Contract changes
Hi Everyone,
Back in June 2024 there was a lovely offer for Sky Sports at £15 per month by email. The email stated that as a 3rd party add on it would not affect the contract and could be cancelled at 30days notice.
My Core services contract was due to end 11th Nov 2024.
I was somewhat surprised to find out that when discussing my current deal with the rep my contract would now run until January 2026. Confused about this and after a lot of emails and calls I was told that ANY changes to the addons (third party or not) automatically amended the contract.
I was somewhat surprised and feel a bit cheated to be honest that simply changing the existing Sky Sports Channels to the HD pack had triggered an entirely new 18-month contract.
They have asked for a copy of the email THEY sent which after this time I am unable to locate. Surely they are aware of their own offers?
This seems to me to be rather shady and underhand as on a number of conversations (online, contact centre, and email) I have never been informed that ANY changes adding or removing add on's will affect the Core services contract (Broadband, Telephone and basic TV).
There method of handling is to ask for emails or call dates which inform me the changes will NOT affect the contract. As its never been mentioned by the company reps this is obviously ridiculous. Shouldn't the company be telling me WHEN I was informed - they know they will be unable to do so.
I feel very let down as the package is now too expensive for me, but I am trapped within the Virgin Media bureaucracy. Whatever happened to caring customer service.
Obviously NOT a professional company so please be aware of this issue. NEVER change your package!!
Good Morning Bill_Scott, thanks for reaching out to us and a very warm welcome to our Community Forums!
Sorry to hear of the issues you have been experiencing with our Sales team when agreeing an offer in relation to Sky Sports.
I'd be happy to look into this for you, to see if we can get to the bottom of this and confirm if this indeed should or shouldn't be a locked in minimum term.
Thanks,
David_Bn