking sites) responsible for 'unintentional' roaming and
there were warnings about the costs of data roaming in the User Guide and on the iPhone when the roaming facility was turned to
'on'.
Found. The charges formed part of the contract price for the available services. Roaming regulations did not apply to roaming in
Egypt. C had authorised international roaming and T had provided adequate warnings.
0.00
3
2011
Bill shock
C incurred extremely high charges for accessing data whilst in Turkey which she wished to have reduced or set aside. She
maintained that she did not enable data roaming on her handset, she was never informed of the rates for data roaming charges
and she did not use her phone to any greater extent than normal while she was in Turkey. T asserted that the charges were
correct, data roaming was automatically turned off on the customer’s handset which necessitated her actively turning it on, and
that the rates for data roaming are clearly set out in its pricing literature.
0.00
1
The customer is referred to as, C, and the communication and internet service provider as, T.
1
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
Found. C’s claim failed. She was liable to pay the data roaming charges incurred on her account because the charges for data
roaming in Turkey were made clear to C when she entered into the contract with T. C actively turned on data roaming on her
handset in spite of warnings about the high rate of data roaming charges she would incur. She admitted to having used data
whilst in Turkey, and the bills confirmed the extent to which C used data whilst she was abroad.
4
2011
Bill shock
C had his phone stolen from his boat in Antigua while he was away. In 10 days a huge bill was run up. T received reports of
unusual activity on the phone and blocked the account, but by then it was too late. C said it was T’s negligence for not detecting
the unusual activity and the bill should be reduced to zero. T maintained that C should have protected his SIM by a password.
Found. While things might be different in EU as a result of the roaming regulation, or because of extenuating circumstances
(such as where C was unable for reasons beyond his control to contact T), there were no facts indicating why C should not pay.
The adjudicator recommended that T abide by its offer of a 50% reduction in the bill.
0.00
5
2011
Bill shock
C was shocked to receive a bill for more than £250.00 in one month and believed that he was being incorrectly charged for calls
to particular mobile numbers. T asserted it had correctly charged the customer and that its pricing guide stated the mobile
numbers called were not charged as UK mobile calls.
Found. C’s claim was unsuccessful as T had neither breached any term of its agreement with C nor failed in the duty of care it
owed to him.
0.00
6
2011
Bill shock
C's SIM card had been stolen whilst he was in Ghana on a business trip although he was unaware of the theft as he used a
different international SIM card during his trip. He was shocked to receive a bill in the region of £1,000.00. C argued that T
should bear the cost of the fraudulent calls as it failed to block his SIM card after the first few fraudulent calls were made and had
allowed charges to escalate. T asserted the contract clearly stated that C was responsible for the safe keeping of the SIM card so
C should be liable for call charges incurred on his account up to the point the account had been suspended due to high
international usage.
Found. C failed to report the SIM card had been stolen. There were no extenuating circumstances which warranted the terms of
the contract being set aside. The contract made C liable for the charges incurred on his account, despite the unfortunate
circumstances of the case. It was recommended that T abide by its offer to reduce the charges by £200.00 and arrange a
payment plan to allow C to pay off the balance in instalments.
0.00
7
2011
Bill shock
C and her husband went on holiday to America. Upon their return they received a bill for £2,970.00 which arose mainly from data
charges which were applied through the use of her husband’s iPhone. C maintained that her husband did not use his iPhone, in
any event T should have placed a bar on the account and the iPhone should not be able to automatically connect to the Internet
when it was not being used.
Found. C’s claim was dismissed. The evidence identified that the SIM card within the iPhone had made the data connections. As
a consequence the charges were properly applied. There were sufficient information and warnings given by T about the potential
for such charges to arise.
0.00
8
2011
Bill shock
C wanted T to refund about £1,200.00 on the basis that T had wrongly charged the customer’s account and had not followed C's
request (made through an agent) to remove iPhone data bundles from a number of mobile phones. T’s account note recorded at
the time of the request was different to that which C thought had been requested.
Found. T had simply acted on an instruction relayed to it by C’s agent. C had failed to establish an error by T. The onus was on
C to produce the written instruction given to T. Having failed to do so and in the light of an admission by C that in any event T
would have calculated data charges correctly in line with its current price guide, there was no basis for C seeking a refund.
0.00
2
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
9
2011
Bill shock
C claimed that T had wrongly billed her £200.00 for calls not made by her household including calls to India and Italy. T argued
that the bill was correct as it had carried out diagnostic tests and found no fault or mistake.
Found. C had provided no evidence to support the claim. The tests carried out by T showed that the calls were made from C's
landline. Under the terms of the contract C was responsible for calls made using her landline with or without her knowledge. The
claim failed.
0.00
10
2011
Bill shock
C was shocked to receive an exceptionally high bill after he had returned from holiday in Pakistan. Before travelling, he had
contacted T about roaming charges and mobile internet charges. In Pakistan C tried his best not to use the facility and
disconnected the mobile internet because where he was staying had free broadband. He believed that the amounts he had been
charged by T were incorrect and excessive. T pointed out that switching off data roaming was something which would be done
by C. T provided a number of offers and services in connection with using data roaming when abroad. It also sends a text
message when the phone is first connected to a foreign network giving details of costs. It sends additional messages to its
customers should they continue to use data.
Found. C’s claim failed. T had correctly calculated the bill and had acted in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
contract.
0.00
11
2011
Price plan
C contracted a phone and broadband service from T but her recollection of the price plan differed from that of T. She contended
that monthly bills did not reflect her recollection of the plan and the bills should be reduced by £200.00. T contended that the bills
were correct.
Found. The price plan described by T was more advantageous to C than her recollection. Bills conformed to the price plan.
However, T had not responded very well to C’s complaints and questions. There was a breach of the duty of care and nominal
compensation was awarded for inconvenience.
25.00
12
2011
Bill shock
C used premium rate multimedia services which he thought were included in his package and ran up a bill of £814.59 in a month.
T had offered to reduce the charges to £250.00 and give C 6 months to pay in instalments at £140.00 per month. C did not agree
as he could not afford this amount although T had informed a debt collection agency that C had agreed and it applied a
termination charge of £479.96. C contended that he had received poor customer service.
Found. T had been in breach of its duty of care to provide a reasonable customer service. £40.00 compensation was awarded
reducing the bill to £774.59 (£814.59-£40.00). As the entire contract value was £840.00 (£35.00 per month x 24 months) and C
had almost reached this in charges of £814.59, applying a termination charge of £479.96 was excessive, so the termination
charge should be waived. C should pay off the balance in instalments: £61.59 followed by 23 monthly payments of £31.00. Upon
receipt of the first payment of £61.59, T should remove the account from the debt collection agency and reset C’s credit file
default.
40.00
13
10:08
Overcharging
C overcharged and suffered inconvenience because T delayed cancelling service.
Found. T had not provided reasonable customer service. T apologised and explained a mistake had been made.
50.00
14
05:13
Dispute over £3
C upgraded to broadband service from dial up service which T continued to charge for.
Found. T had not properly explained its services and not provided CISAS reference number. Dispute over £3.00. C should bear
some responsibility for pursuing such small sum and not acting sooner to stop the double charging.
55.00
15
11:06
Television service
C was without broadband and television for six weeks. CISAS not normally consider complaints about television services but T
agreed to use the scheme. C claimed compensation of more than £1,700.00 calculated at his hourly business rate.
60.00
Compensation
£0.00
3
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
Found. C had suffered frustration by T’s breach of duty of care to provide reasonable customer service. Not appropriate to use
C’s business rates to calculate compensation for a domestic service.
16
08:10
Broadband service
T did not accept termination of contract by C. Termination in accordance with the Consumer Protection (Distance Selling)
Regulations 2000.
Found. T directed to either cancel the service and put a cease on C’s phone line or give C a MAC so that he could go to another
ISP, whichever of these two options could be achieved quicker.
100.00
17
08:02
Broadband service
speed
C gave clear evidence of a service promised by T but not provided.
Found. Neither C’s requests for assistance nor C’s complaints had received appropriate responses from T. C suffered
inconvenience. T directed to release C from his contract without penalty.
100.00
18
05:05
Broadband trial
Consumers’ duty to ensure they understand and can utilise the services requested and software provided.
Found. C did not take care to read contract terms and conditions and confused between dial up and broadband services. T
issued confusing literature, failed to properly investigate complaint and tried to force C to pay for a year’s broadband service that
C could not benefit from.
100.00
19
09:06
No defence:
overcharge
T unilaterally and erroneously upgraded C’s broadband package and tariff resulting in overcharges to C.
Found. C’s evidence credible as supported by bills, emails and letters from T. C was entitled to terminate the contract and be
discharged from it without any penalties. C’s modest claim for £100.00 was sufficient to compensate him for the anxiety and
inconvenience he had gone through.
100.00
20
11.10
Charges
C making many telephone calls and writing many letters but T gave poor customer service.
Found. Breach of the duty of care by T to C.
100.00
21
14:02
Moving house
C cancelled broadband and telephone as he was moving house. He was due a small credit of £4.19. Nothing happened, the
credit was not paid and T continued to bill for the unwanted service being provided to the old address of C. C was concerned that
non-payment would lead to credit blacklisting.
Found. C’s claim succeeded.
100.00
22
08:05
18 weeks without
internet
After 18 weeks C was without a broadband service as T tried unsuccessfully to deal with connection problems but T continued to
deduct a monthly subscription. C was frustrated trying to contact T to the extent that C telephoned T’s helpline at 4.30am in the
morning as it was the only time she could get through. C suffered anxiety and inconvenience caused by the failings of T.
Found. C’s claim succeeded.
150.00
23
15:02
Direct debit
C decided to terminate his services with T and move to another service provider. T disconnected his services early without
authorisation, re-instated the direct debit without C’s authorisation and took two payments from his account.
Found. C’s claim succeeded.
150.00
24
14:10
Services not
transferred to new
home in time
T did not transfer its telephone and broadband service to C’s new home by an agreed date.
Found. C’s claim succeeded
161.49
4
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
25
08:12
Poor service
T, without C’s authorisation, upgraded C’s broadband service accidentally making C’s email address inoperable. T took 76 days
to restore the email service. When C phoned T to cancel the anti-spam package on the email service, T cancelled the whole
account and refused to reinstate it.
Found. T had not provided a reasonable service.
195.00
26
12:06
Broadband service
failed
Broadband connection failed. T tried unsuccessfully to find a fault and restore the service. T agreed to cancel the contract,
offered to reimburse the monthly fees which had been paid by C and cost of calls made to technical support team. C refused the
offer and claimed cost of all telephone call charges, car parking and bus fares in lieu of on-line shopping, mobile top-ups and
£1000.00 for time, stress and the unsatisfactory customer service.
Found. There was no evidence to support the customer’s claims for car parking, bus fares or mobile top ups but the adjudicator
directed the company to pay the customer £15 for identifiable telephone calls and £200.00 for stress and inconvenience.
215.00
27
13:03
Not supplying
broadband
Very slow broadband speed at C’s new home. Remedial work was undertaken by T who then said they could do nothing to
improve service. Six months later C discovered that T had not been supplying broadband to his home. C cancelled the service
and sought a subscriptions refund. T promised a refund but it was never received by C.
Found. The compensation claimed by C was appropriate.
200.00
28
05:03
Reasonable
procedure not
followed
C ordered a broadband service but was unable to connect.
Found. T knowingly failed to provide a service, did not follow its own procedures to refer problem to second level team and
attempted to deny C access to a means of resolving the dispute both technically and administratively while at the same time
charging for that service causing C inconvenience.
250.00
29
06:08
Wrong debts
C had broadband service for less than 1 month. T continued to debit C’s bank account each month. C was forced to close her
bank account to stop monies being taken.
Found. T was directed to refund C all disputed sums debited from C’s bank account and pay compensation.
250.00
30
07:09
Inconvenience
damages
Agreement for services by which C would have enjoyment, peace of mind and would not be overcharged. T overcharged C at
mobile phone rates instead of landline rates for calls to Jamaica. T took more from C’s bank account on a direct debit than C
expected, resulting in bank making an extra charge because there was not enough money in C’s account to cover it.
Found. C inconvenienced by T’s failure.
250.00
31
13:09
Moving broadband
providers
C terminated contract before moving to next door property. C arranged for broadband services at his new property with a
different service provider. A short time after receiving a bill from T for alleged outstanding charges C’s new broadband
connection was suspended. Debt collectors pursued the customer. T acknowledged they had confused C’s account but they had
no record of C cancelling the contract. T apologised.
Found. T was directed to cancel the outstanding bill, to instruct their debt collection agents to stop pursuing C, to pay C’s
reasonable set up costs with another broadband provider, to investigate and explain in writing why C’s line was cut off and to pay
compensation.
250.00
32
15:08
Porting a number
C had been promised by T that he could port his number to his new address but the number was not ported.
Found. C’s claim succeeded.
250.00
33
12:08
Compensation for
C lost landline phone for two weeks and broadband for four weeks. T accepted there had been a service failure as well as poor
300.00
Compensation
£0.00
5
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
lost landline and
broadband
customer service and offered £300 compensation which C rejected, claiming £1,000.00.
Found. T’s offer of £300.00 was reasonable.
Compensation
£0.00
34
06:03
Hard of hearing
C was hard of hearing and found it difficult to communicate with T by telephone. C used T’s Anytime service, opened a different
account then requested termination of the account. T took 6 months to terminate the account which was far too long.
Found. C was disadvantaged when seeking technical support from T because he was continually referred to a telephone help
line when he had difficulty in hearing what was being said to him.
300.00
35
07:08
Providing broadband
C took up T’s broadband offer which could consolidate his three dedicated lines for home telephone, fax/telephone and computer
into two lines, giving an improved level of speed and service without inconvenience. C requested the broadband service be
provided on his dedicated home computer line but T provided it to the dedicated home telephone line.
Found. It cost C more money for a service he did not receive, he spent a significant amount of time trying to sort out a problem
not of his making and he was inconvenienced.
300.00
36
13:10
Broadband in noncable area
C asked T to transfer broadband service to his new home. As C was moving to a non-service area she was told by T to obtain a
line from others and then broadband could be provided over that. C did so, but broadband service was never provided by T. Bills
accumulated at the old address. C terminated the contract after being without broadband service for more than six months.
Found. The order went through another division of T but there were problems between T’s divisions. T was directed to apologise
and pay compensation.
300.00
37
08:04
No broadband
C’s broadband service disconnected by T due to telephone line (owned by another provider) being upgraded. The telephone line
could not take the enhanced service.
Found. T could not use problems with the line as an excuse to avoid responsibility. If a provider fails to provide what has been
agreed and charged for it is in breach of contract and has no right to demand or to take money for something it does not provide.
Exclusion clauses in the contract were void under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and the Unfair Terms in Consumer
Contracts Regulations 1999. T was directed to cancel its contract with C, remove its marker from the telephone line, repay all
sums paid by C after the broadband service failed, cancel any outstanding invoices and pay C compensation. The stress
exacerbated C’s psychiatric condition; compensation for personal injury was outside the scope of CISAS.
350.00
38
15:01
Mis-selling unsuitable
package
C, represented by his daughter, was over 80 years old and died during the course of the application to CISAS.
Found. T had not properly charged him, not provided details of the agreement between them and had mis-sold him a package
which was not suitable for his needs.
350.00
39
03:10
Bills paid late
C had made late payments and failed to pay outstanding sums in the correct manner. Payments were incorrectly allocated by T
to another account; T neither recorded communications with C, nor amended its records, nor advised debt collection agencies nor
corrected credit references. As a result C was refused a credit card, refused a bank account move and had a County Court
judgment entered against him.
Found. T was responsible for C’s losses.
400.00
40
14:01
No phone service
after 14 months
C retired from his firm and continued to use his business account for residential purposes. He was not told that this was a
problem when he opened a new broadband and telephone account with a second company. Broadband was connected
immediately but the telephone service remained unconnected after 14 months. C complained he had had to pay £426.68 charged
by the first company for calls because he still had to use their telephone service. The second company maintained that it was only
426.68
6
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
when they had received the CISAS claim that they had been made aware C’s account was a business account with another
company and this was the reason why they could not connect his telephone service.
Found. The second company should have realised at some point over the 14 months why they could not connect their telephone
service to Cs home and advised him accordingly. Instead they continued to state that the service would be connected and at
times had told him that it had actually been connected.
41
03:02
Renewal letters
T’s two renewal letters were confusing, T had not made it clear which service plan and charges applied to C. C believed he had
been overcharged. T’s complaint procedure was poor and confusing, also C’s letters were not responded to.
Found. For T to apply a debt recovery procedure was wrong, as C had been a long standing customer and the dispute was
genuine. It caused C distress and inconvenience and affected his credit rating. T was directed to apologise to C, pay
compensation, amend C’s payment record to show that there has been no bad debt and reinstate C’s former credit rating.
400.00
42
13:07
Cancelling contract
after serious injury
C placed an order for broadband via the web. Before any equipment arrived she was badly injured. In hospital for one month
and was still incapacitated when she left hospital. During the time that C had been in hospital she missed the broadband
equipment delivery which had been returned to T. A month later C asked T to cancel her contract. |Ty asked for payment of
£50.00 for phone calls. C disputed the charges, maintaining she had never requested phone services and, even if she had, the
contract was not finalised as she had not received a confirmation e-mail from T. C requested a copy of the bills and the contract
but T failed to provide them, instead instructing debt collectors.
Found. There was a contract for phone services made via the web. C should pay for phone calls. T had also acted reasonably
in offering to cancel the debt, recognising they had not answered C’s request for copy bills. However T had not compensated C
for the inconvenience caused, especially by wrongly instructing debt collectors.
440.00
43
13:05
Paid for assistance
Broadband connection problems. C made at least 10 expensive calls for T’s technical support, their engineers admitted they
were unable to solve the problem. C paid for assistance to solve the problem and then claimed the cost from T. T refused,
maintaining if a customer decides to get help outside of T’s broadband support options in resolving a problem then it is up to C to
meet the associated costs.
Found. C had acted reasonably as she had given T every opportunity to put the problem right. T was directed to pay
compensation.
444.97
44
02:35
Banking error
C paid a cheque to settle an account due on time. After T knew the monies had cleared.
Found. T unreasonably barred C’s service and instructed debt collectors, this wasted C’s time for which C was entitled to
compensation. No compensation for business losses as C had not proved them and T did not know the service was for business
use.
500.00
45
05:18
Communications
provider transfer
C placed an order for broadband which she cancelled a month later as she was entitled to do. T took five weeks to transfer C’s
line to another communications provider during which C did not have internet access; also C was without phone access for
several days.
Found. T was directed to reimburse C for phone charges and pay compensation.
500.00
46
12:07
Paying to avoid poor
credit rating. CISAS
rule 5(g) applied
C paid an overcharge of £10.32 by cheque and the account ended but T pursued her via its debt collectors, who forced her to pay
£10.32 again.
Found. C had been confused and frightened about her credit rating and what the debt collectors would do. A rebate of £640.00
was due for overcharging, a refund of fees due to poor service, £30.00 compensation a month for inconvenience caused by poor
500.00
7
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
service plus £150.00 for upset and inconvenience caused by the company’s negligent instruction of debt collectors. However,
under CISAS rule 5(g) the award was limited to the amount claimed by C, which was £500.00.
15:06
Mobile barring
service
C paid for a mobile barring service on her landline to avoid her son incurring high bills. T had not assisted C when she asked if
call barring was working although T’s records showed they knew it was being avoided. T had not barred calls to mobiles. T had
billed 4 months late which meant C did not appreciate the costs she was incurring.
Found. C’s claim succeeded.
500.00
Compensation £501.00 to £999.00
47
08:06
No internet
connection
Product of another provider used by T on C’s telephone line caused loss of C’s internet and e-mail service. T debited C’s debit
card with monthly subscriptions without C’s permission.
Found. T’s action highly inappropriate. T was directed to refund C the monthly subscriptions, release C from the contract without
any payment, provide a MAC, remove any offending products from line and ensure C’s credit rating was not adversely affected.
600.00
48
10.10
Unauthorised access
Cost of unauthorised access to C’s telephone, broadband and television cables added by T to C’s bills. C asked T to terminate
the services and investigate who was accessing the cables.
Found. T did little to help and failed in its duty of care. T was directed to suspend C’s services at no cost to C, liaise with C and
carry out a detailed investigation into C’s problems, suspend the actions of debt collection agency pending results of the
investigations and pay compensation.
600.00
49
11.01
Billing and wrong use
of direct debit
C succeeded in a billing complaint against T and awarded £600.00. T then took more money by direct debit from C.
Found. C’s complaint succeeded. T’s actions were an extremely serious breach of contract and duty of care.
600.00
50
13:08
Account not
terminated
C sent letter terminating two telephone accounts. T’s records showed only one contract was to be terminated, this they did and
chased C for payment of the other account. C’s credit record was blighted.
Found. The letter referred to both accounts. Extremely serious thing to publicise an alleged credit default because it can damage
C’s personal reputation, and ability to pay his way through life. It is to be expected that C will suffer from a bad credit entry. It is
fair and reasonable to compensate customers for the mere fact that a wrong entry was made, regardless of whether they suffer
actual financial loss as a result. Compensation awarded and T was directed to give an explanation and a full apology.
600.00
51
02:14
Inaccurate records
T billed C £900. 00 in one month.
Found. More likely than not C did not make all the billed calls because of their timings and sheer volume. Serious doubts about
the integrity of T’s records.
602:15
52
14:03
Two accounts set up
accidently
A duplicate account had accidentally been set up when an earlier broadband problem had been resolved. C was unaware that an
additional direct debit was being taken by T and had not authorised any additional payment.
Found. C’s claim succeeded. A full repayment should be made by T to C.
607.02
53
10:07
Lost business
revenue
C experienced problems with mail forwarding which T failed to resolve. C asked for a smooth domain transfer which T took 3
months to confirm. Breach of contract or a breach of duty of care by T. C estimated lost business revenue of more than
£30,000.00 and claimed the maximum of £5,000.00 under CISAS but failed to submit evidence supporting the amounts.
Found. Compensation awarded only for inconvenience and the time and energy expended by C in trying to get the problem
750.00
8
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
resolved.
54
13:01
Inadequate
broadband and
defective router
Defective router and inadequate broadband service for about a month. The router caused breaches of security by making the
contents of C’s computer available to other users. C (who was studying for his exams at the time and needed the internet to
prepare) was badly affected by the countless attempts to make the service work with the assistance of T’s technical department.
T was directed to pay compensation for lack of service, vexation and inconvenience.
750.00
Compensation £1,000.00 to £5,000.00
55
04:07
Creating problems
T created problems by wrongly invoicing C annually in advance, making billing mistakes, not providing accurate bills, wrongfully
suspending services, not efficiently using the direct debit facilities given by C and instructing debt collectors.
Found. C endured inconvenience and the cost of having to repeatedly correspond with T together with vexation through loss of
services.
1,000.00
56
02:25
Fraud
C informed T of fraudulent use of mobile phone number to make calls to many countries associated with questionable activities.
T did not take complaint seriously nor offer reasonable assistance or advice.
Found. T seriously failed in its duty of care towards C.
1,000.00
57
12:10
Error making
customer uncreditworthy
C made un-creditworthy due to T’s error more than 12 months earlier; their entries on C’s credit file were not correct.
Found. T failed to rectify the situation promptly after being notified of the error. T was directed to pay compensation for the stress
and harassment C suffered for over one year as well as final loss of increased mortgage payment which directly resulted from the
T’s failures.
1,285.00
58
12:03
Barring outgoing
calls
C had a contract with company 1 for home and business until they transferred to company 2. Two years later traffic was again
passing over the network of company 1 but company 1 had no contract to re-prove the service. C refused to pay bills of company
1 who then barred C’s outgoing calls and placed the matter in the hands of debt collectors. Significant failure of duty of care by
company 1 who had also, through their debt collectors, given notice of legal proceedings after the matter had been referred to
CISAS.
Found. The disregard of the CISAS adjudication process was in the words of C, ‘cynical, needless intimidation... bullying
techniques’, which was inexcusable.
1,400.00
59
12:01
Business loss
C requested an upgrade to a business package with a static IP address. Constant connection problems for a year.
Found. C was frustrated, received little real assistance from T, and his business suffered losses due to the amount of time he
was unable to connect to the internet.
1,500.00
60
08:14
Loss of business
C, a small business, cancelled its contract with T which was unable to provide a broadband service. T continued to charge C,
threatened action from its debt management team, contacted another provider and placed an order for T’s broadband on the line
of C. C’s existing contract with the other provider was interrupted for several weeks.
Found. T liable for loss of business whilst C was without a broadband connection.
2,000.00
61
10.04
Overpayments by
small company
C, a small IT company, regularly overcharged by T for broadband and phone services. T did not try to resolve the dispute
expeditiously. C provided detailed calculations together with copies of tariff and cap agreements. T did not provide any business
contract terms excluding liability for any element of losses arising from overcharging nor did it comment upon losses claimed by C
3,640.00
9
Number
Reference
Case Study name
Subject1
Compensation
£0.00
for time spent trying to resolve the dispute which included lengthy attempts by C to communicate with T, evaluate opportunities to
move service provider, attempts to stop bank payments and assessing bills manually call by call.
Found. T was directed to reimburse C £640.00 for overcharging and £3,000.00 towards C’s total loss.
62
13:02
Business loss
Having purchased a business and since taking over the account, C had numerous problems with T including the phone line being
cut at random without warning, being charged on two accounts for more than 12 months and having hundreds of pounds taken by
T from a bank account, which C had been unable to retrieve. As a result C had bank charges imposed on her due to the wrongful
withdrawals, lost business and had spent 27 hours of her time trying unsuccessfully to solve the problems with T. T admitted they
were at fault.
Found. T was directed to apologise to C, to stop sending bills for a service that C never had, to stop taking money from C’s
account for that service, to pay compensation and reimburse all the money wrongly withdrawn from C’s account.
10
3,700.00