Like when you willingly sign up to a free trial knowing that you’ll get charged if you don’t cancel before that free trial ends?
Let’s look at Netflix as an example…
It’s pretty clear… 1 month free, then they’ll start charging you if you don’t cancel.
When a contract goes against the law, which is the case in your example, the law prevails (obviously). When it comes to subscriptions I don’t know how the law in the UK is, but here in Portugal it clearly states “active user action” is needed before they can start to charge, which is the opposite of having to remember to cancel something.
You have the same misconception a lot of people have that T&C’s and software EULAs can just override the law. It doesn’t work that way
Then we’re both right.
The situation in the UK is different to Portugal, as far as I know here “active user action” required is the user cancelling before the trial ends as when they’ve agreed to getting charged when the trial ends.
It’s in the T&C’s when they sign up which they agreed to. I.e. a subscription in which the first month is free, then it isn’t free thereafter.
So if the situation is different in Portugal, fine. Doesn’t change what applies in the UK.
No, even if the UK law doesn’t explicitly say the same, you just proved why those kinds or trials are deceptive, when you call it a subscription free on the first month. They advertise it as a free “trial” not a signup offer or discount. A trial is not a subscription
And anyways, they write the exact same in their Portuguese page, where it’s very clearly illegal, and it’s a pretty known fact that most of what’s written in software EULAs and that kind of subscription T&C’s is meant to scare you from trying legal action against them or having certain behaviours and most of it is not legal
Proof of that is that every time I take legal action against those companies, they immediately solve the situation. Of course I only do so when I have legitimate reason for it
I disagree in this context, if you are trialling a subscription service then it makes sense to me for that service to continue under a paid plan once the trial is over.
Also, law is about more than what the government has put into force. There is also common law, which is based on precedent. I’d imagine if you checked for the precedents of this kind of thing in the UK, it would probably not go in the consumers favour.
By its own definition a trial is a sample of what you get when subscribing, so a trial in the sense Netflix sells it is a “signup with a free month”, something we have here in Portugal and which companies don’t call a trial because it is not. A trial is a try before you buy, so if you don’t do nothing and start being charged, you were in fact buying in the first place, not trying.
Conflating a trial with a subscription is exactly what these companies try to do, tough you bring up a fair point, we don’t have precedent here in Portugal, that’s why maybe in the UK the interpretation may be different
Is that not exactly what that free month is? You are trying their full service for free. You are under no obligation to continue onto the paid service. However, it is your responsibility to let them know that you have decided against using the paid service.
The consumer being the one responsible for cancelling prior to being charged also encourages the consumer to explain what about the service perhaps isn’t good enough for them to be willing to pay for it. Though, again, they are not obligated to do so.
No, no one will 
Maybe it’s because here in Portugal theres a clear distinction between a “trial”, where when it ends, then you have to subscribe if you want to keep it and a subscription that offers you the first month. Here we have both and no one will label the later as a trial. There are all kinds of lawsuits and public rage against companies like Spotify or Netflix when people sign into their “trials” and then start being charged. They won’t understand why their trial turned into a subscription without them doing anything and they have legal grounds to have their money back plus compensation
The conversation here is getting quite heated and aggressive, so I’m going to close this thread for a while.
This topic was automatically opened after 19 hours.
This is a UK based bank and the people on this forum are primarily UK based. Not being rude but what you have to say about Portugal has limited importance to anyone other then yourself.
Isn’t one of the primary functions of a community forum to help other people? A lot of forum topics are about one person seeking input from others, so I’m not sure what the point is.
Of course with this being a UK based forum I make the distinction of being based somewhere else exactly so that we can understand where there may be distinctions in procedures, rules, etc.
Additionally I’ve counted at least 5 other Portuguese users in this forum and I’d like to believe we’ve made positive contributions to the conversation here. I don’t understand why you insist on replying to me if you consider my participation in this forum of no utility and you also consider no one should use the forum for their own benefit in seeking input or help from others. Mind you, no one is forcing you to engage with them
If I’ve made you feel in any way exposed or personally attacked, my apologies. Please understand the intention here should be to discuss ideas, and there’s no problem or shame in conceding an argument or admitting when someone else made you change your mind.
With this said, please consider this my last reply to you given your stated sentiment regarding my participation on this community forum.
All I heard is I don’t like what you said to me so I’m gonna throw my toys out of the pram. In saying that if that happens to be your point of view then so be it.
My last post to you was in response to the fact that you continue to go on about Portuguese law when in the great scheme of things, it doesn’t matter as most of the people here are UK based. Take it or leave it.
Hello, the conversation here hasn’t cooled down, so I’m closing the thread. Thanks!
