Which? argues that a customer who would have theoretically paid £1.99 for the service but was not able to do so because the actual £2.99 price was unaffordable suffered a £1 loss, even though the customer paid nothing.
Maybe you have to be a lawyer to understand this, because to me it sounds like complete nonsense.
Maybe you have to be a lawyer to understand this, because to me it sounds like complete nonsense.
Maybe it means the customer lost a theoretical £1 in value?