The Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) has upheld orders to ban unfair practices of two telecoms issued by the Consumer Protection Commission (CPC). It is about the mobile operators BTK (trade name Vivacom) and Mobiltel (trade name Mtel), announced by the CPC, reports mediapool. 

Vivacom has not informed its customers about the full features of the mobile devices it sold to them. The devices were presented as waterproof and impact-resistant. However, they remain undamaged only if they are immersed in water for up to one meter and for no more than 30 minutes, and if they fall from a height of no more than 1.2 meters.

"These essential features have not been part of the phone's label but at the same time may be relevant to the buyer's decision to buy, and in this way create prerequisites for the trader to refuse a claim in the event of a problem with the mobile device , which arose in circumstances that the guarantee did not cover without the consumer having been aware of the terms in advance ", explained by the CPC.

Another recently confirmed order by the Supreme Administrative Court  is to ban the unfair practice of Mtel. The telecom has not communicated to its customers in advance the existence of a fee when a subscriber wishes to change the tariff plan for mobile services.

Customers would have to pay a charge of 19.90 BGN if they change their plan. The fallacy stems from the fact that the contract provides for the possibility for the subscriber to switch to another tariff plan with only a higher or equal monthly subscription fee and it does not indicate that the consumer owes money for this change. The charge for the service in question is only announced on the operator's website. Also, all essential clauses of the treaty should be explicitly and thoroughly settled prior to its conclusion, the expert opinion confirmed by magistrates also states. CPC advises users to check the details of the devices they buy and check for hidden charges. When a contract is concluded in unfair terms, consumers may request their termination and seek their rights in court. The SAC's decision on the case can be used as an argument in any case.