Altering the contract after your client signed it...

[Guest DRL]

Hello.

As some of you know, one of my reasons

for inactivity increase have been the legal

issues regarding the changes that Claro

(the company I got my USB modem & internet

service from) has been doing to the contracts.

Basically, they have altered the contract from

something like:

"You pay the monthly sum until the limit of $100 is reached.

After it, you pay any additional downloads and

messages you sent using you USB Modem."

To:

"You pay the monthly sum of $50, downloads and messages

are paid even without exeding the limit. After the limit

is exeded, services will cut until the next month."

As I have said before on the other thread, this is a big legal

issue, and today it will be taken to court.

But court support is divided.

Some say Claro should return monthly pay to forme levels,

and add something like "after-exedeed" limit (How much you

can use after you have exedeed the limit), which you also pay.

Others want to force the company to comply to the initial version

of the contract, and stick to it and make no changes.

The company itself, for the moment, has states that "These

measures have been taken to save up bandwidht and offer a

better service." This however has been critized by the

thousands of USB modem users who use the service of Claro,

stating that the service was already bad enought, and this

was "[...]The last straw![...]".

Now here comes the problem. Technically, there are no

legal impedants for this happen. Yes, you heard it right.

In our constitution, it is never mentioned whetever or not

the companies can chage the client's contract.

A group is demanding that this ability of corporations to

alter contracts is banned inmediately, while some want

to make possible limited changes. A smaller, almost

non-existant fraction wants to let companies do as they

see fit. Some say to let the companies alter the contract,

but only if that is specified at the document at the time

of signing it.

Me? I am in favor of banning this. If you read a contract,

then sing it, you should have the security to know it will

stay that way. Ban the ability of companies to alter the

contract after it was signed.

[Kursed]

I don't know what the law is  in your country but altering a contract like that without having you Resign it seems very stupid and  illegal

["User"]

I don't know what the law is  in your country but altering a contract like that without having you Resign it seems very stupid and  illegal

Agreed.  In Canada at least (and I'm 99% sure in the U.S. as well) this activity would be considered a breach of contract by the corporation.  The excuse they are giving which is "These measures have been taken to save up bandwidth and offer a

better service" would hold no water unless they specifically said in the contract that they have the right to perform such an action.  If you are taking the matter to court did you ensure you've already had a lawyer or paralegal read the entire contract to make sure what the corporation was doing, under the laws of your country, was illegal?

[Sabre]

I'm not lawyer, but changing a contract after the fact is dodgy. If it's a subscription, they usually either honour it until renewl, or cancel the contract.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

:banghead

I don't know what the law is  in your country but altering a contract like that without having you Resign it seems very stupid and  illegal

That's true.

Agreed.  In Canada at least (and I'm 99% sure in the U.S. as well) this activity would be considered a breach of contract by the corporation.  The excuse they are giving which is "These measures have been taken to save up bandwidth and offer a

better service" would hold no water unless they specifically said in the contract that they have the right to perform such an action.  If you are taking the matter to court did you ensure you've already had a lawyer or paralegal read the entire contract to make sure what the corporation was doing, under the laws of your country, was illegal?

good idea

I'm not lawyer, but changing a contract after the fact is dodgy. If it's a subscription, they usually either honour it until renewl, or cancel the contract.

yep.

[Guest DRL]

Agreed.  In Canada at least (and I'm 99% sure in the U.S. as well) this activity would be considered a breach of contract by the corporation.  The excuse they are giving which is "These measures have been taken to save up bandwidth and offer a

better service" would hold no water unless they specifically said in the contract that they have the right to perform such an action.  If you are taking the matter to court did you ensure you've already had a lawyer or paralegal read the entire contract to make sure what the corporation was doing, under the laws of your country, was illegal?

I am not taking into legals myself, but

a "coalition of consumers and clients" is

doing so. It will most likely fall in our favor,

althrought this goverment is know for it's

hideos deals with corporations.

The trial will begin shortly, in fact, at around

7:50 local time.

About the bandwidht thing, well, the 'deal'

the corporation is attempting to do is to

increase available speed, (thus speeding up

your way to reaching the paid limit).

This is however highly unpopular with

it's clients.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

I think these pricks are trying to give you the runaround.  I dunno if your country has antitrust laws, but in America that would be a violation of those laws.

["User"]

I am not taking into legals myself, but

a "coalition of consumers and clients" is

doing so.

That the equivalent to a class action lawsuit up in North America.

It will most likely fall in our favor,

althrought this goverment is know for it's

hideos deals with corporations.

Many South American countries have corruption issues (no offense)

About the bandwidht thing, well, the 'deal'

the corporation is attempting to do is to

increase available speed, (thus speeding up

your way to reaching the paid limit).

This is however highly unpopular with

it's clients.

That sounds like what some ISP's are doing up here because 90% of their bandwidth allocation involves torrents or otherwise mass downloading from a minority of it's user.

[Guest DRL]

Many South American countries have corruption issues (no offense)

No offense taken, it is all the truth.

We have a overwhelmed, inefficient

bureaucracy. One can only expect

corruption to come by. However,

what I meant was this current President

and his husband (needless is to say,

Mr. Kirshner's wife won elections by

an "vast majority"... Turns out you

got $500 after voting for them.

Talk about rigging...)

That sounds like what some ISP's are doing up here because 90% of their bandwidth allocation involves torrents or otherwise mass downloading from a minority of it's user.

That is why most wireless users

download via torrent, because the

speed was too slow and the connections

too unstable for a direct download to last.

However, thing is, their speed and service

was already too bad, and now the 'speed up'

is not enought to compensate for the limit

reduction. Additionally, once you exceed

the limit, the service is cut off entirely,

while previously you paid the additional

usage.

Anyhow, I hope it all returns to the previous

state. I am tired of being on-off-on-off.

[Guest DRL]

Good news!

The court has banned the

ability to alter contracts!

And there was a heavy

blow delivered agains the company.

We will retain the new speed

(which is faster) and our previous

limits/payment methods. YEAH! :D

["User"]

Good to see that justice was served :)

[Kursed]

Good news!

The court has banned the

ability to alter contracts!

And there was a heavy

blow delivered agains the company.

We will retain the new speed

(which is faster) and our previous

limits/payment methods. YEAH!

serves them right for ripping you off like that.

[Guest Julius Quasar]

Good news!

The court has banned the

ability to alter contracts!

And there was a heavy

blow delivered agains the company.

We will retain the new speed

(which is faster) and our previous

limits/payment methods. YEAH!

ALL RIGHT!

Good for you!

Serves those pricks right, ha ha!

[DZComposer]

In all jurisdictions in the US, you cannot alter a contract without the consent of both parties. Also, you cannot alter a written contract verbally (that's called the parol evidence rule).

There is a loophole that a lot of service companies use, though. It is a clause in the contract that states they can terminate your service at any time for any reason. They'll come up with new terms, and pretty much tell you if you don't agree to the new deal, your account with them is canceled.