About "Unlimited" tariffs and not only

    Recently, “unlimited” tariffs at fairly low prices have become popular among providers and mobile operators. However, the lucky owners of such tariffs will soon realize that there is no free cheese, and the bandwidth of the provider is limited. The provider, in turn, restricts users. This can be done in different forms, most often after reaching a certain volume of downloaded speed drops sharply until the end of the month. At the same time, the subscriber is still allowed to use communication, so formally the tariff continues to meet the definition of “unlimited”.

    However, there is also exotic: for example, one of the mobile operators blocked the subscriber with reference to article 10Civil Code, which tells of "abuse of the right," that is, such actions that are carried out "solely with the intention of harming another person." Let's see if something can be objected to the provider in such cases.

    We study the materiel



    In order to have an idea of ​​the applicable law, we need four basic regulations. Firstly, this is the law “ On Communications ” - in its seventh chapter it defines the basic rules for the provision of services in this area. In addition, the provision of Internet access is described in the " Rules for the provision of communication services for data transfer " and the " Rules for the provision of telematic communication services ." If we are talking about mobile operators, then the " Rules for the provision of mobile services " apply . True, between the last two “rules” a collision is possible if the mobile operator provides Internet access.

    It is in the interests of the operator to assert that his services are regulated only by the latest “rules”, since their conditions are less beneficial for the subscriber. This is probably why most of the complaints arise precisely from those who use the services of mobile operators. In general, by-laws in the field of communications are full of strange nuances that “work” against consumers. What does it cost only a period of sixty days, during which the operator can consider the claim of the subscriber? This is twice the thirty-day period that is set for answers to citizens from the authorities.

    Or, for example, the requirement to notify citizens of new tariffs contained in the twenty-fifth paragraph of the Rules for the provision of mobile services. The notification should be made through the media - that is why all the official websites of mobile operators are registered as such. He informed about the tariff on the site - he notified subscribers through the media. It seems that the law has been observed and everything is correct, but in essence - mockery. Therefore, it is important to remember that the subscriber who decided to argue in such a situation will be opposed not only by the legal department of the provider or mobile operator, but also by some features of our laws, decrees and other documents.

    What is a “tariff”?



    All the mentioned "rules" define the "tariff" as the "set of price conditions" on which the provider or operator provides its services. This wording, which is difficult to understand, hides this: formally, under the “tariff”, the law understands only the volume of services provided and their price. The quality of services, in particular, the connection speed, simply does not fall under this definition. When it comes to the price of the contract, the procedure for changing it, in accordance with article 424 of the Civil Code, must be specified in the contract itself or in law.

    In addition, the aforementioned “rules for the provision of services” provides a list of essential conditions that must be defined in the relevant agreements in order for them to be considered concluded. And here one more surprise awaits us: the “tariff plan” as an essential condition is provided only in the “Rules for the provision of telematic communication services”, all other “rules” allow not to indicate it in the contract at all.

    The usual (i.e., non-essential) terms of the contract are the telematic services rules and data transfer rules that include technical characteristics of communication services: for example, for data transfer this is the line bandwidth, that is, the connection speed. But for contracts for cellular services there is not even such a requirement.

    One more unpleasant moment follows from this: since the “tariff plan” is “the totality of price conditions”, then, as mentioned above, article 424 of the Civil Code permits changing it — it is enough to provide for the procedure for such a change in the contract. The main thing is to report this to the "media", which, as you recall, are usually providers' sites.

    By the way, since we are talking about a contract, try to remember the last time a mobile operator gave you a copy of it. Usually, everything is limited to a copy of the "subscriber card" and the "rules for the provision of services." The author of this article has two copies of the contract: the first is framed in accordance with all the rules, but issued already in 2003. The second, from the Tele2 operator, is not filled out and not signed, as expected, by the parties. In 2003, the signing of a contract for cellular communications was taken more seriously, since it was then more expensive. Now, when the price of most contracts does not exceed hundreds of rubles, such trifles are treated more lightly.

    As you probably guessed, this feature of the connection design has an unpleasant consequence for the subscriber. The fact is that both the Law “On Communications” and those “rules” referred to in the article provide for the filing of a complaint by a subscriber before going to court. You can sue the operator only after consideration. A copy of the service contract must be attached to this claim. No, this does not mean that operators do not consider claims submitted to them. But when the subscriber decides to go to court, then an ambush awaits him: it turns out that he has not followed the procedure for filing a claim and he cannot sue.

    As you can see, the domestic legislation on communications provides colossal opportunities for operators for the very “abuse of law” that was mentioned at the beginning of the article: the Civil Code does not limit this concept, providing for “abuse of the law in other forms”. As a rule, mobile operators “abuse”: our legislation, as already mentioned, is more favorable to them.

    How to be



    Nevertheless, it is quite possible to punish the operator in such a situation, if not in court, then after filing a complaint with supervisory authorities, for example, the Federal Service for Supervision of Communications (Rossvyaznadzor).

    As an example, although not entirely from this area, one can cite onefrom cases reviewed by the Arbitration Court of the Novgorod Region. It dealt with the appeal by Megafon of bringing to administrative responsibility in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article 14.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses ("Carrying out business activities in violation of the conditions provided for by a special permit (license)"). Megafon disconnected one of its subscribers, motivating this by the fact that it made an abnormally large number of calls to its own number from Tele2 in order to receive “bonuses” for incoming calls. It would seem that “abuse of the right” in its purest form - however, this fact did not matter to the court: in its opinion, outgoing calls do not violate the rules for the provision of Megafon services, no matter how many there are.

    After Megafon disconnected the subscriber, he turned to Rossvyaznadzor, which brought the operator to justice. Megafon appealed this decision, the court denied it, he filed an appeal, but the court decision was upheld.

    An artificial restriction on the receipt of information may violate the Law on Advertising . The seventh part of its fifth article prohibits the distribution of advertisements in which “there is no part of the essential information about the advertised product, about the conditions for its purchase or use, if the meaning of the information is distorted and the consumers of advertising are misled”. The description, of course, is vague, but the silence about the fact that the connection speed at the "unlimited" tariff can change, and substantially, falls under it.

    The fight against violations of the law on advertising is the area of ​​activity of the Federal Antimonopoly Service, which should be complained about. In addition, the requirement to provide consumers with “the necessary and reliable information about goods (works, services), ensuring the possibility of their correct choice” is contained in the tenth article of the law “ On the Protection of Consumer Rights ”. This is also a rather vague requirement, but nevertheless, to declare its violation in court is quite realistic.

    An example is a court decision.in a lawsuit against Beeline, published on one of the legal forums. In it, the court recognized the information about the terms of the tariff as unreliable, despite the fact that Beeline representatives claimed that they were talking about the so-called “navigators,” that is, brief advertising materials that set out only the basic conditions of the tariff plan.

    So, despite the difficulties that may occur on the way of the consumer, it is quite possible to deal with such tricks of providers

    Also popular now: