I had my NCAT conciliation meeting (30 mins) with Foxtel.
They offered:
To refund me the subscription fees I paid while I was in possession of a lemon set top box; and
To reimburse me the NCAT application fee.
They declined
To compensate me for the 95+ failed recordings; and
To offer me the sweet deal offered to some being $35/month for the whole menu of Foxtel’s programs. Instead I was offered to pay $119/month for 12 months (this is a $20/month discount on the list price), for the entire menu of programs. When I turned that down, I was offered to add a package of programs (currently sells for $20/month) for free for 12 months, to my current subscription.
The NCAT member suggested we go away and work out an agreement and thereafter revert to NCAT with the agreement so that the formal “hearing” will not proceed.
After the conciliation meeting, I logged into my account to establish the monthly billing date (as I was considering ending my 25 years or so as a customer of Foxtel) and lo and behold, I saw several upgrade options including the whole suite of programs for not $139/month )being the list price) or even $119/month, being the price I was offered. Instead I saw it offered for $101/month. This is $18/month or $216 cheaper than what was offered in the conciliation meeting.
Needless to say I felt the NCAT discussion was not a shining example of good faith negotiations.
I then advised the monopolist that I wish to terminate my subscription. Soon after, the monopolist confirmed my decision to terminate, but as yet has not confirmed the refund.
Correct me if I am wrong, but given a breach of ACL, the refund must be in the manner in which the fees were paid or via another means at the discretion of the customer. The business/supplier cannot insist that a customer takes the refund in the form of a credit to his/her account, can it? I ask because not only have I terminated my subscription service but the account is all paid up. Any credit will sit on my account gathering dust until such time as their subscription rates collapse to entice me to rejoin. True?
In mid August NCAT ordered (with the consent of the parties) for Foxtel to pay me by cheque the $306 I claimed, before 01SEP21.
Checking my bank statements, I saw a few odd amounts (credits) from Foxtel on one of my credit cards were processed by 01SEP21. Foxtel ignored the Order’s instruction to pay me by chq (in one lot).
I thought not to make an issue of this and asked Foxtel where the missing $102 was.
I was told it is Foxtel policy to refund a customer in the manner in which the customer paid. So Foxtel says it credited one card with a reversal of 4 earlier pmts by me and credited another card of mine used with three other credits.
I did not rcv the $102 because Foxtel
Did not bother asking me if the card in question is still active (it is not)
Foxtel decided the $102 they owe me was originally paid by me to them and hence falls under their unilateral, NCAT breaching policy of ignoring their obligation to pay me by cheque. In fact $61 of the $102 werw NCAT relates fees, which have no connection to any pmts I made over time to Foxtel.
When asked, NCAT sent me (at no cost) a CERTIFIED MONEY ORDER ie the original order, now stamped and signed by the Registrar which I can lodge with a Local Court who will send someone to collect the money from Foxtel. The cost is $98, to me. If I want oOxtel to pay that cost I must apply to NCAT for that (meaning another $61 burden to me to file).
I mentioned to Foxtel that I will do this and pass the bill to them. They recommended I ask my bank, where the card in question has been replaced with one of another number, if they can find the missing sum because Foxtel states that the money paid was not returned by my bank.
I spoke to the bank three times in 3 days.
Long story short: my bank, not happy with the thankless task of looking for a needle in their haystack, will allocate several days to look for this and then advise.
Suggestions: (1) That consumers be granted an easier process of chasing organisations that ignore NCAT directives (to pay by chq) like Foxtel, than taking the matter to court (with all those delays); (2) That all related fees in chasing the counter party (court $98 and further NCAT filing fees $61) be immediately added to the debt outstanding (ie the sum chased by the court now would be $261, given the NCAT hearing a consumer will no doubt apply for; and (3) that for thumbing their nose at what they agreed to at NCAT ie paying by chq, that Foxtel be fined an amount that will discourage non compliance.
Did you know that the card used for payment no longer existed? If you did, possibly you should have notified Foxtel that the card no longer exists and and payments which were made to that card won’t be able to be reversed.
It is a situation of should they have asked…or should they have been told. Most businesses can easily reverse payments to a credit card used for payment. It is more difficult to reverse charges to another credit card and also increases the risk of the wrong credit car being credited (through incorrect card details being provides/used).
Do you know if Foxtel can pay by cheque? Many business no longer use cheques. Do you know if they approached NCAT for advice on other payment methods if they don’t/can’t issue cheques…or did Foxtel decide to reverse the payments using the original payment methods?
I have not used the card in question for many months. I had no idea that reversing pmts was Foxtel’s procedure. Not do I care what their procedure is. They signed a document, certified by NCAT, agreeing to paying by chq. I would have thought that is a legally binding agreement.
I disagree. Foxtel agreed to pay $306 by chq. That is clear cut. I was not told that instead they would reverse some of my subscription pmts to them. Nor would I have agreed to that because who knows how long that takes. The Order said for them to give me a chq at my home by a certain date.
If they did not want to pay me in any manner other than reversals they should have made that clear and not signed a legal document only to thumb their snout at their obligations.
As to the card in question, I forgot all about it as I have not used it since Feb. I had no idea that Foxtel would try to credit that card rather than pay me by chq. My bank changed the card number several months ago, but my bank account number linked to that card stayed the same.
Had Foxtel told me that they were about to credit my card, I would have asked them for details of the card in question and at that time would have discovered they were about to credit a non existent card.
But as I wrote, I forgot all about the card. And until I realised the comensation was not received, I had no reason to consider a card being replaced months ago with one of a new number.
I don’t understand how they can try to credit any card without quering its expiry date or its activation status. As to using the non existent card to credit me with $61 NCAT fees, that is a tad rich of Foxtel.
The card with the new number was not used with Foxtel.
I also would have expected Foxtel to have contacted you to agree / arrange / confirm payment details. Although the decree was a cheque, today’s cheque is an EFT in practice so I would have expected a request for my banking details for deposit if it was not going to be an old school cheque.
Foxtel is a company by Fox (Newscorp) and Telstra, and from years of people posting their experiences, they seem to have the worst customer service practices of each, combined into one.
Agreed: EFT is the norm as is calling the customer to confirm details. This is EXACTLY what happened when I had a dispute with Bunnings. BTW, of large companies, at the end of the day, I found Bunnings quite receptive to customer demands.
You’re spot on regarding Foxtel’s customer service. I however don’t think it stinks so much because its a Murdoch/telstra beast, but rather because they have no competition.
I doubt I’ll ever return to a pricey subscription with Foxtel, but I am however considering signing up to a planned internet service of theirs that is expected to come out in a couple of months, providing a news only package (Fox News, Sky, BBC, CNBC etc) for $8/month.
As to your query on chqs…all I know is what I read on the Order they signed, I signed and NCAT certified: pmt will be by chq to the applicant by 01SEP21 delivered to his home address (which was listed). Not that I am going to court, but I cannot imagine they could argue that they are entitled to unilaterally change the means of pmt when doing so goes against what they signed.
NCAT hearing took place 29JUL21
NCAT sent written orders on 11AUG21
The order was for Foxtel to reimburse me by 01SEP21
It is now 01OCT21 and they have not done so in full.
They also ignored the only form of reimbursement agreed on betweeb the parties: by chq
Unilaterally they refunded a “dead” debit card without even checking that it’s valid.
My bank confirms receipt of only some of the claimed refund/compensation amount.
As of last Friday, they no longer reply to my emails
That leaves me no option but to seek enforcement action via the local court on presentation of a CERTIFIED MONEY ORDER from NCAT which was kindly provided.
Does anyone know if this process involves a hearing at the local court?
What is the steps involved and duration of “enforcement action”?
I established that I must return to NCAT in order to formalise my demand for Foxtel pay me the ensuing fees of the local court and re-appearing at NCAT.
I cannot help but wonder how much Foxtel is making by not ponying up what they agree to with customers (as compensation) as most folk I am sure would not struggle with the many hurdles the monopolist has thrown in my way.
Not sure about NSW procedures, but in Victoria it is off to the Magistrates Court if VCAT money orders have not been complied with.
And that is something that would involve good legal advice and probably legal help in dealing with the process.
Ask yourself is it really worth the effort for such a small amount of money, considering you will pay substantially more in legal fees than you may get from Foxtel if they end up paying you in full.
Legal costs can mount up, true.
But I was told that I can return to NCAT to sue for all the extra costs imposed on me by Foxtel’s thumbing of its nose at its own undertakings.
Today they repeated their irrelvant claim that the bank they sent the money to did NOT reject their pmt and Foxtel implies that they did refund me.
Of course this is BS. They agreed in writing to refund by chq to a specific address. I cannot see any judge siding with Foxtel on this.
I need to assure myself that I can indeed recoup every last cent from another NCAT hearing.
What you would get from another NCAT hearing is another money order. Which could include costs incurred by you in chasing Foxtel for the money owed from the first order.
But for enforcement if the other party doesn’t abide by the letter of the order, and so far they haven’t, it is off to court.
However, keep them communicating. They may just decide it is cheaper to just send you a cheque as they agreed, than tie up staff dealing with an issue that will not go away.
BTW, when I Googled Foxtel rip offs, this thread came up twice on the first results screen.
On 01OCT21 (i.e. last Friday) I wrote (early in the morning) to Foxtel advising that I am filing the NCAT papers later that day with the local court. This involves a sheriff turning up at Foxtel HQ to enforce the money order for $62 which remains unpaid by Foxtel.
I made clear that I will take the matter to NCAT, suing for $62 plus the NCAT fee and any other court/tribunal related fees (at least $98 for local court fee and $61 NCAT fee). I will point out that “we are here in court or at NCAT only because Foxtel ignored their written commitment to pay by chq and to pay in full. Not to mention, to pay by 01SEP21. Foxtel reneged on all three promises”.
While I told Foxtel that I would file by Friday, knowing that such organisations, even if they want to do the right thing, take a while to do so. Like turning a tanker in a lagoon, it isn’t a 5 minute job. I penciled in filing with the local court no later than noon today, 05OCT21.
So guess what happened?
It seems that someone at Foxtel took my promise to file with the local court on 01OCT21 seriously because when I checked my bank account balance online this morning, 05OCT21 the missing $62 magically appeared.
The credit to my a/c was posted on 01OCT21.
Moral of the story: Do not yield to bad corporate behaviour. Have the facts in your favour. Stand your ground. Make a noise. Don’t take “no” for an answer. Make clear to your opponent that you will fight on every hill and in every dale and that you will not allow them to escape liability. In emails, write little. But do a lot. Establish what is needed by Fair Trading, NCAT (or VCAT etc) if you go that route and prepare the documentation well in advance. Not only will you be good to go in the event that you reach out to Fair Trading or NCAT, but each time you redraft or summarise the case, the issues become clearer to you. That clarity will serve you well in correspondence.
Good result @Jon01. And good series of posts documenting your journey in pursuing your right to fair compensation.
You are now armed with knowledge of the system.
I would not like to be a shonky business that came up against you in the future.
Thanks. But what really grates is the number of hoops I had to jump, knowing full well that most folk would not bother to do the same and that would just give Foxtel unjust financial windfalls.
The NCAT Consent Order was clear: pmt by chq delivered to my residence (address noted on the Order) by 01SEP21.
At any time prior to Foxtel signing the Consent Order and returning it to me to file with NCAT, they were free to offer
alternatives to chq payment.
In discussions prior to me receiving Foxtel’s signed paper, Foxtel made clear that if the funds (in “time”, a period that Foxtel did not define) are not credited to my bank a/c then they “would send a chq”.
