For decades, tenants have paid TV costs through additional rental costs. This has come to an end since the beginning of July. But some tenants are still being asked to pay for the TV signal. Consumer advocates are alarmed. The NRW consumer advice center accused the housing group LEG and the network operator NetCologne of foisting contracts on tenants and thus acting illegally. The corresponding warnings have been sent out.
The two companies independently sent letters to tenants stating that the tenants would automatically receive an end-user contract. According to consumer advocates, however, the tenant's active consent is necessary. “After the abolition of the ancillary costs privilege, consumers actually have a free choice of how they receive TV,” says Felix Flosbach from the NRW Consumer Advice Center. “But the two providers are trying to trick consumers into signing contracts without actually concluding them.”
You should definitely ignore this letter
In the letter from NetCologne to its customers, it says that it wants to make things as easy as possible for cable users and convert the existing cable TV contract into an individual TV user contract.
“So you don't have to worry about anything and just keep watching your favorite program – and at a low price.” According to the letter, you have to pay five euros a month, which is actually relatively cheap. The month of July is free. Customers can unsubscribe online – so there is no obligation to pay, unlike the previous additional costs model.
LEG, in turn, writes to its tenants that they can “sit back comfortably and do not have to sign their own contract”. A new contract will be set up alongside the rental agreement, independent of the rental agreement. Termination is also possible here. The LEG apartments receive their television signals from the cable provider Vodafone. A spokesman for the Düsseldorf telecommunications company says that they have no direct contractual relationship with the tenants and that LEG offers its tenants TV services independently.
Documents are critical – tenants should act
If your landlord or a provider offers you an end-user contract for cable television, you can refuse without hesitation. Because you have the freedom to choose and can decide for yourself whether you want to accept the offer or not.
If cable TV continues to be transmitted without the tenant's consent, households will no longer have to pay for it from July 1st. If the item remains part of the utility bill, the document is considered incorrect. The landlord or property management must then correct the bill. The cable TV bill is then the landlord's responsibility.
Anyone who has signed a contract with cable TV operators based on this model should immediately exercise their right of withdrawal or terminate the contract at the earliest possible date. This is because many providers continue to lure customers with cheaper options – for example from Sky, Telekom, Vodafone, Joyn and others. Alternative offers such as Magenta TV from Deutsche Telekom, Sky Stream from the pay-TV provider Sky or online services such as Zattoo and waipu.tv have been booming for months.
This is how the companies justify themselves
The companies reject the consumer advocates' accusations. A LEG spokesman says that the offer is only fulfilling contractual obligations. “In our legal opinion, a functioning TV connection is part of the existing old rental agreements.” This argument, however, does not convince consumer advocate Flosbach. “In principle, the cable TV connection must be available if it is guaranteed in the rental agreement,” says the lawyer, but: “This does not result in forced use.”
NetCologne says that a smooth transition for customers is important when it comes to television provision. “So that they can continue to watch cable TV as usual and the signal remains available in the first step, we have opened up the possibility of continuing to use the previous service via an individual contract by means of implied consent.” Implied consent means that a person's actions indicate something that they have not explicitly said.
