Giffgaff Gaffe

[Bambino]

O2 screwing its customers yet again, but the customers don't seem to care.

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-49162186

[Anonymous]

@Bambino 

There's a reason giffgaff customers stay (declaration: I am one myself) and that's the ability to earn money.

You earn for contributing to the forum and like O2, you can earn for each person that joins.

Twice a year you can opt to have it paid out to a paypal account, use it as credit (so lots operate their phone effectively for free so you could argue that's err value) or they vote for a charity.

I joined and stayed because I can earn some dosh assisting people regarding phone matters, I did that on a general phone forum plus helping to mod it for nothing and not even the proper tools to combat the spam.

The rates aren't the cheapest (o2's are)  but that's one of the main reasons why.

[jonsie]

I'm not sure just why O2 should care to be honest @Bambino ? They obtained the money illicitly and got found out. The fine in real terms is peanuts to a company like Telefonica and should have been 10 times that to make them give a damn.

[Anonymous]

More info

---

@Anonymous wrote:

@Bambino 

There's a reason giffgaff customers stay (declaration: I am one myself) and that's the ability to earn money.

You earn for contributing to the forum and like O2, you can earn for each person that joins.

Twice a year you can opt to have it paid out to a paypal account, use it as credit (so lots operate their phone effectively for free so you could argue that's err value) or they vote for a charity.

I joined and stayed because I can earn some dosh assisting people regarding phone matters, I did that on a general phone forum plus helping to mod it for nothing and not even the proper tools to combat the spam.

The rates aren't the cheapest (o2's are)  but that's one of the main reasons why.

---

The community only accounts for a tiny percentage of the overall customer base (probably less than 3%), so it is hugely damaging for giffgaff’s reputation. 

Still, many of those disgruntled customers will probably have moved on by the time those dubious Which awards are handed out 

[welshsteve76]

So refunds have been issued to those customers that can be traced, which is fine.  But the fine should have AT LEAST been the same as the overcharge. 

[Anonymous]

---

@welshsteve76 wrote:

So refunds have been issued to those customers that can be traced, which is fine.  But the fine should have AT LEAST been the same as the overcharge. 

---

You can read Ofcom’s final decision here. It’s worth reading in its entirety, but the following extract is quite damning:

“During the course of this investigation, Ofcom also became aware that giffgaff had failed to provide accurate information in response to two statutory information requests issued by Ofcom under section 135 of the Act. We have today issued a separate Confirmation Decision under s139A of the Act to giffgaff for its contraventions of requirements to provide information. We have imposed a penalty of £50,000 on giffgaff for these contraventions.”

[jezza1234]

O2 screwing its customers yet again, but the customers don't seem to care.

It is worth noting that Giff Gaff uses the O2 network and is owned by the same parent company- Telefonica.

The 2 on the whole are run as separate business' and O2 has no direct control over how Giff runs or otherwise its business.

the statement should read Telefonica screwing its customers.

[welshsteve76]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@welshsteve76 wrote:

So refunds have been issued to those customers that can be traced, which is fine.  But the fine should have AT LEAST been the same as the overcharge. 

---

You can read Ofcom’s final decision here. It’s worth reading in its entirety, but the following extract is quite damning:

“During the course of this investigation, Ofcom also became aware that giffgaff had failed to provide accurate information in response to two statutory information requests issued by Ofcom under section 135 of the Act. We have today issued a separate Confirmation Decision under s139A of the Act to giffgaff for its contraventions of requirements to provide information. We have imposed a penalty of £50,000 on giffgaff for these contraventions.”

---

That is pretty damning, and hopefully proof that the era of large companies ripping off consumers and hiding behind unscrupulous business dealings is hopefully on its last legs.