Non Compliance - EU Consumer Rights Directive?

[#1]

Quote from: I

Quote EU directives lay down certain end results that must be achieved in every Member State. National authorities have to adapt their laws to meet these goals, but are free to decide how to do so. Directives may concern one or more Member States, or all of them. Each directive specifies the date by which the national laws must be adapted - giving national authorities the room for manoeuvre within the deadlines necessary to take account of differing national situations.

Hi Mike,
Thanks for the authoritative reference, I think it illustrates my understanding well.  Until the UK government enacts UK law, an EU directive is no more than a bit of paper having no legal standing within this sovereign state.  So back to the thrust of the thread, does anyone know if UK legislation has been passed to facilitate this external directive?  Being able to refer to UK legislation having had Queen Elizabeth's Royal Ascent is a much more relevant point of reference.
Kevin

[#2]

He's posted it above - http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/3134/contents/made
Section 41 covers the phone calls.

[#3]

The UK legislation is referenced earlier in the thread.   Edit: AndyH beat me to it. 

[#4]

Thanks.  The problem with this stuff is that some of it is written in Chinese with caveats...

Quote

6.(2) These Regulations do not apply to contracts— (b)concluded with a telecommunications operator through a public telephone for the use of the telephone; (c)concluded for the use of one single connection, by telephone, internet or fax, established by a consumer;

[#5]

Thanks for the continued patience. Sorry it's taken a while to get some information for you.
I've received confirmation from our Legal team that they are looking at fixing this soon (early next week) and they've stated that as far as the refunds go they will be dealing with this on a case by case basis.

[#6]

@Linn
will the legal team be notifying the affected customers in the 1^st instance, or will customers have to contact the legal team ?

[#7]

At the moment we don't have a way of identifying the customer's affected so we would be dealing with this on a case by case basis as and when the customer contacts our support centre.

[#8]

How will customers that do not follow the forums, know if they are / or are not possibly affected, in the current view "That the customer will have to make the 1^st step(s)
Will you be sending emails, sending the info over the social networking sites like Twitter / Facebook

[#9]

Quote from: Linn

At the moment we don't have a way of identifying the customer's affected so we would be dealing with this on a case by case basis as and when the customer contacts our support centre.

PN should email every Madasafish customer, explaining that PN  have not followed the new rules/law (till now) , and anyone who has been charged over the basic rate since the 13th of June, to the day the phone numbers change . Should call the basic rate number to obtain a refund. ?
Are PN going to be doing this?
How can this be a case by case basis? Its a blanket refund for everyone who has been charged above the basic rate
Regards
Mike

[#10]

I'm surprised how long it's taking them to change the phone number on the website.
They could at least put a warning in the interim.

[#11]

It does not take 5 - 10 minutes to change a phone number on a website, or to add a message to alert the Madasafish customers that are affected,
So what is the hold up ?

[#12]

Quote from: TORPC

So what is the hold up ?

When it comes to changing anything that's considered "Live Code" there are a series of steps we have to go through to ensure that changes are made and are done so properly, this will not only include changes and peer reviews of the code but then we have to push this through QA testing. In addition to this, purchasing, allocating and then routing a series of numbers while configuring the inbound call management equipment/software adds in further complexity.
Please rest assured that we're working on this as a matter of priority and as we begin to bring in changes we'll be sure to update everyone.

[#13]

Adam , are PN going to be contacting all Madasafish customers, to inform them of the situation , and how to get a refund if they are affected. ?
Regards
Mike

[#14]

Hi Mike,
The logistics of this are yet to be decided and confirmed so we'll update once we have something concrete to report back.

[#15]

Quote from: Adam

Quote from: TORPC So what is the hold up ? When it comes to changing anything that's considered "Live Code" there are a series of steps we have to go through to ensure that changes are made and are done so properly, this will not only include changes and peer reviews of the code but then we have to push this through QA testing. In addition to this, purchasing, allocating and then routing a series of numbers while configuring the inbound call management equipment/software adds in further complexity. Please rest assured that we're working on this as a matter of priority and as we begin to bring in changes we'll be sure to update everyone.

The short version is
It need to be checked / verified by different channels / panel(s) prior to implementing into the existing code
How does that affect just a replacement to a known correct number a a brief message (in the 1^st instance, surely itt does not take nearly 1 week since this was originally posted on the forums, & over a week since Plusnet was informed ?
If a court had ordered it to have been done in 24hrs then it could quite aptly be done in a 24hr timespan
So without a court ruling it appear as though Plusnet are dragging their heels on this known LEGAL issue
I am sure that several members could advise which bits of code to amend / add, if you need assistance