Abstract
This article deconstructs mobile phone contracts as an example of long-term contractual relations in four jurisdictions to reveal that there are three elements which define consumer protection. The elements are contract duration, renewal of the agreement and unilateral modification. Each of these factors are regulated differently in each of the jurisdictions, but, assessed collectively, similar levels of consumer protection are found. The authors show that the reason for the different weighting is determined by regulation (subject-specific or general); by external factors, such as technological development, geography or business considerations; and by wider cultural considerations. The comparison of these features across the jurisdictions shows that, ultimately, regulatory intervention plays little role in contract design, unless an overwhelming policy goal is pursued, which means that, in most cases, regulators would be advised to avoid or reduce regulation of mobile phone and other long-term contracts.
Highlights
This article deconstructs mobile phone contracts as an example of long-term contractual relations in four jurisdictions to reveal that there are three elements which define consumer protection
This article will focus on the three features that characterize mobile phone, and other longterm, contracts the most: the duration of the contract, i.e., the initial commitment period, the ability to automatically renew the contract at the end of the initial term, and the possibility of unilateral modification of the contract by the service provider
It will do so by comparing the solutions applied in four jurisdictions – Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States (US) and Canada1 – which provide examples of different approaches to the regulation of mobile phone contracts and illustrate differing attitudes to long-term contracts
Summary
There are two prototypes of mobile phone contracts. First, the prepaid or monthly rolling contracts, where the customer either pre-pays or post-pays for a service on a monthly basis without commitment beyond one month. The mobile phone user, when entering into the agreement, will consider the length of time that they will be bound by the contract, in order to compare market rates and to make the (usually costly) handset affordable by being able to pay for it in instalments (Bar-Gill and Stone 2012). Mobile phone providers have a substantial interest in binding customers for a certain length of time to amortize the cost of the handset They can attract new business by allowing the customer to spread the cost of the handset over a period of time, making the contract seem more affordable The options for initial commitment periods for mobile phone contracts have changed over time (Dodsworth et al 2014). In order to establish the regulatory context within which this article will consider these influences, it is necessary to consider the national rules of each jurisdiction
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
