The Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013

Time to write to my MP...

I am hoping you can address a concern I have regarding these regulations. This letter should hopefully explain my concerns, and why I feel a small amendment to the regulations would be in order, particularly now.

Who am I?

I am the director of an Internet Service provider (Andrews & Arnold Ltd) providing internet and telephone services throughout the whole of the UK, and with most staff based in Berkshire, and several staff based in Wales.

Background

One of the key features of these regulations is a 14 day cooling off period for distance sales, for goods and services, to consumers. This is an important safeguard.

However, section 36 provides a facility for consumers that do not wish to wait 14 days for a service to be performed. It specifically allows a consumer to make an express request, in a durable medium, for a service to be performed within the 14 days, and waive their right to cancel within 14 days if the service is performed.

It then provides the protection that if the service is not performed yet, the consumer can still cancel within 14 days, only paying for the part of the service that has been performed, in proportion. However, once the service is performed, the right to cancel is lost.

This is a benefit to consumers that do not wish to be forced to wait 14 days for a service, and addresses the inherent nature that a service, unlike goods, cannot simple be sent back.

The problem

The problem is the wording of 36(2), and specifically the phrase “if the service has been fully performed”.

This makes perfect sense for a service like installing a dishwasher. I.e. if the installation has started, but not finished, the consumer can cancel, paying only proportionately for what has been done so far.

However, this wording does not fit well with a service such as broadband/internet. The problem is that such a service is installed and then ongoing, possibly even with a minimum term. The supplier has costs for arranging the installation, and may well have commitments with circuit providers for a minimum term.

If a customer cancelled after the installation was complete and the service is working, but within 14 days, the supplier has to charge in proportion. For a 12 month term, that is a fraction of the costs to the supplier. Indeed, with services on 12 month term it is common for a free installation to be offered, which is another cost for the supplier if cancelled within 14 days.

As such broadband service provision invariably has a 14 day cooling off period, denying the consumer the option to have an installation done sooner.

Why now?

Until now, for most broadband/internet installations, either a new circuit had to be installed (which takes time), or a migration is done with a carrier such as BT Wholesale. BT Wholesale have, to date, enforced a 14 day delay in migrations. So 14 day cooling off period is effectively enforced.

However, a new initiative by OFCOM has changed things. This takes effect 12th Sep 2024. As a result, BT Wholesale are dropping the 14 day minimum lead time on migrations. OFCOM are trying to encourage switching of broadband to be easy for consumers, indeed, the wording of the OFCOM general conditions means a provider has to provide a service as soon as technically possible if the customer expressly requests it, which may be within that 14 day cooling off period.

The fact OFCOM are, in effect, insisting operators allow customers to request services sooner creates a serious problem for providers. If nothing else, a free installation type service would not be sensible (again, to the detriment of the consumer). Even if a provider chose not to fully adhere to OFCOM GC, and insisting on a 14 day cooling off time, this effectively denies the consumer an option. But the wording of 36(2) of the regulations means an Internet provider will not be willing to offer quicker broadband switches without significant risk.

I stress that a consumer has to make an express request for a faster install, in a durable medium.

Suggested change

I would suggest the drafting of the regulations simply did not consider this type of service provision, and the current wording is an oversight.

I’d like to see working more along the lines of…

… if the service has been fully performed, or, for an ongoing service, the ongoing service has been made available, …

This could allow an ongoing service to commence within 14 days, losing the right to cancel, at that point, which is only fair given the costs for the supplier. I.e. supplier has done the work necessary now and so deserves to be paid.

How does this help your constituents?

The clash between OFCOMs new rules and the regulations is already causing concern for small Internet Providers like us, and leading to reduced choice for consumers, your constituents. We’d love to offer the full range of options, including cheap or free install on a 12 month term, along with service provided even next day when possible. But at this point, such options are a risk for small providers and ultimately will reduce consumer choice.

I feel having this option of faster broadband switching will benefit consumers, and would support OFCOMs aims of better and simpler broadband switching. It remains entirely optional for consumers, obviously. But being unable to cancel once the “ongoing” service “starts” seems fair, and seems to be what the regulations clearly intended as an option.

Is this something you can raise in parliament?