TIM will have to pay 928. 00 0 ?? for the remodeling carried out on the Base Plan from 1, 99 ?? per month made to the detriment of some users who had no active offer. This is what AGCOM declared, which decided to fine TIM for having charged numerous customers with a pay-as-you-go plan a fixed monthly cost with the claim of a contractual modification. In this case, therefore, the consumption plans have become a fixed monthly cost.

TIM: fine of almost 1 million euro

The story dates back to last January 2020 when TIM had informed users of a remodeling for some offers. Specifically, AGCOM found that the Italian operator charged a certain number of SIM holders with pay-per-use plans a fixed monthly cost with contractual modification , introducing a new contractual condition which has radically changed its nature. In this case the plans of the customers involved have gone from being consumption to plans at a fixed monthly cost: two very different situations.

So here is the fine that AGCOM has decided to inflict on TIM which clearly defended itself with various arguments, including the lack of competence of the Authority on the matter. In fact, according to AGCOM, clear and explicit information as well as complete was not communicated to users that would allow them to better orient themselves in a competitive market and perhaps change operator consciously.

What AGCOM underlined : ?? In this case, however, the Company has not implemented a unilateral amendment aimed at adapt the contractual conditions already consciously accepted by the recipients, but proceeded to insert a quid novi in ​​the original prepaid contract signed by the users, characterized by full control of the expense through the use of services until the telephone credit purchased by the customer is exhausted. ? user in the amount chosen by him . More precisely, it must be reiterated that the possibility of modifying a contract meets the limit inherent in the modifying function itself: this cannot create a new obligation, because in this case it would go beyond the modification , involving, as in the case in question, the establishment of a new loan action and the objective distortion of the identity of the main contractual relationship. It is necessary, in fact, to remember that users, at the time of signing the original contract, have consciously opted for prepaid offers, having certain legal and economic conditions, which best suited the personal needs for the use of the services and the periodically paid expenses, in the case of the SIM-only pay-as-you-go SIMs like those in question, when recharging. On closer inspection, with the maneuver in question, TIM surreptitiously, and without any consent from the customers involved, identified a new service (id est 3 / 21 / CONS 11 the obligation to pay a fixed monthly cost never contemplated in the original contract conditions) to which users will be required regardless of the use of mobile telephone services, by not opting for example, as it could well have legitimately, for an adjustment of the minute prices of the individual services or the method of payment of the fees already provided in case of use of the same services “.

Follow us on our Instagram channel, lots of news coming soon !