Formal Complaint: Unclear EU calling terms, conflicting rates, and poor complaint handling

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing further to my earlier correspondence regarding my SIM-only contract with Simyo (“Simyo Onbeperkt”, ordered on 10 August 2026), and to the explanation subsequently provided by your representative Filiz regarding the treatment of calls to foreign EU numbers. Having now reviewed the actual signed contract document in detail, I have identified a direct discrepancy between its wording and the explanation Simyo has given me, which I set out below.

The relevant contract clause

The signed contract document, under the heading “Verbruik in het buitenland” (“Usage abroad”) on page 3, states in full:

“In het buitenland gelden in de EU dezelfde prijzen als in Nederland. Buiten de EU hanteren we andere prijzen.”

In English: “Abroad, in the EU the same prices apply as in the Netherlands. Outside the EU we apply different prices.”

This is the entirety of the contractual provision governing usage abroad. It draws exactly one distinction: between the EU and countries outside the EU. It makes no reference whatsoever to any further distinction based on whether the customer is physically located abroad when making a call, as opposed to calling a foreign EU number from within the Netherlands.

Why this contradicts Simyo's explanation

In her response to my complaint, Filiz explained that Simyo draws a distinction between (a) using my bundle while physically located in another EU country, which is included, and (b) calling a foreign EU number from the Netherlands, which is excluded and charged at the buitenbundeltarief. In support of this, I was referred to the page “Bellen naar het buitenland” on the Simyo website, and to information available via the “i” information icon on the order page.

This explanation cannot be reconciled with the wording of the contract I actually signed, for the following reasons:

1. The distinction Simyo now relies on does not appear in the contract. The signed contract refers only to “in het buitenland” (“abroad”) and draws its line at the EU border, not at the location of the caller. A reasonable consumer reading this clause, calling a UK or other EU number from the Netherlands, would conclude that EU pricing applies, since the call falls squarely within the EU as referenced by the clause.
2. The plan name itself compounds the ambiguity. My plan is named “Simyo Onbeperkt” (“Simyo Unlimited”). A plan marketed and named as unlimited, combined with a contract clause stating that EU usage is priced the same as domestic usage, gives no reasonable indication that calls to EU numbers from the Netherlands would be excluded and separately charged.
3. The carve-out relied upon by Simyo does not appear anywhere in the contract document itself. The four-page contract I signed contains no reference to a buitenbundeltarief for EU calls, nor to any distinction between roaming usage and calls placed to EU numbers from the Netherlands. This information was, by Simyo's own account, only available separately via a website tariff page and an “i” information icon on the order page, neither of which forms part of the signed contract.

Legal basis

Under Article 6:238(2) of the Dutch Civil Code (Burgerlijk Wetboek), where a term in a set of general terms and conditions is unclear or open to more than one reasonable interpretation, the interpretation most favourable to the consumer must prevail. The clause quoted above is, at best, ambiguous as to whether calls to EU numbers made from the Netherlands are included at domestic rates. Given that ambiguity, and given that Simyo's own contract document contains no clear carve-out excluding such calls, the interpretation in my favour, that such calls are included at the same price as domestic usage, must prevail.

I consider this discrepancy between the signed contract and Simyo's subsequent explanation to further support my original complaint and my request for termination of the contract without an early-termination fee, as set out in my earlier letter.

Requested action

I request that Simyo:

1. Terminate my contract with immediate effect, without an early-termination fee, and provide written confirmation of this termination together with a final bill clearly stating the contract end date.

As previously notified, I have already submitted a formal complaint to the Geschillencommissie (Disputes Committee) in the Netherlands regarding this matter, which will be progressed and continued regardless of any response to this letter.

I would welcome your prompt written response addressing the points raised above.

Yours faithfully,

Benjamin Freeman

I'm no employee, but I wish you a lot of luck with your complaint. I do doubt you would get far with that complaint.

In case you missed it: This page (in English) exists and I do believe there are several references to that.

But given the way you want to handle it with laws and stuff the most important one: The “Tarieven” has a nice table on page 6 stating that the "Tarieven (per minuut) voor bellen tussen de verschillende zones” from “Nederland” to "Naar zone 1” costs € 0,2299.

The tariffs sheet is basically the foundation of any costs the Simyo would charge you. It most certainly was one document you agreed to and it just shows the foreign tariffs without hiding that.

It also is not unique that Simyo as provider charges costs for calling zone 1 countries from within The Netherlands. Plenty do that! The European rules "Roam like home” prevents providers to charge customers any addition costs WHILE you are roaming in zone 1 countries. That same rule does not want to interfere with internal markets, so providers may charge whatever their internal markets allow for calling within that country to zone 1 countries/foreign countries.

Thanks for digging that up. However, I think it actually supports my point rather than undermining it.

I'm not disputing that a tariffs PDF exists somewhere with a zone table. I'm disputing that my contract clearly told me calling zone 1 from NL is excluded. My signed contract says, in full, on the usage-abroad clause: "In het buitenland gelden in de EU dezelfde prijzen als in Nederland." That's it. No mention of a caller-location distinction, no mention of "except when calling from NL."

If the real rule requires citing an EU roaming regulation, a zones table in a separate PDF, and a distinction between roaming and calling, to explain why I'm being charged despite that contract clause, that's exactly the kind of ambiguity Dutch consumer law (Art 6:238(2) BW) resolves in favor of the consumer. Two documents that contradict each other doesn't mean the more restrictive one wins by default, it means the more favorable reading to me wins.

Whether the Geschillencommissie agrees, we'll see. But "it's legal and other providers do it too" isn't the same as "it was clearly disclosed to this customer in the contract they signed."

I would really appreciate the support of a Simyo moderator to help reconcile the situation.