Can you say how many, if any, customers rejected the recent updated Terms & Conditions Ian.

Of course he can't. I highly suspect you knew that we wouldn't be in a position to answer that question anyhow.

By the way - regarding the deferred charges remaining payable under the 30 day notice period. That is not correct and my apologies if that caused any confusion, although I do believe that it was cleared up at a later point. I know I certainly did on MoneySavingExpert, but I can't remember if I did on the Community Site.

However. It was trained out internally that the only fees that would be payable under a cancellation request under the detrimental change in the terms and conditions would be any subscription fees owed over that period of time. So any deferred contracts and also anything outstanding under a fixed term contract outside of the 30 days period would be written off.

I trust that clarifies the situation.

Edited by deleted (Tue 04-Nov-08 13:33:17)

That actually made me laugh James. So most of the indignation and legal explanations in this thread are based on a factual inaccuracy in the PlusNet forum that this post quotes from.

Ah hang on.

I've confused myself for a change.

From a Madasafish perspective, there would be no deferred charges owed. They would be owed on a Plusnet perspective. I'll try and dig out the relevant clause in our terms and conditions and suitably continue to look like an idiot...

(from our main terms and conditions)

23.2 If we give you notice, you must pay the Charges applicable up to the end of that notice. If you give us notice, you must pay us the Charges that would have been due within the notice period.

(from signup)

6. If you cancel your service before the end of the 12-month minimum period, you will be expected to pay the full cost of the hardware, in addition to any other cancellation fees that may be payable.

There isn't a specific instance which covers deferred hardware, apart from the charges that would have been owed within the notice period.

I'm *really* sorry for the confusion I've caused here. The Madasafish terms and conditions are a little different, hence my clarification on the MoneySavingExpert site on the matter over an initial oversight.

Feel free to laugh away...

I think you were right before James, as what you said, which now seems applicable to Madasfish but not to Plusnet, made sense.

If the Plusnet position still is as that quote, and paragraph 9 of this FAQ then all I can say is Madasafish legal advice was better than Plusnet's.

They may get a few customers to pay, if any actually do migrate because of it, but if anyone challenges it I think Plusnet would have no chance of enforcing it in court.

In reply to:

---

Of course he can't.

---

Unlike in the past, I would have been happy with answer of, "none", or "a few"

Your clarification that deferred fees are not payable where the customer rejects the new T&C's is welcomed. The question remains has anyone actually left but paid these fees?.

He changed his mind about that and said it only applied to Madasfish. Plusnet want to charge them.

I'm trying to remember but I thought the last full T&C change months (maybe over a year now) ago introduced a clause to allow for charging the termination charge (even though it may not of been applied at that time). My (probably failing) memory seems to think it was around the time BT first started to talk about the charge last year.

It was a clause in the Broadband Your Way terms and conditions from last April.

Even though the clause had been in there since then, we felt it was a sensible option to contact all customer, including those on broadband your way, advising them of the change, in case they had missed it when they had signed up, or potentially changed product.