53-year-old Mr. Zhang calculated that he had to apply to China Mobile to adjust his mobile phone number fee when he was 79 years old.
htmlOn September 20, Mr. Zhang, a consumer of Zhaodong City in Heilongjiang City, reported to the Pengpai Quality Complaint Platform (www.thepaper.cn/consumersComplaint.jsp) that in 2014, he applied for a mobile card with the last number of 6789 at the Shisidao Street Mobile Business Hall in Zhaodong City, and also handled a 300 yuan business for special numbers. Three years later, when Mr. Zhang went to the mobile business hall to apply for a reduction in tariffs, he was told that he could not reduce the tariffs and could not cancel the business. The reason is that the package contract period for this business is 29 years, which will last until 2043, and will expire in 25 years. htmlOn September 21, a manager named Wu from the mobile business hall of Shisidao Street, Zhaodong City told The Paper (www.thepaper.cn) that in view of Mr. Zhang’s fee structure and actual situation at that time, he would report it to the relevant departments of mobile company .
Mr. Zhang found that some packages processed by mobile phone numbers are valid for 29 years or 30 years.
query found that the package contract period was 29 years, and the application for lowering the tariff was rejected
On September 20, Mr. Zhang told The Paper that in 2014, he applied for a mobile card at the Shisidao Street Mobile Business Hall in Zhaodong City. The last four digits were "6789", which was a "good number", and the monthly minimum consumption was 300 yuan.
Mr. Zhang was born. He signed a contract when he was processed, but the contract has now been lost. "At that time, the salesperson said that after two or three years of use, the minimum monthly consumption of 300 yuan could be cancelled."
Mr. Zhang is 53 years old this year and is a laid-off worker. He was helping his son run a cosmetics store four years ago, and the phone bills are high. "If you don't open a store now, the monthly phone bill is more than 100 yuan. If you can't use the phone bill for 300 yuan, you will still be deducted 300 yuan per month." Mr. Zhang said.
In August this year, Mr. Zhang went to the mobile business hall of Shisidao Street, Zhaodong City to apply for a replacement package to reduce the monthly minimum fee, but was rejected. At that time, the staff at the business hall told him that his monthly fee package of 300 yuan could not be replaced or reduced during the contract period.
However, this statement has not been confirmed by the mobile business hall of Shisidao Street, Zhaodong City.
htmlOn September 21, a manager named Wu from the mobile business hall of Shisidao Street, Zhaodong City told The Paper: "This number should be what our leaders want. Our leaders will definitely make it clear to him, and he should also apply for a card that he approves."Manager surnamed Wu said that in view of Mr. Zhang's fee structure and the actual situation at that time, he will report it to the relevant departments of the mobile company.
But Mr. Zhang denied that he had handled the number with the last number "6789" through the "leader" relationship of the mobile business hall at that time. He said that when applying for a card, he only knew that the number was a "special number" and did not know that the package contract period was as long as 29 years.
According to the screenshot of the query information on China Mobile APP provided by Mr. Zhang, the "Determined Business" column states that "Special Number Bottom Line 300 yuan for Special Numbers" is the ordering time on November 24, 2014 and the expiration time is December 1, 2043.
In addition, the query information also shows that the 1 yuan domestic chat package newly issued by Mr. Zhang on January 1, 2017 was expired on January 1, 2047, which was also 30 years. Is it reasonable to restrict users from reducing the package tariff standards?
On September 23, lawyer Wang Pengdong told The Paper that the telecom service providers provide communication services, and the contract signed for mobile phone packages should be a service contract. According to the Consumer Rights Protection Law, some terms of the contract are invalid due to violations, because consumers have the right to independently choose goods or services.
Wang Pengdong said that when consumers choose goods or services independently, they have the right to compare, identify and select. The non-allowance of replacement of packages is inconsistent with the mandatory legal rules, and this restriction should be an invalid clause; special numbers cannot reduce the tariff and the package time is unilateral clause of the operator, which is unreasonable and has no clear legal basis.
lawyer Xing Xin introduced that my country's "Telecom Network Number Resource Management Measures" clearly stipulates that telecom operators are prohibited from "charging number selection fees from users" and "restricting telecom users to use their designated services in any way". Since the number cannot be bought and sold, mobile and other operators set restrictions on different numbers such as minimum consumption, pre-deposit phone fees, contract periods, etc. for different numbers, setting up a "edge ball", forming different thresholds for users to choose.
Xing Xin believes that if Mr. Zhang signed a package contract with a mobile company, it clarifies the usage period, guaranteed consumption amount and other contents, and is the true intention of both parties, and does not violate the mandatory provisions of laws and administrative regulations, and is legal and valid. Both parties should perform as agreed. However, Mr. Zhang’s number tariff is valid until 2043, and the package standard cannot be reduced during the validity period. This tariff standard poses a restriction and burden on Mr. Zhang’s rights. When joining the network, the mobile company should make a clear explanation to Mr. Zhang and provide information services on the premise that Mr. Zhang makes a confirmation to ensure consumers' right to know and free choice. If the mobile company cannot provide evidence to prove that it has fulfilled the above notification obligation, it is at fault.
