View Full Version : Oh dear someone's in trouble
Official notification in the post from Virgin Media about the new price changes.
If you have a phone package, any calls made outside your call plan will be rounded up to the next minute , but at just 3p a minute, they're still great value
So you can call all the premium rate and mobile numbers for just 3p a minute
from the 1st May 2007. There's no small print to say otherwise.
I don't think that excuse will cut any ice with CS when you complain :)
If its 90p a min, then it will be rounded up to another 90p
In an age of per-second billing, this is a retrograde, money-grabbing step by VM, coining in pennies here and there in the hope the customers won't notice. :td:
I don't think that excuse will cut any ice with CS when you complain :)
If its 90p a min, then it will be rounded up to another 90p
But it says on the leaflet that the prices are changing. there isn't no 90p a minute. they're all 3p a minute.
The managing director wouldn't say so if it wasn't true ;)
Where's the rolling head icon?
Yeah, OK, if you say so, 3p a min applies to 09 numbers then...
Best of luck arguing your case with CS with "Well, Sir Richard said so..."
Cobbydaler
28-03-2007, 13:10
Aren't the price plans restricted to numbers beginning 01 & 02?
Aren't the price plans restricted to numbers beginning 01 & 02?
But it mentions 'any calls made outside your call plan'.
Yeah, OK, if you say so, 3p a min applies to 09 numbers then..."
Does it? :shocked:
Best of luck arguing your case with CS with "Well, Sir Richard said so..."
Now I didn't say that, did I :confused:
Is he a 'Managing Director' anyway?
Does it? :shocked:
According to you...
So you can call all the premium rate and mobile numbers for just 3p a minute
Now I didn't say that, did I :confused:
Is he a 'Managing Director' anyway?
That's who everyone thinks runs Virgin Media. They have their own non-Branson CEO, although Branson is the chairman of the Virgin Group.
It's what the letter implies. It's very misleading.
---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------
But it mentions 'any calls made outside your call plan'.
Yep, so that'll be Premium rate and mobile numbers as they're not included in the plan, so you'll be dialling them outside the plan.
This is what the letter is trying to say, it can't be any clearer than "there is a £5 charge if you don't pay by direct debit"
Yep, so that'll be Premium rate and mobile numbers as they're not included in the plan, so you'll be dialling them outside the plan.
This is what the letter is trying to say, it can't be any clearer than "there is a £5 charge if you don't pay by direct debit"
I don't think that is what they are trying to say, but I agree it could be interpreted that way. But, as others have said, I think you will have a very hard time arguing the case with CS.
I don't think that is what they are trying to say, but I agree it could be interpreted that way. But, as others have said, I think you will have a very hard time arguing the case with CS.
The thing about Virgin being a communications company, they're not very good at communicating.
They're not very good at wording stuff very well either. many times they have been unclear with the meaning of things, and they have to be changed so that they are not misleading to customers. The one about the £25 charge to upgrade the modem being one of the latest ones.
Everyone thought it was a cheek to charge a customer a charge for a modem that is owned by them. then all of a sudden it was announced that it's badly worded guys. it's only if an engineer has to be sent out, otherwise we'll post you one free of charge.
That has still not been corrected on the website. It's misleading you said so yourself. so why not change it?
They managed to change the one about the phone charges changing, from 'the nearest minute' to 'the next minute' but not this confusion about the £25 charge.
It seems that they go out of their way to publish misleading information all the time. Otherwise there wouldn't be so much confusion all the time.
wtaylor82
31-03-2007, 19:32
Official notification in the post from Virgin Media about the new price changes.
So you can call all the premium rate and mobile numbers for just 3p a minute
from the 1st May 2007. There's no small print to say otherwise.
PRS Calls will not be 3p, will they are outside your plan, the price for these calls are clearly stated prior to ringing them i.e. phoning competitions, you wouldn't get any joy, try it if you dare.
PaulH225
02-04-2007, 08:45
PRS Calls will not be 3p, will they are outside your plan, the price for these calls are clearly stated prior to ringing them i.e. phoning competitions, you wouldn't get any joy, try it if you dare.
They're clearly stated prior to ringing them that they are charged at x pence per minute "from a BT landline" and that calls from other networks and mobiles may vary.
Paul
PRS Calls will not be 3p, will they are outside your plan, the price for these calls are clearly stated prior to ringing them i.e. phoning competitions, you wouldn't get any joy, try it if you dare.
So is the letter sent out to everyone meant to be misleading?
If I read it like that, he and she reads it like that, they read it like that. Then that is how it's meant to be read. It's meant to be misleading.
So is the letter sent out to everyone meant to be misleading?
If I read it like that, he and she reads it like that, they read it like that. Then that is how it's meant to be read. It's meant to be misleading.
Your logic is faulty. You, he and she are not the sole arbiters of what the author intended. The author is entitled to have a say as well and I doubt very much they would say that is what they meant. With justification too. What possible reason could they have to be deliberately misleading in such an obvious fashion that they're bound to get found out?
I suspect in this case it's just a sloppy, badly-worded piece of work by VM's marketing dept. It wouldn't be the first time.
Your logic is faulty. You, he and she are not the sole arbiters of what the author intended. The author is entitled to have a say as well and I doubt very much they would say that is what they meant. With justification too. What possible reason could they have to be deliberately misleading in such an obvious fashion that they're bound to get found out?
I suspect in this case it's just a sloppy, badly-worded piece of work by VM's marketing dept. It wouldn't be the first time.
Response from the author Steve Stewart Managing Director, Customer Care who signed the letter.
Thank you for your recent communication.Your interpretation of Talk
Unlimited is correct and includes unlimited calls to 01 & 02 telephone
numbers.
These are the calls we referred to when we mentioned calls outside your call
plan.
All other calls are charged at our standard rates. The letter did not
change the terms and conditions for your call plan.
That makes it ok then.
Is he going to send out a less confusing letter now as that one has caused confusion as to what it means?
No, best to keep it sloppy and badly worded as normal.
---------- Post added at 14:35 ---------- Previous post was at 14:18 ----------
Your logic is faulty. You, he and she are not the sole arbiters of what the author intended.
Are you saying that those who have received the letter, and those that question the letter, are not the ones who should judge what the letter means?
Who should be the one to judge what the letter means?
And you say my logic is faulty?
Are you saying that those who have received the letter, and those that question the letter, are not the ones who should judge what the letter means?
Who should be the one to judge what the letter means?
And you say my logic is faulty?
I very much appreciate the fact that you agree with me. It's very noble of you to admit you were wrong in such a public fashion. :tu:
I suspect in this case it's just a sloppy, badly-worded piece of work by VM's marketing dept. It wouldn't be the first time.
Indeed. This would probably be much the same Marketing Dept who proudly wrote to all ex-videotron customers in London announcing they could get broadband some three years before they could.
Anyhow, Virgin probably have some sort of get out clause on this..
:wtf:
I love the way you use irony to demonstrate that you agree with my point.
I love the way you use irony to demonstrate that you agree with my point.
I'll make use of the smilies to better express what I mean.
<removed>
I'll make use of the smilies to better express what I mean.
But I know what you mean. You're using wit and irony to say that you agree with me, and you are wrong. Your meaning is abundantly clear to me.
But I know what you mean. You're using wit and irony to say that you agree with me, and you are wrong. Your meaning is abundantly clear to me.
You don't fool me.
You're trying to get me to use one of them smilies again, aren't you
:xmas:
You don't fool me.
You're trying to get me to use one of them smilies again, aren't you
:xmas:
No, I'm trying to get you to see how ridiculous it is to suggest that someone reading a statement has more right to interpret it than the person who made the statement.
You say one thing, I take it to mean something else, I insist that I am right and you are wrong, you get completely P***ed off.
Geddit?
Happy Easter by the way. ;)
No, I'm trying to get you to see how ridiculous it is to suggest that someone reading a statement has more right to interpret it than the person who made the statement.
You say one thing, I take it to mean something else, I insist that I am right and you are wrong, you get completely P***ed off.
Geddit?
Happy Easter by the way. ;)
The person reading the statement interpret's it the way it reads.
To say that the only person who knows what it means is the person who wrote it, is just plain crazy. Especially when there's quite a few in the virginmedia feedback group querying what it's supposed to mean.
Geddit?
Good.
Oh and I'm not p***ed of at all. It takes a lot to get me p***ed off.
And :xmas:
Virgins legal people are now looking at this :)
Haven't had this letter... dont suppose someone wants to scan it in.
If it says what you have said it says, it sounds like false advertising
Haven't had this letter... dont suppose someone wants to scan it in.
If it says what you have said it says, it sounds like false advertising
http://img177.imageshack.us/my.php?image=virginhj8.jpg
arcamalpha2004
04-04-2007, 16:24
I would run up a massive bill courtesy of richard then argue it out in court clutching the promotional leaflet.
---------- Post added at 16:17 ---------- Previous post was at 16:14 ----------
Your logic is faulty. You, he and she are not the sole arbiters of what the author intended. The author is entitled to have a say as well and I doubt very much they would say that is what they meant. With justification too. What possible reason could they have to be deliberately misleading in such an obvious fashion that they're bound to get found out?
I suspect in this case it's just a sloppy, badly-worded piece of work by VM's marketing dept. It wouldn't be the first time.
But none the less it is official?
It is from VM?
" all calls outside the plan "
£2000 phone bill and counting ;)
---------- Post added at 16:20 ---------- Previous post was at 16:17 ----------
Indeed. This would probably be much the same Marketing Dept who proudly wrote to all ex-videotron customers in London announcing they could get broadband some three years before they could.
Anyhow, Virgin probably have some sort of get out clause on this..
And like the adverts in the press offering customers the ability to download as many music tracks as they like unlike sky as vm put it.
Somewhere along the line the asa has to take a look at vm's dodgy tactics.
---------- Post added at 16:24 ---------- Previous post was at 16:20 ----------
http://img177.imageshack.us/my.php?image=virginhj8.jpg
Just read that, I can somehow see a mr stewart in queue 1 of the dole queue in the morning ;)
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.