General information only; not legal advice.

A “service transfer” (also called relocation, transfer of service address, or line transfer) is when a subscriber asks an internet service provider (ISP) to move an existing broadband subscription from one address to another. Disputes commonly arise when: (a) the ISP delays or fails to complete the transfer, yet (b) billing continues, late fees accrue, the account is threatened with disconnection, or the ISP insists on lock-in penalties despite non-service at the new location.

In the Philippine context, these disputes are usually resolved through a mix of contract law, consumer protection principles, and telecommunications regulation and complaints practice (typically involving the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC)). The correct remedy depends on the facts: whether the ISP actually delivered service, whether the area is serviceable, what the contract says, and what the subscriber did to document requests and follow-ups.

1) Typical fact patterns that trigger disputes

A. “Transfer requested, no installation date, but billing continues”

The subscriber files a relocation request; the ISP issues a ticket/reference number; weeks pass with no technician visit or no port availability. Monthly charges keep posting.

Dispute core: charging for a period where the subscriber cannot use the service at either address.

B. “Old address disconnected, new address not yet activated”

The ISP deactivates the old line (or it stops working after the move), but the new installation isn’t completed.

Dispute core: the ISP has effectively delivered zero service during the gap, yet bills keep running.

C. “New address not serviceable; ISP insists on termination fees”

The ISP later says the new address has no facilities (no fiber port/capacity). The subscriber wants to cancel without penalty; ISP demands pre-termination/lock-in fees.

Dispute core: whether inability to provide service at the new location is an ISP failure (breach) or a contractual condition (serviceability disclaimer), and what is fair.

D. “Transfer is treated like a new contract”

ISP requires a new lock-in period, new fees, and new terms; subscriber disputes being bound to a reset lock-in especially when delays are ISP-caused.

E. “Billing for equipment not returned / modem charges”

Move triggers equipment return obligations; disputes arise over alleged unreturned modem/ONU/router, installation materials, or “device fees.”

F. “Multiple overlapping accounts”

An agent mistakenly creates a new account at the new address while the old account remains active and billed.

2) What “delay” legally means in a relocation dispute

In Philippine obligations and contracts principles, a delay becomes legally meaningful when there is:

a demand (or a contractual due date) and
a failure to perform within the time agreed or reasonably expected given the nature of the service.

Even if the contract does not specify a firm timeline for relocation, service providers cannot rely on “no timeline” to bill indefinitely while not delivering service. Delays may support claims of:

breach of contract (failure to perform the service you pay for),
negligence in performance of obligation (if mishandled),
rescission/cancellation for substantial breach,
damages when the subscriber suffers losses (e.g., paid charges without service, lost work).

3) Legal bases commonly used in the Philippines

A. Contract of adhesion and fairness

Residential broadband contracts are typically contracts of adhesion (pre-printed, take-it-or-leave-it). Courts generally enforce them but may interpret ambiguous provisions against the drafter and may scrutinize oppressive terms.

B. Civil Code principles on obligations and breach

Key contract-law concepts that frequently apply:

Obligations arising from contracts have the force of law between the parties.
A party who fails to perform, performs poorly, or delays may be liable for damages.
For substantial breach, the injured party may seek rescission (cancellation) plus damages.
A party may not unjustly benefit by collecting payment while not providing the promised service (unjust enrichment concepts can be relevant in framing refund claims).

C. Consumer protection and unfair practices

Where representations were misleading (e.g., “transfer will be done within X days” but no capacity exists) or billing practices are unfair, consumer-protection concepts may support claims—particularly for:

deceptive sales practices,
unfair collection pressure,
charging without corresponding service.

D. Telecommunications regulation and complaints practice

Telecom and internet services are regulated; the NTC is the principal regulator for telco services and commonly receives complaints involving:

service delivery failures,
billing disputes,
disconnection/reconnection issues,
unresolved customer service complaints.

Even when your main claim is “refund/credit,” regulatory complaint processes can be an effective path because they pressure compliance and documentation.

4) Understanding the ISP’s usual contract clauses (and how disputes are argued)

Most broadband terms and conditions contain combinations of these clauses:

A. Lock-in period and pre-termination fee

You agree to keep the service for a fixed period.
Early termination triggers a fee (sometimes “all remaining months,” sometimes a fixed charge).

Dispute angle: If the ISP cannot provide service at your new address or leaves you without service for an unreasonable period, the subscriber can argue:

the ISP is in breach first, or
the contract’s purpose (providing internet access) has failed, making penalties unfair in that context.

B. “Subject to feasibility / serviceability”

ISPs often reserve the right to deny relocation if facilities are unavailable.

Dispute angle: This clause may be enforceable, but it does not automatically justify:

prolonged billing during a no-service period,
refusing to cancel without penalty after the ISP confirms non-serviceability,
failing to promptly inform the subscriber of feasibility results.

C. Relocation fees and processing timelines

There may be a relocation fee and an estimated time frame.

Dispute angle: A fee does not buy the ISP unlimited time. If the ISP accepts the request and payment but fails to act, the subscriber can demand:

refund of relocation fee,
billing suspension,
cancellation without penalty for non-performance.

D. Billing cycle and advance billing

Some plans bill in advance.

Dispute angle: Advance billing still assumes service availability. If service is not delivered, credits/refunds are typically the equitable remedy—often framed as:

pro-rating charges for the period without service,
reversing charges entirely if there was no service at all.

E. Disconnection for non-payment / collection

ISPs may threaten disconnection or collections if bills are unpaid.

Dispute angle: The subscriber should separate:

undisputed amounts (e.g., charges while service was working), and
disputed amounts (charges during transfer delay/no service), and document payment “under protest” for disputed amounts if paying to prevent account harm.

5) The core billing issues in transfer-delay disputes

A. Billing while no service is available

This is the heart of most cases. The subscriber’s position is typically:

No service = no basis for recurring monthly charges (or, at minimum, charges must be pro-rated/credited).

ISPs may counter:

The account remained active in the system, or
Service was “available” at the old address, or
Delay was caused by subscriber’s missed appointments/incomplete requirements.

What decides it: proof of (1) relocation request dates, (2) actual service usability at old/new address, (3) technician notes, (4) appointment history, (5) documentary trail.

B. Pro-rating, credits, and refunds

Outcomes often fall into one of these:

Full reversal of billed months during zero service,
Pro-rated adjustment based on actual activation date,
Service credits (offset against future bills),
Refund (less common unless the account is terminated).

C. Late fees and penalties during a documented dispute

Subscribers often dispute late payment charges when the underlying principal amount is contested due to no service.

A reasonable approach is:

ask the ISP to freeze billing and late fees pending resolution,
demand written confirmation.

D. Charges for equipment and installation materials

If termination happens after transfer fails, disputes may shift to:

modem/ONU return,
“unreturned equipment fees,”
installation fees already paid.

Practical rule: return equipment with documentation (receipts, photos, serial numbers) to avoid a second layer of dispute.

6) Evidence that wins these disputes (Philippine practice realities)

A. Create a clean timeline

Maintain a dated timeline of:

relocation request date,
ticket/reference numbers,
promised appointment dates,
missed appointments and reasons (if any),
follow-ups (calls, emails, chat logs),
date service stopped at old address (if applicable),
date new service was actually activated (if ever).

B. Preserve “no service” proof

Useful proof includes:

modem/ONT status screenshots,
ISP outage notifications,
speed test records (less conclusive alone but helpful),
technician notes or messages saying “no facilities available,” “no fiber port,” etc.

C. Keep bills and payment records

monthly statements showing charges during transfer delay,
receipts, proof of payment, especially if paid “under protest.”

D. Written confirmations matter

Phone calls are hard to prove. When possible:

move conversations to email/chat where transcripts exist,
request written confirmation of transfer status and expected completion.

7) Practical dispute-resolution sequence (Philippines)

Step 1: Notify the ISP and demand billing suspension during transfer

Best practice is a written message stating:

transfer request reference number,
date service became unusable,
demand to suspend recurring charges from the no-service date,
request for pro-rated adjustment once service is activated,
request a firm install date or feasibility determination by a fixed deadline.

Step 2: Separate “billing dispute” from “service request”

Many cases stall because they’re handled only as an installation issue. Open a billing dispute case explicitly and get a reference number.

Step 3: Escalate internally with a formal complaint email

Include:

timeline,
attachments (bills, screenshots, tickets),
a clear computation of the relief demanded (e.g., “reverse charges from ___ to ___; waive late fees; refund relocation fee”).

Step 4: Consider “payment under protest” for undisputed portions

If non-payment will trigger disconnection, credit issues, or collections, some subscribers pay the undisputed amount while explicitly contesting the rest. The key is documenting that payment is not an admission that the disputed charges are valid.

Step 5: Escalate externally (commonly NTC)

When internal complaint stalls, escalation often goes to the regulator for telecom service complaints. Typical results include:

the ISP being required to submit a response,
facilitated resolution (credits/refund, cancellation without penalty, or expedited service action).

Step 6: Civil remedies for refunds/damages (if needed)

When the dispute is primarily monetary and the ISP refuses, options include:

demand letter,
civil action for refund/damages (often practical only when amounts justify it),
small claims procedure for pure money claims (subject to the current Supreme Court threshold and rules).

8) Remedies and outcomes under Philippine legal principles

A. Service credits / reversal / refund

The most common practical remedies:

cancel billed months during no-service,
pro-rate charges,
waive late fees that arose from disputed billing,
refund relocation fee if the ISP failed to act or confirmed non-serviceability after taking fees.

B. Cancellation without penalty (when transfer fails)

Strongest grounds include:

ISP confirms new location is not serviceable,
prolonged no-service attributable to ISP facilities/capacity,
repeated failed appointments attributable to ISP,
failure to process transfer within a reasonable period despite complete requirements.

C. Damages (when warranted)

Possible damages under civil law concepts:

actual damages (documented out-of-pocket losses: redundant mobile data spend, alternative connection costs, paid billing without service),
moral damages (harder; typically requires proof of bad faith or serious distress beyond ordinary inconvenience),
exemplary damages (rare; typically tied to bad faith/wanton conduct),
attorney’s fees in proper cases.

In practice, many consumer telecom disputes settle at the credit/refund level unless there is extreme bad faith.

D. Interest and collection issues

If the subscriber withholds payment entirely, the ISP may:

impose late fees,
disconnect,
refer to collections,
report internal “delinquent” status.

This is why many disputes are handled with:

written dispute notice,
request to freeze billing,
partial payment of undisputed amounts, when strategically necessary.

9) Special complications

A. Transfer-of-ownership vs transfer-of-location

“Transfer” can mean:

moving the same account to a new address (relocation), or
transferring account ownership to another person at the same or different address.

Ownership transfer raises additional issues:

consent and credit checks,
assignment of obligations,
equipment custody.

B. Corporate vs residential accounts

Business accounts may have SLAs and clearer deliverables; residential accounts often rely heavily on T&Cs and regulatory consumer mechanisms.

C. Building/admin restrictions

Delays sometimes stem from condominium/building rules or lack of building permits/access.

If the delay is due to the subscriber’s inability to grant access or secure permits, billing disputes become fact-intensive: the ISP may argue the subscriber caused delay.

D. “Available at old address” argument

If the ISP claims the service remained available at the old address and the subscriber simply moved, the subscriber’s best counterproof is:

the ISP accepted the relocation request,
the ISP disconnected or deactivated old service,
or service at old address was no longer usable (and documented).

10) Drafting a demand letter (what to include)

A demand letter for a broadband transfer delay billing dispute typically includes:

Identification

account number, registered subscriber name
service addresses (old and new)
contact details

Facts

relocation request date and reference numbers
key events and missed commitments
date(s) of no service

Violations / legal framing

billing without service as breach/unfair billing
failure to perform relocation within reasonable time
bad faith indicators (if any): ignored requests, repeated false promises, refusal to correct billing

Demand

suspend charges from no-service date
reverse/pro-rate billed amounts (state computation)
waive late fees/penalties tied to disputed charges
refund relocation fee (if applicable)
cancel without termination fee if serviceability fails or delay is unreasonable
written confirmation within a stated period

Attachments

bills, receipts, emails/chats, screenshots, medical or work impact proof (if claiming damages)

11) Computation approach (how subscribers commonly present claims)

A clear computation makes resolution faster:

Monthly plan fee: ₱____
No-service period: (date) to (date) = ___ days
Amount billed during no-service: ₱____
Requested adjustment:
- Full reversal for months with zero service, or
- Pro-rated charge based on activation date
Add: relocation fee refund (₱____) if paid and service not delivered
Less: any undisputed period actually served (₱____)

12) Key takeaways

The dispute usually turns on a simple principle: recurring service fees must track actual service delivery, especially when the ISP accepted a relocation request.
Most successful claims are built on documentation: ticket numbers, written follow-ups, bills, and proof of no service.
Remedies commonly pursued in Philippine practice are: billing suspension, pro-rated credits, reversal of charges, waiver of late fees, and cancellation without penalty when the ISP cannot deliver service at the new address or delays unreasonably.
Escalation is typically most effective when you treat it as both a service delivery failure and a billing dispute, and when you can present a precise timeline and computation.