On some occasions, multinationals commit illegal acts that can cause moral damage to their clients due to improper charges. Specifically, in the telecommunications field, it often happens that bills include expenses that the user has not made and it is at this precise moment that complaints and claims begin. In this context, Vodafone Spain has become the focus of justice after having made an erroneous charge to one of its clients.
Nowadays, the more insurance policies we have with different companies, whether medical, car, home, etc., and even other types of billing related to necessary living expenses, such as water, electricity and gas, Internet, etc., the more emphasis we have to put on each of the documents we receive at the end of the month to make sure they are in order and we have not been charged an extra cost that does not correspond to what we have spent.
Mobile phone bills are usually the ones that vary the most in costs and are the ones we have to pay the most attention to in order to avoid any surprises. This is the case of a Vodafone customer, who has been forced to sue the red operator for making an improper charge that results in compensation of 17,000 euros.
The prosecution went to court to study the situation, concluding that one of the parties acted in bad faith and, therefore, Vodafone has been condemned to return the financial funds that it unfairly acquired from one of its clients, in addition to granting compensation with interest. Below, we tell you all the details of the judicial process.
The Supreme Court rules in favor of the Vodafone client
Vodafone has once again fallen into the nets of justice after witnessing an uncomfortable situation with one of its clients, who was claiming an incorrect charge on one of her telephone bills. The affected person claims that she received no response at any time from the operator after having tried to contact them on several occasions. From that moment on, she decided to file a complaint and, subsequently, a lawsuit.
Following a clash of opinions as to when payment should be made, the Court of First Instance number 4 of Terrassa determined that the interest had to be paid from the date it was claimed in relation to the provisions of articles 1101 and 1108 of the Civil Code. However, the client did not agree with this statement, as she insisted that it should be accrued from the dates on which the undue payments were made, as stipulated in article 1896 of the Civil Code.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the client, declaring that interest must be received from the moment the undue payment was received, excluding the argument of the Court of First Instance.
This is not the first time that this type of incident has occurred in the world of telephony and its bills. Therefore, it is necessary to always look at the small print and each of the monthly charges that companies deduct at the end of the billing cycle.
