I'm not 100% sure but I think Joel is wrong! I'd like to think that if yourcontract stipulates that you can raise the monthly within a pre-definedpercentage or amount that CT would not take issue. We tie ours to an amountequal to or less than the increase in the CPI for the same period. I'd likeJoel to point me to where that is written!Come on Joel,educate me.........

Dan B

Ken,

I like the language in your contract better. We are doing a due diligencein which the seller purchased some contracts from a small dealer a fewyears ago. The small dealer’s contracts allow the customer to cancel upon arate increase. This means that we have to identify each contract forspecial handling and my buyer is cautious as they have a relatively low RMRand he would like to increase them. Had a larger percentage of thecontracts had this clause, he may not have done the deal.

Mitch R

I prefer rate increases that are fixed. I think you make it too complex ifyou peg it to the CPI or some other index. I don't think you can go wrongwith a "up to 9% per year increase;" you don't have to impose it.You need to have an out if the increase isn't paid. Actually I recall anarticle I did that mentioned the risk you take when you have the right toincrease and only you have the right to cancel - the contract could beconsidered illusory - which would make it non binding on the subscriber.The option to impose the fixed increase is the better idea, or you canstick with permitting the subscriber to cancel, but you need to be carefulwith that one since once canceled there is no option on your part to savethe contract.