Dec 07
Free to new court
When prey is, UFC Que Choisir not let go. Just weeks after a complaint filed against the provider of Internet access (ISP) Free to improper billing of the hotline, the association of consumer advocacy attack again for collective redress "many and various unfair and unlawful" .
The UFC has assigned the Free interim High Court of Paris as part of an accelerated procedure. A decision motivated by complaints from several consumers who feel cheated by the rules of subscription and advertising provider. As the class action (editor's note: class actions in the courts) are impossible in France, is in his own name as the association claims 535,000 euros in damages.If Free is considered in the light of competition law, this amount could rise to 96 million, or 10% of the turnover of the company.
Unfair
Among the problems raised by clients and accepted by UFC, several relate to the conditions of sale. It is alleged the ISP to pre-check the option "Service Plus" in the subscription forms online so that this option costs EUR 9.99 per month. Worse, this addition does not appear in the sum total of the subscription rises to 39.98 euros per month and not 29.99 as stated. UFC has also criticized Free to impose a payment by debit to its subscribers. If they refuse, they are forced to pay a deposit of 400 euros to pay 4 euros per month extra.
And if the customer decides to cancel his subscription, it will take a period of one month instead of 10 days imposed by the Chatel Act. In addition, he must pay 96 euros less than 3 euros a month old. A change of address or request new equipment redo the note up to 96 euros automatically. "These practices are harmful. Free communicates on a price ceiling that is actually a floor price. Customers are direct victims, "indignant Catalina Chatellier, a lawyer specializing in new technologies at UFC Que Choisir.
Moreover, the association called for an end to the advertising campaign suggesting that provider with Free, the customer has all-inclusive. UFC said that in the ? 29.99 that it cost to subscribe, like all other ISPs, calls to mobiles and special numbers are not included. Advertising can be misinterpreted.Similarly, the joint venture on so-called exclusive services actually are not as fast-Fi or parental control software.
"Most ISPs have policies effective sales and marketing as they come to pass in a few seconds a message of clarity and simplicity to consumers who actually is not," said Master Yann Lorang, Attorney at Law, Jakubowicz Mallet-Guy and Associates. "Today the drafting of terms of business of selling has become an art in that it must juggle the provisions protecting consumers while preserving the relationship of trust – and thus the imperative of return – between the operator and its customers, "said the lawyer.
Asked about the issue, Free declined to give his version."We do not comment on subpoenas in general and that it no longer," said a terse email from the Communications Department Iliad, the parent of Free.
History
Free is not his first assignment in the courts. Already in 2006, UFC Que Choisir had complained to protest the excessive taxation of calls to the hotline. In 2007, the ISP was forced to appeal a court decision sentencing him to repay three customers and remitted to the association 20 000 in damages for the same problem.
Last October, UFC Que Choisir was again to report a complaint hotline maintained an unfair price by 34 cents the minutes despite complaints. In November, the legal troubles continue with a historic decision of the Court of Cassation.This gave reason to a customer who complained Free to pay its entire supply Triplay (Internet, telephony and television) as he received no television. The court noted that the supplier is under an obligation of result when the services it offers. A decision should set a precedent.
Criticized for its lack of goodwill in the implementation of court decisions, Free found himself back on the wall. UFC Que Choisir hopes this time change its behavior. "They have everything to gain by giving a better image of themselves," says Catalina Chatellier.
More broadly, the decision to be taken following the hearing on March 9 should have a wider scope in the world of ISP. "Only the actions of this kind, not the individual claims mediators, can alter these contracts to more equality and fairness," said the lawyer Yann Lorang.
For Free, which should be awarded the fourth license at the end of the year, the new ads come in any involuntary case to a very bad time.
Comments Off