Mid contract price rises

Hopefully it is within the forum rules to highlight this "Which?" campaign against mid-contract prices rise.
I really don't like being tied into a 24 month contract with prices rises at CPI+3.9%, seems like an exploitation of a large monopoly company to me (I know there are choices and I will take advantage of those at the end of my current contract.)
Anyway "Which?" are looking for people to support/sign up to there campaign - if you're interested have a look here: Sign Which Petition

Done, not that it affects me at the moment. I don't like the long contracts and certainly don't like the price rises in them

I've signed. In a way I can understand CPI rises (although not within a contract period with no bail-out) but I don't understand the need for the +3.9% bit at all. Surely a fixed price for a fixed term is better for everyone.

Signed and Shared!

Done ... and I most certainly have been seeing that I've just been screwed senseless with undocumented excessive out-of-contract prices for a few months and have now had to contract again for 2 years with 2 mid-contract CPI+ price increases to look forward to.

Thank you Mr.Plusnet, [bends over in readiness], can I have another

The industry move from 12 to 24 months seems to have been done for zero real benefit to the consumer.

If you want me to sign for 24 months then give me a price that will last for that period.

Signed.

To say that these lengthy CPI+ style contracts are very one-sided in almost all respects would be a significant understatement.

Not sure how long this campaign has actually been running but I'm slightly surprised that there aren't considerably more 'signatures' despite allowing for the usual apathy. Contractual CPI+ increases and massively unrealistic out-of-contract pricing just seems to be the go-to ripoff now with so many other companies jumping on what appears to have been the original BT bandwagon.

I believe the campaign was started on 6th Oct, so about a week to get around 50,000 "signatures" - not sure how well advertised it has been - I suspect it is mainly Which? subscribers that would have been notified.

I think 24 month contracts are generally not user friendly (but you makes your own choice) but tieing in Inflation + 4% each April is really just exploiting the virtual monopoly the big Telcos have... well that's my opinion anyway.

And let us not get started on those that use RPI instead of CPI.

Even the ONS & UK Statistics Authority recognise it as a bad measure of inflation - https://www.ons.gov.uk/news/statementsandletters/uks... but they are legally bound to publish it

In reply to a post by Bam16:

I believe the campaign was started on 6th Oct, so about a week to get around 50,000 "signatures" - not sure how well advertised it has been - I suspect it is mainly Which? subscribers that would have been notified.

If this petition had been on the UK Parliament website like a lot of other campaigns I would have signed it in a flash but as its on the 'Which?' website where they love to harvest your data I won't be signing it although I 100% agree with it.

I think a lot of other people won't sign for the same reason.

Edited by PCJM40 (Fri 13-Oct-23 10:34:14)

In reply to a post by Bam16:

I think 24 month contracts are generally not user friendly

Now there's an understatement!

Of course, the providers have to recoup their one-time setup costs (Openreach activation charge; supplying you with a router; paying their salespeople commission). In theory, a longer contract means a lower monthly price as these costs are amortized over a longer period.

However, if that were the *real* reason for the long contracts, then the price would drop at the end, whereas in practice for most providers it jumps up hugely: they want to force you to sign a new contract. Of course for a continuing customer they have no activation charge to cover, and often don't send out a new router, so it's all cream. Plus, you can't take advantage of a competitor's offer while you're locked in.

There was a similar issue with mobile phone contracts, where the cost of the handset is recovered during the contract period, but mobile providers were not dropping the monthly fee at the end of the term.

Eventually OFCOM forced the providers to drop rates automatically once the handset is paid off. People were always free to change provider at the end of their contract, but OFCOM decided that market forces weren't working properly here, and customers were being exploited. I think a very similar case can be made for broadband.

Oh Sorry - I didn't believe 'Which?' would be that bad (how naive of me) - perhaps we should raise a petition in parliament as well for people who would rather sign that instead? At least it would get more attention on the subject and perhaps bring more pressure on OFCOM.

Yes - an understatement about 24 month contracts! I was perfectly happy with 12 months being a good balance of commitment and risk, always worries me that it's hard to see 2 years in advance and you can't tell what might bring you to need to leave the contract early with big early termination fees. But there are very few ISPs offering less than 2 years

In reply to a post by Kr1s69:

The industry move from 12 to 24 months seems to have been done for zero real benefit to the consumer.

If you want me to sign for 24 months then give me a price that will last for that period.

Signed.

Nothing is done for the benefit of the consumer unless it makes money

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

If this petition had been on the UK Parliament website like a lot of other campaigns I would have signed it in a flash but as its on the 'Which?' website where they love to harvest your data I won't be signing it although I 100% agree with it.

I think a lot of other people won't sign for the same reason.

First name, email and what broadband and mobile phone number you are using. Not really much data for them to harvest, you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.
Hopefully if they get enough they can take it to the government or ofcom, they are bigger than us and while I am not a fan of Which, it may get noticed.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.

You are welcome to do that but its not for me.

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.

You are welcome to do that but its not for me.

Fair enough

signed, and will try and get others to as well.

I share your concern but all Which? ask is your email and first name. You have to tick a very noticeable box if you want them to keep your details for marketing etc. I signed but did not tick the box.