“Legislation requires communication service providers to clearly inform consumers about all the main terms of the contract, including possible payments if the contract is terminated early. However, RRT, when examining consumer disputes, notices that a common problem arises when the consumer, concluding the contract by phone, does not receive all the important information,” says Aridana Jurčiukonienė, head of the RRT Legal and Consumer Rights Protection Group.
Read more In July – preliminary 5.6% annual, 0.3% monthly inflation
According to RRT experts, before concluding a contract by phone, the consumer must be clearly and understandably informed about the service price, applicable discounts, how long the commitment to use the services and not terminate the contract lasts, and what financial consequences may arise if the contract is terminated earlier than agreed.
The mere fact that the terms are posted in self-service after the call or sent to the consumer by email or even a paper contract is delivered using a courier does not change the obligation to provide essential information to the consumer at the time of concluding the contract, i.e., during the phone call.
For example, recently RRT examined a dispute where a consumer contested the communication service provider’s demand to return granted discounts after terminating contracts earlier than the agreed term and to pay the operator 172 euros. The consumer stated that she terminated the contract due to improperly provided service – the service disruption was not promptly resolved, and the cause of the malfunction was identified only after several days.
According to RRT experts’ assessment, a one-time technical malfunction is not considered a material breach of contract that entitles the consumer to terminate the contract without additional costs. However, in the case under review, although the contract duration, service price, and mention that discounts might have to be returned if the contract is terminated early were discussed during the phone call, the communication service provider did not explain which specific discounts were applied and the amount the consumer would have to return. By RRT’s decision, the communication service provider’s demand to return the granted discounts was unfounded.
In other recently examined disputes, RRT found that service providers did not prove that during the phone call with the consumer it was clearly stated that the contract includes a commitment to use the services for a minimum of 24 months, or that if the contract is terminated before this term ends, the consumer will have to return the granted discounts, or only the discounted price was stated, but neither the discount itself nor the price without it was specified. In all these cases, disputes were resolved in favor of the consumers.
Read more “Swedbank” and “OP Corporate Bank” lend 140 million euros to “Linas Agro”
What to pay attention to when concluding a contract by phone
RRT experts remind that when concluding or renewing electronic communications service contracts, consumers should pay attention to its essential terms: price without discount and with discount, minimum service usage period, and clarify the consequences if the consumer terminates the contract before this period.
It is also important to check whether additional services are included in the contract – internet protection, television services, or travel insurance.
“Recently, we have noticed that some service providers include such services and offer the possibility to use them free of charge for a certain period (a few months), but after this period ends and these services are not declined, consumers’ bills increase. Service providers must inform consumers about the end of the free period of such services, but we also urge consumers to be attentive and not miss these informational messages and to timely decline additional services,” says A. Jurčiukonienė.
RRT alone in the first half of this year examined 319 requests regarding postal and electronic communications services and saved service recipients nearly 10,000 euros. Throughout 2025, 585 consumer disputes were examined, and 46 thousand euros were refunded to consumers.
If a consumer has doubts about the quality of communication services, their operation can be objectively assessed using a free tool.
Read more Transaction in Vilnius: an impressive amount for a building in the center
