# Possible Reneging on Contract by Provider



## SparkRite (27 Oct 2019)

Here's a good one that I would like some advice on please.

A well known broadband/TV provider in Ireland that I am a customer of has just emailed me stating that my tariff will
increase in January 2020. 
Now, last Jan.2019 I made a call to them looking for a better price following their last increase. A customer rep. offered me
€x for 6 months or €x+y for LIFE !
I queried does 'Life' actually mean 'Life' or until their next increase ?
I was told that as long as I remain as a customer my set price will NOT change.
I asked the Cust. Rep. to check this and was put on hold while they did so.
Upon resuming the call it was re-iterated to me that the offer is indeed 'For Life'.
So obviously I said I would accept that offer and agreed to pay €x+y monthly.
I also asked for an E-mail stating this offer but was told no need as I can see on my online account that it states
'Fixed price', which it did.
Happy days.....or so I thought.

Roll on Oct.2019 and I am emailed that my 'for life' offer is going up in Jan. 2020.
After calling them and explaining the above (to no avail) I requested a copy of the initial call under GDPR.
The next day I receive a call from the GDPR dept. who had listened to the tape and agreed with me that
I was offered the 'for life' contract but went on to say that the Cust. rep. had 'made a mistake' and no such
offer exists. They went on to offer me a waiver of the forthcoming increase for 12 months and a credit of
one months fee. This I feel is a derisory offer, in that the potential difference between what I 'signed up for' and approx.
€95 'goodwill' is in the thousands of Euro.
As most companies are only too quick to hold you to telephone contracts, should it not also be true that they have to
honor the contract too ?

What do people think would be a reasonable outcome/offer and also where could I go with this, failing a resolution with my provider?

TIA.


----------



## jpd (27 Oct 2019)

Not sure how you get "is in the thousands of euros" but then I don't know your age, so potentially you could be correct

I think you have a very good chance of getting your contract agreed but it will be a fight - do you have a copy of the call?


----------



## Brendan Burgess (27 Oct 2019)

Just email them with a summary of what happened and their recent offer.

Point out that you have a valid contract in place and you are not accepting their offer and you will not be paying any increases ever in the future.  Tell them that you value this contract at €10,000 and will, reluctantly, accept this price if they want to buy you out of the contract. 

I very much doubt that they will attempt to renege on it. 

This salesman must have offered this deal to others as well. 

Very embarrassing and potentially embarrassing for the company, but you should hold them to it. 



Brendan


----------



## SparkRite (27 Oct 2019)

jpd said:


> Not sure how you get "is in the thousands of euros" but then I don't know your age, so potentially you could be correct
> 
> I think you have a very good chance of getting your contract agreed but it will be a fight - do you have a copy of the call?


Very easy get into thousands, the deal I'm on, after next Jan will be €10 a month less than full price, ie. €120 a year difference.
Now allow their usual increase of around 6 - 7% per annum, it VERY quickly grows into the aforementioned thousands.

Awaiting a copy of the call.


----------



## SparkRite (27 Oct 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Just email them with a summary of what happened and their recent offer.
> 
> Point out that you have a valid contract in place and you are not accepting their offer and you will not be paying any increases ever in the future.  Tell them that you value this contract at €10,000 and will, reluctantly, accept this price if they want to buy you out of the contract.
> 
> ...



That's the way I look at it Brendan, but I get the distinct impression that they may well have a different view on things.

I would also like to ask where do I go with this, assuming they are not as embarrassed as I hoped.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (27 Oct 2019)

€120  a year for 10 years would be €1,200 

After 20 years, €2,400. 

So, you could say that the value in today's money is about €2,000. 

Brendan


----------



## SparkRite (27 Oct 2019)

But that's only if the full price remains static @Brendan Burgess , which it obviously won't.
So each year the difference will become greater, and after 10+ years will be appreciably greater.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (28 Oct 2019)

Sparkrite

Which would you prefer to have ? 

€10 today or €13 in a year's time? 

Brendan


----------



## SparkRite (28 Oct 2019)

In all honesty Brendan, 13 next year followed by 16.50 the next year, followed by 20 the year after and so on. Remember, that is per month. 

I'm looking for them to honor their side of the contract, as I have mine, but assuming that they refuse to, where do I bring it?


----------



## MugsGame (28 Oct 2019)

Hi SparkRite, tabulating a specific worked example showing the difference over 20 years and converting each year's difference to net present value would help illustrate your point. I agree it's in the thousands in today's money. I find it also helps the narrative to attach a fictional name to the provider, perhaps Vile Megacorp, or VM for short.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (28 Oct 2019)

SparkRite said:


> I'm looking for them to honor their side of the contract, as I have mine, but assuming that they refuse to, where do I bring it?



Hi Spark rite

I fully agree with you that they should honour their contract.

But in today's money it's worth €10 a month or €120 a year.

Do if you expect to stay with them for 10 years, the value in today's money €1,200.

Brendan


----------



## Brendan Burgess (28 Oct 2019)

MugsGame said:


> converting each year's difference to net present value



HI Mugs

You can assume that the discount rate is the same as the rate of the price increase, so just multiplying today's saving by the number of months gives you a best estimate of the answer.

Of course, you could assume that VM will increase the price by 20% a year and general inflation will be 1% a year, and you would get a different answer.

Brendan


----------



## MugsGame (28 Oct 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> HI Mugs
> 
> You can assume that the discount rate is the same as the rate of the price increase, so just multiplying today's saving by the number of months gives you a best estimate of the answer.
> 
> ...



6-7% historical annual increases in Sparkrite's example vs 1% inflation.


----------



## Palerider (28 Oct 2019)

Is there really a contract that is enforceable as I don't see there is, there is no written contract.

If a mistake was made by an excited employee then it is hard to expect any company to honour it.

See how you get on but take their best and final offer when made.


----------



## SparkRite (28 Oct 2019)

Palerider said:


> Is there really a contract that is enforceable as I don't see there is, there is no written contract.
> 
> If a mistake was made by an excited employee then it is hard to expect any company to honour it.
> 
> See how you get on but take their best and final offer when made.



Service providers are well known for enforcement of verbal/phone recorded contracts.
The fact remains that I entered into a contract in good faith, as was offered to me by a representative of that company.
I don't think it's acceptable for them to then turn around and say" Ah look we made a mistake, we want more money from you, so let's forget what we
offered you last time. "

Thanks for the replies so far.

I have asked a few times, but no answer thus far, so does anybody know where I could bring this, assuming that the provider does not honor what they offered me, please?


----------



## SparkRite (28 Oct 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> HI Mugs
> 
> You can assume that the discount rate is the same as the rate of the price increase, so just multiplying today's saving by the number of months gives you a best estimate of the answer.
> Brendan


Brendan, it is NOT a discount rate, it is a fixed price. So annual increases and inflation over the forthcoming years will make the potential savings quite an attractive amount.


----------



## RichInSpirit (28 Oct 2019)

Sounds like the tracker mortgages, the company did a bad deal for themselves in your favour. Try and hold them to it!


----------



## SPC100 (28 Oct 2019)

SparkRite said:


> Brendan, it is NOT a discount rate, it is a fixed price. So annual increases and inflation over the forthcoming years will make the potential savings quite an attractive amount.



The second part of this definition.








						Discount Rate Definition
					

"Discount rate" has two distinct definitions. I can refer to the interest rate that the Federal Reserve charges banks for short-term loans, but it's also used in future cash flow analysis.




					www.investopedia.com


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Oct 2019)

SparkRite said:


> Brendan, it is NOT a discount rate, it is a fixed price.



Hi Sparkie

The "discount rate" is the term used to describe rate you use to convert  future euros to today's euros. It is nothing to do with the price of the product as such. 

There is no reason to assume that the price of broadband and TV will rise by more or less than the general level of inflation.   It might do, but, it's a very competitive market, and technology changes, so it's quite possible that it will increase by less than the rate of general inflation. 

But in doing an example, I realised I was making a mistake. 

Let's say that the price next year is €70 a month but you will have a fixed price of €60. 

After ten years, the €70 will have increased to €77 so your saving will have increased to €17 a month.  
That is €15 a month in today's money discounted back at 1% 

So for the next ten years it will be worth about an average, in today's prices, of say €12 a month. 

So today's value of the next ten years' savings will be €1,440  - not €1,200 as I said originally. 

From a practical point of view in assessing any offer from the company to settle your claim, you should not go much beyond this.

Technology will change and this product may no longer be something you want. There may be much better products and  offers out there. 

Brendan


----------



## SparkRite (29 Oct 2019)

Thanks for that Brendan. 
Historically the price increase with the provider in question has been a lot higher than the rate of inflation. 
But I understand fully what you are saying. 
I should have a copy of the call today.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Oct 2019)

SparkRite said:


> Historically the price increase with the provider in question has been a lot higher than the rate of inflation.



Is this an impression or have you data on it?

I think it would be hard to get data as the product has changed so much.

A TV and broadband package might be twice as high today as it was 10 yeas ago ( i.e. 7% inflation a year) but it's a completely different product from what you had ten years ago.

That is why I would say to you that if they offer a half decent deal, then take it.

If they refuse, then you can take them to the Small Claims Court and claim up to €2,000

Or you could go to the District Court and claim up to €15,000.

Or the Circuit Court for up to €75k.

If you think it's worth more than this, you could go to the High Court.

Brendan


----------



## llgon (29 Oct 2019)

Comreg are the regulator for broadband providers and I think should be your next step if you are unhappy with the response from your provider. I made a complaint to them over a similar issue when a price was agreed over the phone for a fixed period for a home phone/broadband package that the provider subsequently tried to increase. The provider had insisted they were entitled to increase the price by giving one months notice. I unsuccessfully went through the providers complaints procedures but once I made the complaint to Comreg they agreed to settle and honour their previous commitment.

I'm not sure if the fact that your package is for TV as well will affect Comreg's ability to deal with it. I doubt it but might be worth contacting them to check.

I've had a look at their website https://www.comreg.ie/consumer-information/internet/contracts/  and one thing I noticed that might affect you is:

'The 2011 Universal Service Regulations states that authorised service providers (for either landline, mobile, or internet services) may not have consumer contracts that have an initial minimum term longer than 24 months.'

I'm not familiar with these regulations but VM may argue that your contract is not legally enforceable beyond 2 years.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Oct 2019)

There is no minimum term in Sparky's contract? 

He can cancel out of it at any time.

Brendan


----------



## SparkRite (29 Oct 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> There is no minimum term in Sparky's contract?
> 
> He can cancel out of it at any time.
> 
> Brendan


Yes there is Brendan, 12 months minimum.
If I was to cancel before that I would incur a charge.

BTW I have never mentioned the provider by name.


----------



## Brendan Burgess (29 Oct 2019)

Sorry. What I meant was that the minimum term was not longer than 24 months so it has not fallen foul of the Universal Service Regulations.

Brendan


----------



## llgon (29 Oct 2019)

Contracts work both ways. Sparkrite wishes to hold the provider to an indefinite contract. I'm not saying that the provider would be successful in this argument but it might be one that they make.

I would also stick by my advice for Sparkrite to contact Comreg as I don't think the Small Claims Court will deal with this as was previously advised.


----------



## MugsGame (29 Oct 2019)

Brendan Burgess said:


> Is this an impression or have you data on it?
> 
> I think it would be hard to get data as the product has changed so much.



While I can't be sure which provider Sparkrite is referring to , my own broadband provider emails me every year with a substantial increase, for a no better and sometimes worse package. I've taken to recording my retention calls with them to avoid disputes later.

I would take great pleasure in seeing them held to the word of an ... ahem over-enthusiastic salesman. For technical reasons shopping around is not a credible option, although I'm hopeful Siro will change that in time.


----------



## SparkRite (31 Oct 2019)

Just a short update,

Am now in possession of a copy of the call.
"never go up" , "price is stagnant", "will not increase" and "for life" are all descriptions used by the providers CS rep.

It is actually stronger than I remembered it.

Time to make a formal complaint, methinks and if no joy then see if Comreg are interested or maybe even the bould Joe.


----------



## SparkRite (8 Nov 2019)

Another short update :-

After raising an 'official' complaint with the provider, they have agreed that I was indeed told that the price would never go up but that the rep. made a 'mistake' and they would/could not honor the contract that I entered into.
All they would do, was the same as was offered before ie. :- waive the increase for 12 months and credit me one months tariff.

Initially I rang to cancel my subscription and only continued with it because of what I was offered, so as it turns out I was in effect duped and I feel mis-sold a product.
Any thoughts?


----------



## EmmDee (19 Nov 2019)

Palerider said:


> Is there really a contract that is enforceable as I don't see there is, there is no written contract.
> 
> If a mistake was made by an excited employee then it is hard to expect any company to honour it.
> 
> See how you get on but take their best and final offer when made.



A contract doesn't need to be written. It can be verbal - offer and acceptance are the only criteria unless there is an obvious error which a reasonable person would recognise (i.e. something posted for €1 instead of €100 - which was an obvious typo). Usually, the problem with enforcing a verbal contract is how to prove it was offered. 

In this case, that element is acknowledged. They seem to be relying on the "obvious" error excuse. But given it was made during a call to cancel and the OP suggested the agent go off and check the specific offer being "for life"... I would have thought it's enforceable to some extent - maybe not for actual "life" but for a significant period (longer than a year)


----------



## Leo (19 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> A contract doesn't need to be written. It can be verbal - offer and acceptance are the only criteria unless there is an obvious error which a reasonable person would recognise



Contract law in Ireland requires agreement, intention, & consideration.


----------



## EmmDee (19 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> Contract law in Ireland requires agreement, intention, & consideration.



Ok - but we already knew there was consideration. And the intention was clearly there - including the clarification of the terms. So my point was that there was an offer and acceptance of the offer. The fact it was verbal doesn't invalidate a contract


----------



## SparkRite (19 Nov 2019)

Thanks Leo and EmmDee for the above.

They are sticking to their guns, ie. :-  waive the increase for 12 months and credit me one months tariff. 
I am not happy with this at all. 
Comreg. were worse than useless, asking questions when I had already supplied the answers and then washing their hands of it by saying the provider had offered a resolution.

The provider is not disputing the offer was made but is saying it was down to 'human error' but I pointed out that the agent had gone and checked it with a colleague, this is also not in dispute.
I went on to say the fact remains that I was retained as a customer on that basis, which I accepted in good faith. Initially, (Jan.2019) I rang to cancel my subscription and only continued with it because of what I was offered, but now it turns out I was in effect mis-lead and I feel mis-sold a product. To date in 2019 this provider have received €525 from me that they would not have, had I not being offered the 'fixed for life' price. 

I really don't know where to go with this, retain a solicitor or file a case with the small claims court ? 
What would you ( anybody ) do in this case ?


----------



## Palerider (20 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> A contract doesn't need to be written. It can be verbal - offer and acceptance are the only criteria unless there is an obvious error which a reasonable person would recognise (i.e. something posted for €1 instead of €100 - which was an obvious typo). Usually, the problem with enforcing a verbal contract is how to prove it was offered.
> 
> In this case, that element is acknowledged. They seem to be relying on the "obvious" error excuse. But given it was made during a call to cancel and the OP suggested the agent go off and check the specific offer being "for life"... I would have thought it's enforceable to some extent - maybe not for actual "life" but for a significant period (longer than a year)



A verbal contract is not worth the paper it is not written on,   I don’t mean to be unkind but that is the law, try and enforce it.


----------



## Palerider (20 Nov 2019)

SparkRite said:


> Thanks Leo and EmmDee for the above.
> 
> They are sticking to their guns, ie. :-  waive the increase for 12 months and credit me one months tariff.
> I am not happy with this at all.
> ...



I have been accused in the past of having too much time on my hands, you may be in the same position.

If a mistake was made then I don’t understand how you think it is enforceable, If you feel that strongly then consult a professional legal advisor.


----------



## AlbacoreA (20 Nov 2019)

Its a running joke on some forums that certain providers change their contracts so often that you rarely get 6 months before they change it. Billing is a shambles and getting refunds in cash rarer than winning the lottery. Pricing is basically market stall haggling and you have to get it in writing or they won't honour it. Even where they do they change pricing or contract before the contract ends. 

The only solution is to switch providers as often as you can to the lowest. 

One family member has a long running battle with one provider who agreed services and constantly tried to get out of it. Billing at the new pricing, but they've never cut it off, and the increase has never been paid. Been going on for years.


----------



## EmmDee (20 Nov 2019)

Palerider said:


> A verbal contract is not worth the paper it is not written on,   I don’t mean to be unkind but that is the law, try and enforce it.



That is not the law. The law is clear that a contract does not need to be written. It can be verbal or implied. Every time you buy something in a shop you have entered a verbal agreement. If verbal agreements weren't recognised then there would be no consumer rights (i.e. the seller being contractually obliged to provide goods and services that are fit for purpose etc)

That adage relates to the fact that enforcing a verbal contract is difficult because proving the offer and acceptance in a contested situation is a problem. However in this case, there is a record (and acknowledgement) that there was an offer.









						Are Verbal Agreements Legally Binding? - Farleys Solicitors
					

Verbal agreement disputes can be messy. Commercial contracts and commercial litigation solicitor Rachel Harrison offers her expert guidance.




					www.farleys.com
				








__





						oral contract Archives - Terry Gorry & Co. Solicitors
					





					businessandlegal.ie


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> Ok - but we already knew there was consideration.



Yes, so we're agreed that 'offer and acceptance' are not the only criteria.



EmmDee said:


> And the intention was clearly there



I think that is the core of the issue here, did the company really intend  to offer these terms to customers or did the agent make an error or overstep?



EmmDee said:


> The fact it was verbal doesn't invalidate a contract



The reason the expression that 'verbal contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on' is so common is that is is nigh on impossible enforce a verbal contract.


----------



## Clamball (20 Nov 2019)

I think what you are looking for is a further explanation of how the error was compounded by the operator on the phone “double checking” with someone else.   If the operator had made the error on his own it is easier to understand and explain and accept the offer that has been given.

so perhaps write back to them saying you would accept it was an error except the operator checked and you have been offered no explanation of this double checking so feel unable to accept their current explanation that it was an error by one person and can they relook at this?

I had an issue with laya when one of my children turned 18.  I got a letter saying her cost was 900 (can’t remember exact figure) and I got a letter the following day saying her cost was 300.  (What I failed to notice was one letter was for the next year cover and the other was for the previous year cover).

So I phoned and asked why the 18 yr old had two different prices on letters issued one day apart.  The phone operator said they were doing a special deal for students and the lower figure applied.  So I apparently said at the end of the call “Can I confirm again that the cost for my 18 yr old for next year is €300?” and the operator said yes.   I wrote on the letter, phoned them on date and confirmed lower figure is correct.

Roll on 3 months and when I downloaded the cover from the Laya site the 18 yr old is at the higher figure of €900.  So I phoned back with my 3 pieces of paper, the date I had phoned and my understanding of the outcome.  The supervisor looked into it and came back and pointed out the issue that one letter was the previous year and the other letter the following year, which when pointed out to me I fully accepted but I had got verbal confirmation from them it was the lower figure for the renewal.  She went back and listened to the transcript, which is when she quoted the line above to me.  So they happily refunded me the difference, although their operator had made an error.  It was the fact that I had asked for confirmation of my understanding at the end of the call that swung it for me.

So you asked was he sure, he went off and double checked.  It was that part that caused you to remain with them “for life” and you feel they are not addressing it, but maybe say you would be happy with 5 year cover at that price but not 12 months.


----------



## EmmDee (20 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> The reason the expression that 'verbal contracts aren't worth the paper they're written on' is so common is that is is nigh on impossible enforce a verbal contract.



No - it's because it is so hard to prove a verbal contract if the terms of the contract are disputed. If there isn't a dispute over that then it is perfectly possible to enforce a verbal agreement. You do it every day when you buy a coffee - if you were given a tea you would return and get it replaced.

The issue here is that they are saying their agent made an error. That has nothing to do with verbal vs written contract. The agent could equally have posted out something in error. 

So the dispute here is not whether there was a verbal or written contract. It is whether the agent acted outside their remit and offered what would be reasonably construed as an error. That would be the argument if brought to small claims. And the fact that the agent was asked to verify their offer is completely relevant.

That doesn't mean the firm would be obliged to reinstate the offer "for life" in a court. It could be argued that the current offer is an adequate one. But given it's their first offer (and implicitly concedes there is an issue), there is potential for an improved offer if pushed. 

This is not a dispute about whether a verbal offer and acceptance exists. Intention doesn't mean that the company intended to offer this deal - it means that the two parties had the intention to create a legal relationship - which again is not in dispute


----------



## MugsGame (20 Nov 2019)

@SparkRite, are you paying by DD? If you're willing to move provider over this and more concerned about the principle than the money, I'd be tempted to only pay them what you agreed and let them cut you off if they don't like it. IMO they're not going to win if they pursue you in court over the difference and you have a pretty good defence it they send it for debt collection or try and affect your credit rating. If you start paying the new rate by DD or otherwise, that could be deemed acceptance of the "new" contract.


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> If there isn't a dispute over that then it is perfectly possible to enforce a verbal agreement. You do it every day when you buy a coffee



That's executing a contract, enforcement means forcing one party to honour the agreement. In the coffee example, enforcement would only come into play if you paid, then the barista refused to hand over the coffee.


----------



## Peanuts20 (20 Nov 2019)

Was it a contract or an invitation to contract?. After all, if a shop or website has priced something wrong they have no contractual obligation to sell it to you for that price as it is an invitation to contract. Unless you have this in black and white in writing your wasting your time.


----------



## EmmDee (20 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> That's executing a contract, enforcement means forcing one party to honour the agreement. In the coffee example, enforcement would only come into play if you paid, then the barista refused to hand over the coffee.



The scenario given by the OP is probably more like if you asked how much a coffee was, being told €3 and then ordering one and being charged €4. But in your example, what would be your opinion if you had paid for the coffee, the barista refused to hand it over and then claimed you had no contract because it wasn't in writing.



Peanuts20 said:


> Was it a contract or an invitation to contract?. After all, if a shop or website has priced something wrong they have no contractual obligation to sell it to you for that price as it is an invitation to contract. Unless you have this in black and white in writing your wasting your time.



"Invitation to Treat" - usually (not always - for example special sale signs etc) a price sign in a shop or an advertisement is considered an "Invitation to Treat" i.e. not a formal offer. The idea being that you still need to go into the shop and enquire about the price.

This wasn't the case here - the OP looked to end a contract, the company (whether in error or not) made a counter offer, the OP asked them to confirm the details of that, they did and reconfirmed the offer which was then accepted.

If it had been a general indication that a certain deal might be available for some customers then it would be an invitation


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> But in your example, what would be your opinion if you had paid for the coffee, the barista refused to hand it over and then claimed you had no contract because it wasn't in writing.



If the coffee shop owner intervenes and says the barista made a mistake with the €3 price, they would be under no obligation to sell it to you at that price, so you agree to pay the €4, or you get a refund. They cannot be forced to honour the €3 price they gave in error.


----------



## EmmDee (20 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> If the coffee shop owner intervenes and says the barista made a mistake with the €3 price, they would be under no obligation to sell it to you at that price, so you agree to pay the €4, or you get a refund. They cannot be forced to honour the €3 price they gave in error.



Not a good analogy - let's make it more like the original issue. If the sign on the shop said €3 for a coffee - or I went to the counter and was told €3 - and I said I'd pass as it wasn't great value. The Barista says "actually, I'll give it to you for €2". If I then ask him to back and check and after doing so he said, "Yes - I can do it for you at that price" and then I ordered the coffee.

Yes I would expect them to honour that price - even if the owner comes out and said a mistake was made. At that point, it's the owner's problem that his staff are untrained or acting incorrectly. And I think I would be legally correct. However - who insists on their rights for €1 - it's not worth it. So, even being right I'd probably just move on.

Multiply it 1000x - then maybe it does become worthwhile to go through the hassle - depends on each person I guess


----------



## Leo (20 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> And I think I would be legally correct. However - who insists on their rights for €1 - it's not worth it. So, even being right I'd probably just move on.



And that's just it, the shop can come back and say the price they offered was a mistake even after you decide to buy based on the revised price. Regardless of whether the difference is €1 on a coffee or €10,000 on a car, the shop can not be forced to honour the price. You do not have a right to get that price, so you have no legal grounds on which to to try enforce it.


----------



## MugsGame (20 Nov 2019)

I think it's more akin to renting a coffee machine. I ring Virgin Coffee Machines up to tell them to take their machine back as their new price is too expensive. Their retention rep then says "Mr. Game, you're such a valued customer, we'd hate to lose your custom, I've spoken to my boss and we can give you a discount and hold you at that price for life". Customer retained, rep meets his retention targets and gets his bonus.

Virgin Coffee Machines accept this discounted price for the first year then contact me and tell me the "for life" contract was only for a year, and the machine rental price is going up again. Had I known that I would have switched to Eircoffee the last time around, who had a particularly attractive offer at the time, even though I prefer the way Virgin deliver their coffee beans.

If I was also free to end the "for life" contract after a year, it's probably not enforceable. And even if enforceable, probably not worth my while paying a solicitor. But I'd feel free to keep the machine and keep paying the discounted price, until they turn up to collect it. Of course if the coffee machine breaks or I want to upgrade to the latest superduper Highspeed Fibreground Coffee Machine, I'd expect them not to honour the discount.


----------



## SparkRite (20 Nov 2019)

That is exactly it, in a nutshell. It was a contract I entered into with a minimum term of 12 months as stated by the rep.
I pay by DD but I don't think I have any control over the amount that is debited unfortunately.

There is absolutely no dispute over what I was offered in order to retain me as a customer, but they state that they cannot 'retain' me on such a basis ie. fixed price for life.
I wonder, in fact I probably know, that if the situation was reversed and I rang to say I made a mistake when entering into a contract and I now want to change what we agreed and pay them LESS, I don't think I would get a sympathetic ear.


----------



## EmmDee (20 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> And that's just it, the shop can come back and say the price they offered was a mistake even after you decide to buy based on the revised price. Regardless of whether the difference is €1 on a coffee or €10,000 on a car, the shop can not be forced to honour the price. You do not have a right to get that price, so you have no legal grounds on which to to try enforce it.



I do actually. And if it was €10k on a car I would absolutely enforce it if I could demonstrate the correct offer, validate offer and acceptance. After that it's between the company and their sales person

You seem to be still claiming you can't have a verbal contract. You absolutely can have a valid verbal contract.

I've seen it, been on both ends of it... And for amounts a lot bigger then this.

For years, virtually all FX and securities deals were verbal. Think back to "calling your broker" or every single image of open outcry trading... All verbal contracts


----------



## MugsGame (20 Nov 2019)

Can't you cancel the DD @SparkRite and start paying the agreed amount by card or bank transfer?

I think the fact that you were aware you had to stick with the contract for a year is key. It wouldn't be fair to allow you break the contract after a year and not allow the provider do the same. IANAL but I think there is a principle of reciprocity and symmetry in fair contract terms. Although there's also a principle that bad or ambiguous terms will be read against the drafter ...


----------



## SparkRite (20 Nov 2019)

If I'm reading you correctly @MugsGame , are you saying that as I have the option of backing out after 12 months then that option must be afforded to the contractor as well ?


----------



## MugsGame (20 Nov 2019)

I'd think, so, yes. But this non-qualified opinion is worth even less than you're paying for it


----------



## Leo (21 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> I do actually. And if it was €10k on a car I would absolutely enforce it if I could demonstrate the correct offer, validate offer and acceptance. After that it's between the company and their sales person



The car scenario above is missing the intention and consideration. You cannot legally enforce execution of an error.



EmmDee said:


> You seem to be still claiming you can't have a verbal contract. You absolutely can have a valid verbal contract.



Where did I say that?


----------



## EmmDee (21 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> The car scenario above is missing the intention and consideration. You cannot legally enforce execution of an error.



Really? 

(a) Intention already established by both parties entering into negotiations. The "intention" rule is not that you intended to sell at a certain price - it is that you intended to enter into a contract. In fact, the sales room itself is a factor towards intention. 

(b) Consideration is there - the fact there is a disagreement over price proves consideration (not that consideration requires money).

(c) You absolutely can be legally required to complete an error by your employee. Unless it was so obvious an error as to be ridiculous - you could




Leo said:


> Where did I say that?





Leo said:


> And that's just it, the shop can come back and say the price they offered was a mistake even after you decide to buy based on the revised price. Regardless of whether the difference is €1 on a coffee or €10,000 on a car, the shop can not be forced to honour the price. You do not have a right to get that price, so you have no legal grounds on which to to try enforce it.



In fact you keep saying it. Let me put it another way... if a company issued a written contract with an error which both sides signed, do you think they could be held to it? You argue above that you can't be held to an error - but I think you mean in a verbal contract. I'm pointing out that an error, verbal or written, is enforceable - where a contract can be proved

Therefore I think you differentiate between a written contract and a verbal one


----------



## Leo (21 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> (b) Consideration is there - the fact there is a disagreement over price proves consideration (not that consideration requires money).



Under Irish law, you are correct, consideration doesn't have to be money, but it must be something of value. What in the coffee example above has the customer transferred to the supplier before they are asked to pay €4 for the coffee they thought would cost €3?



EmmDee said:


> In fact you keep saying it.



Just point to where I said it once....


----------



## EmmDee (21 Nov 2019)

Leo said:


> What in the coffee example above has the customer transferred to the supplier before they are asked to pay €4 for the coffee they thought would cost €3?



The €3 is the consideration. Consideration doesn't have to be in the past - nothing has to have changed hands before a contract is in place. The fact that consideration is part of the agreement makes it an enforceable contract.



Leo said:


> Just point to where I said it once....



I already did above - you say there is no legal basis to enforce a verbal arrangement. I'm saying that there is - and I'm pointing out that if you had the same offer in writing you wouldn't claim there was no basis to enforce. Therefore you are differentiating between verbal and written contracts. But legally, there is no differentiation.

The transaction doesn't have to have happened in the past (e.g. payment) for there to be a contract - a promise to do something in the future for a fee is a contract and is enforceable legally


----------



## Leo (22 Nov 2019)

EmmDee said:


> The €3 is the consideration. Consideration doesn't have to be in the past - nothing has to have changed hands before a contract is in place. The fact that consideration is part of the agreement makes it an enforceable contract.



That is actually a key test in legal cases.



EmmDee said:


> I already did above - you say there is no legal basis to enforce a verbal arrangement.



Can you quote the line?


----------

