Optus toughens up mobile contract
Last December Optus incurred customer wrath, effectively torpedoing mobile access to cheap international VoIP services by charging them at international rates.
At the time, Optus insisted that:
International calls within the meaning of your Optus Mobile Standard Form of Agreement for all Timeless and Cap plans includes calls that re-route or divert to international numbers.
CSP Central asked Optus to tell us where the SFoA said that. We couldn’t be sure – because the document is a confused mish-mash – but as far as we could tell it said no such thing.
Apparently Optus didn’t feel too sure of its grounds, either. So it has bolted on a powerful, unbalanced new contract term that is sure to attract the interest of consumer regulators who have unfair contract terms legislation in their armory. Today, that’s only Victoria. On 1 January 2010, it will be every Australian State and Territory, and the ACCC.
SFoA backgrounder released
Many CSPs are already using a ’Standard Form of Agreement’ but many others don’t … and don’t know what it’s all about.
To demystify the topic, here’s a dowloadable SFoA backgrounder that overviews what they are and why they can improve CSP business processes, with the compliments of CSP Central and Logie-Smith Lanyon Lawyers 
You should also check out this post about complying with the SFoA Summary notification regime.
Dear Optus, please show us where
To describe the Optus standard customer contract as a dog’s breakfast is unkind to dogs. We know many canines that can at least keep their food inside the bowl.
In this case, the clarity (or otherwise) of the contract documents matters more than most. Optus is basing a controversial decision to deny Timeless or Cap plan customers access to cheap VoIP calls on a claim that its standard contract is quite clear about it.
Struggling to make sense of Dodo’s liability clauses
Regular readers will know that T&C clauses that (supposedly) limit CSP liability are very important. If you don’t get them right, you can be exposed to unnecessary legal risk.
Worse, you may commit a criminal offence under the Trade Practices Act – of misrepresenting peoples’ legal rights.
Dodo’s most recent brush with the law caused us to take a look at its ‘liability limitation’ clause. All we can say is ‘Wow !’ What planet’s legal system generated this weird stuff ?
CSPs fail simple compliance test
It’s surprising how many service providers trip up on basic compliance requirements. We surveyed 36 Aussie CSPs against a simple benchmark. 21 of them failed.
The smaller the company, the more likely it was to get the requirement wrong. But Adam Internet, Crazy John’s and Soul Mobile all got it wrong, too.
Managing your SFoA summary delivery
Some CSPs do it well, and many fail to do it at all. A copy of your Standard Form of Agreement summary has to be given to customers at the start of the contract, and then a short reminder each two years.
Are you compliant ? Can you prove it ?
Here are some hints for getting it right.
Talk about tangled up ! Sorry, Voda. Your prepay contract terms don’t work.
A thread on Whirlpool about early termination fees under Vodafone mobile prepays led us into the maze of Voda’s complex contract terms. And guess what ? They don’t say what Voda thinks they say.
It’s a great lesson to telcos and their lawyers … Super-complex contracts don’t only confuse your customers.