View Full Version : I have to pay for a wireless router that is free to new customers?
cook1984
07-09-2008, 22:42
Just been checking out the VM web site and it looks like I have to pay for a wireless router if I want one (on XL), but if I'm a new customer it's free?
Is that right? Seems like a bit of an insult!
whydoIneedatech
07-09-2008, 22:46
Just been checking out the VM web site and it looks like I have to pay for a wireless router if I want one (on XL), but if I'm a new customer it's free?
Is that right? Seems like a bit of an insult!
Yes it is correct that existing customers have to pay £40, but you do get full Tech Support for your router, because if you buy a 3rd party router and call in with a fault relating to your 3rd party router all they will do is give you a support number to call for it.;)
Yes it is correct that existing customers have to pay £40, but you do get full Tech Support for your router, because if you buy a 3rd party router and call in with a fault relating to your 3rd party router all they will do is give you a support number to call for it.;)
How is that equitable?
Just been checking out the VM web site and it looks like I have to pay for a wireless router if I want one (on XL), but if I'm a new customer it's free?
Is that right? Seems like a bit of an insult!
The only way to get VM attention is to go for disconection and see the reaction i got my monthly bill down from £40 to £27.
Try it you have nothing to lose:)
whydoIneedatech
07-09-2008, 22:50
How is that equitable?
Its not but to get a reaction phone up and complain on 150 and wait for the thinking of leaving us option.
I was just pointing out the pros as the cons are actually having to pay for it.:shocked:
Well I appreciate that VM do provide free upgrades to to their BB from time to time(though speaking as a loyal customer on 2MB I'm wondering IF we will ever get any equity in future) I sometimes think they should put the loyalty of their long term customers more to the forefront.
Some sort of loyalty bonus accrued after so many years custom perhaps... :shrug:
whydoIneedatech
07-09-2008, 23:12
Well I appreciate that VM do provide free upgrades to to their BB from time to time(though speaking as a loyal customer on 2MB I'm wondering IF we will ever get any equity in future) I sometimes think they should put the loyalty of their long term customers more to the forefront.
Some sort of loyalty bonus accrued after so many years custom perhaps... :shrug:
The only bonus I ever remember getting was a free upgrade from 512kb to 2meg.
xspeedyx
07-09-2008, 23:24
I dont get the whole loyalty thing why should you get free stuff just because you have paid the company for a few years for the service they have provided you with, any ways the router retails around £50 - £60 so your saving money already.
whydoIneedatech
07-09-2008, 23:29
I dont get the whole loyalty thing why should you get free stuff just because you have paid the company for a few years for the service they have provided you with, any ways the router retails around £50 - £60 so your saving money already.
PC World £24.99 if you order online for instore pickup.
http://www.pcworld.co.uk/martprd/store/pcw_page.jsp?BV_SessionID=@@@@1267578960.122082651 6@@@@&BV_EngineID=ccfeadefdhmgjgecflgceggdhhmdgmk.0&page=Product&fm=13&sm=1&tm=1&sku=951446&category_oid=
xspeedyx
07-09-2008, 23:30
smart ass lol
whydoIneedatech
07-09-2008, 23:32
smart ass lol
Or Amazon £29.98 inc delivery
(http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/B000T5TUDO/ref=sr_1_olp_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1220826662&sr=8-1)
I dont get the whole loyalty thing why should you get free stuff just because you have paid the company for a few years for the service they have provided you with, any ways the router retails around £50 - £60 so your saving money already.
I thought the router remained the property of virginmedia, so how are you saving money?
cook1984
08-09-2008, 00:30
I will phone them up and demand one. The cheek of it! Making loyal customers pay. I was thinking of getting Be installed to see what sort of speed I get anyway, I'm that fed up with VM. The traffic shaping is really starting to annoy me.
Can the VM router be set up as just an access point? I already have a wired router that I'm happy with and which is undoubtedly 100x better than the VM one. I just want wifi too...
I understand the frustration of existing customers about the router being chargeable. Hopefully they will bring back the existing customer offer soon.
The VM router cannot be altered to anything more or less then it is. So no reflashing of the firmware, no changing it to an access point only etc.
They sent me one, I didnt have to pay. They said they had a lot to give away free.
xspeedyx
08-09-2008, 09:04
I will phone them up and demand one. The cheek of it! Making loyal customers pay. I was thinking of getting Be installed to see what sort of speed I get anyway, I'm that fed up with VM. The traffic shaping is really starting to annoy me.
Can the VM router be set up as just an access point? I already have a wired router that I'm happy with and which is undoubtedly 100x better than the VM one. I just want wifi too...
You are the kind of free loader VM need to get rid just want stuff free and if you don't you stomp your feet and demand stuff or escalate the call to a manager which I tell you from now will not help when you want free things
What brand is the wireless router there giving away ?
How are people finding it? Is it reliable ?
JethroUK
08-09-2008, 11:55
Just been checking out the VM web site and it looks like I have to pay for a wireless router if I want one (on XL), but if I'm a new customer it's free?
Is that right? Seems like a bit of an insult!
New Customers Only policies are ridiculed/mocked openly by professional companies - but VM is run by a bunch of chimpanzees
It is an insult & blatant comtempt to existing customers - and considering alllllll VM's customers are 'existing' ones it's quite a risk to take with your business - hence why professionals dont do it - it's potentially financial suicide
...think they should put the loyalty of their long term customers more to the forefront...
Vm don't give a monkeys about existing customers and this is reflected in their prehistoric New Customers Only practices
VM are playing russian roulette with their whole business and they don't realise it - that's why New Customers Only policies points to people that don't know what their business is or who their customers are - it suggests VM have basically lost their way
I dont get the whole loyalty thing ...
it's not rocket science - it's about "keeping" customers - y'know, so they dont go play with Sky instead
.
I dont get the whole loyalty thing why should you get free stuff just because you have paid the company for a few years for the service they have provided you with, any ways the router retails around £50 - £60 so your saving money already.
I would suggest you never open your own business with that attitude...What is the point in signing up new customers if your long term customers are bug....deciding to vote with their wallet and go elsewhere and get a possible better service.
Any firm that wants any kind of longevity needs to consider the long term customers from time to time...
xspeedyx
08-09-2008, 14:13
The company provide the service the customer pays and uses the service simply as that free loaders is what gets companies in debt, I work in the eviorment where I see this day and day out until you have seen it you dont know how bad it is these days I agree yes exsiting customer do derserve some incentive which the free upgrades of bb speeds are and VM,Telewest,NTL have been know for
JediMaster
08-09-2008, 15:43
I phoned retentions the other week for the New "Sweet 16" deal. I asked about wireless router (FREE) & was offered it if I pay postage £7-8. I did not need it but wanted to see if I was able to get it.
Ring up 151 & get to Retentions & they will offer it to you I'm sure.
xspeedyx
08-09-2008, 16:59
151 is faults not retentions you need to dial 150 and choose the option for leaving Virgin Media
I thought the router remained the property of virginmedia, so how are you saving money?
If the router does remain the property of VM then the £40 charge is effectively payment for technical support.
Personally I would purchase the router from an outlet selling them for under £30 as previously mentioned. It will also not be tied to VM firmware.
Of course those who prefer to have technical support may consider the £40 charge to be reasonable.
Axegrinder
08-09-2008, 18:27
What brand is the wireless router there giving away ?
How are people finding it? Is it reliable ?
Its a Netgear WGR614v9, standard 54mbps router.
moiraf100
08-09-2008, 18:45
When I upgraded to L BB I phoned a fortnight later and asked for a free one - and got it.
And I've been with them a number of years.
A lot of companies eg insurance, offer "come on" deals to new customers, the practice is not restricted to VM.
Just have to watch out for special offers.
moiraf100
08-09-2008, 19:20
I must say though, that since replacing my year old D-Link 110 with it, I have had continuous connection and a download speed of never less than 8mb.
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2008/09/26.png (http://www.speedtest.net)
you give people a sandwich with poo on it and they demand extra poo..
its a "you cant win" situation with the public... After all it is us.. who pay for a service which we rightly so should demand to get...
Virgin Media certainly isnt the worst company in the world .. Telewest Blueyonder to me was always fantastic in my mind... it was the NTHELL part of it that made it all DIRE.
I atmitt .. theres alot of problems iv had with them.. but it was generally things that would take time to resolve.. or things that will required waiting to be sent to me etc..
I see your point about the router for existing customers..
iv been with TW VM for erm.. 8-10 years i think... and i DID rec a free router .. which only supported up to 10MB and i was on 20MB..
i eventually gave the router away and found out that VM had introduced a Firmware Update to allow the Router to cope with 20MB lol
I must admit i got one of their routers for the cost of p&p when they first began providing them,even though i never actually needed the thing.In fact i`m quite sure a few people on here did the very same thing if i remember rightly.
I eventually put it on our spare 1Mb line but i never did try it on the 20Mb.
A lot of companies eg insurance, offer "come on" deals to new customers, the practice is not restricted to VM.
The Big Fat Juicy Worm Rate:)
Wicked_and_Crazy
09-09-2008, 13:35
I would suggest you never open your own business with that attitude...What is the point in signing up new customers if your long term customers are bug....deciding to vote with their wallet and go elsewhere and get a possible better service.
Any firm that wants any kind of longevity needs to consider the long term customers from time to time...
I think the point is you could take the router today and leave tomorrow. I do think they should offer the new customers deal if your prepared to be locked in for another 12 months.
Impz2002
09-09-2008, 14:11
i rang up and said id like a router and i didnt want to pay for it and the lady was very polite and said that was fine and 3 days later it was delivered.
Easy peasy :)
Impz
JethroUK
09-09-2008, 14:17
...The Big Fat Juicy Worm Rate:)
Exactly
Now VM have chucked you in the keep net.
cook1984
09-09-2008, 18:12
A lot of companies eg insurance, offer "come on" deals to new customers, the practice is not restricted to VM.
True, and that's why I switch insurance companies every year ;)
Comparison sites have made it easy to do with insurance and utilities, but unfortunately broadband is a bit trickier. They are just relying on that fact to stop people switching I think, and to avoid having to offer them anything.
The VM router cannot be altered to anything more or less then it is. So no reflashing of the firmware, no changing it to an access point only etc.
Hmm, okay, sounds fairly useless then as I really just want to use it as an access point, since I already have a pfsense based router which is far superior. It's a shame because I could do with a second AP to cover my entire house (very thick walls I think, the re-flashed La Fonera I'm using doesn't give a signal in some rooms).
I suppose I can understand why they locked it down to make tech support simpler, but I do wonder what will happen if a security flaw is found as happened with BT wireless routers.
What brand is the wireless router there giving away ?
How are people finding it? Is it reliable ?
Netgear WGR614 54Mb :)
I already have a Netgear 110 Mb, so not tried it
cook1984
09-09-2008, 20:40
The WGR614 is supported by DD-WRT! Anyone tried upgrading it? Someone said it cannot be firmware upgraded, but looking at the photo of the PCB (http://dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/files/wgr416v9_411.jpg) it looks like there is a header which might have RS232 on it.
Actually, it looks like it's actively being worked on: http://dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=28412&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=120&sid=e8723062febef7b93bfda9fe52b3113a
upgrading it to what ? mobile phone :) ?
Am I missing something ? what will the upgrade do ? if its a speed hack, then I think it would be a lot more than a firmwear hack.
cook1984
11-09-2008, 18:01
No, the upgrade changes the firmware from the useless VM one to DD-WRT, which has a lot of useful features like access-point only mode, VPN, better security, even traffic shaping.
It won't make the connection faster as such but it will cope a lot better with VM's connection retarding/"management" or P2P apps with 1000s of open connections.
whydoIneedatech
11-09-2008, 18:06
No, the upgrade changes the firmware from the useless VM one to DD-WRT, which has a lot of useful features like access-point only mode, VPN, better security, even traffic shaping.
It won't make the connection faster as such but it will cope a lot better with VM's connection retarding/"management" or P2P apps with 1000s of open connections.
And of course you cannot call up Tech Support for help if you have altered any settings as the router will now be totally unsupported.;)
xspeedyx
11-09-2008, 18:17
no disrespect but I wouldn't trust India to support me on a router they cant even support me on a cable modem
cook1984
12-09-2008, 18:35
To be honest if you even know what DD-WRT is then you already know about 20 times as much as tech support :(
Oh, so your saying that the wifi they send you has custom VM firmware. When its switch on then, does it say "No Connection Available" :)
The company provide the service the customer pays and uses the service simply as that free loaders is what gets companies in debt, I work in the eviorment where I see this day and day out until you have seen it you dont know how bad it is these days I agree yes exsiting customer do derserve some incentive which the free upgrades of bb speeds are and VM,Telewest,NTL have been know for
However, the company in question needs to remember that they have many competitors and a large percentage of their customers can leave with very little notice.
AFAIK there is and was no intention to stop the existing customer router offer for good. It was suspended so that they could manage stock levels, and was always told to staff as being a temporary measure.
xspeedyx
13-09-2008, 13:20
AFAIK there is and was no intention to stop the existing customer router offer for good. It was suspended so that they could manage stock levels, and was always told to staff as being a temporary measure.
Virgins temporary measures have always meant endless look at STM that's was only meant to be temporary and that ain't going nowhere
routers aint exactly hard to configre and if there is a technical problem then you take it up with the company you bought it from like pcworld (providing you still have warrenty), yeah that always happens the 'new customers only' term, all new customers get great discounts, like once they had a deal for free ps3 I was so ****ed off, anyway nothing much u can do, they should of had a point system for us loyal member who have been around since NTL...
cook1984
13-09-2008, 23:04
My friends got Virgin TV and then cancelled it three days after it was put in because they lost Sky 1. Then VM offered it to them for free for three months, so they stayed. Then VM started doing a new customer deal so they cancelled and the other half signed up as a new customer. The installer was interested to hear all about it when it came round with a new box, only to find one with a few days still left to run...
Robbie G
14-09-2008, 12:11
Technical support from a router from a VM call centre? Thanks but I'd rather use Google / forums.
Good companies should look after long serving customers, I have been with the AA for 20 years, I get Relay free with my Home Start & Roadside pack.
Lets face it the router costs virgin what £20 probably less.
If giving a few of them out here and there keeps the customers happy then do it.
What companies need to look at is the short term loss vs the long term gain.
JethroUK
14-09-2008, 15:42
..What companies need to look at is the short term loss vs the long term gain.
What companies need, and what Vm do are two different things
How many companies do you know insist you stop becoming a customer at all for 4 months - before they consider you valued cutomer (NEW customers only!)
this is all part of VM's short term gain vs long term loss philosophy :D
cook1984
14-09-2008, 16:53
I think when I go on holiday next time I'll cancel my service the day before I go away, and that morning call up to have it re-installed about a month later when I get back. I save a months charges for something I won't use and get the benefits of being a "new" customer.
Wouldn't work as all disconnections are subject to 30 days
xspeedyx
14-09-2008, 20:55
plus you start a new contract if you came back as a new sub
I will phone them up and demand one. The cheek of it! Making loyal customers pay. I was thinking of getting Be installed to see what sort of speed I get anyway, I'm that fed up with VM. The traffic shaping is really starting to annoy me.
Can the VM router be set up as just an access point? I already have a wired router that I'm happy with and which is undoubtedly 100x better than the VM one. I just want wifi too...
Or you could just ring up and ask, rather than demand.
Could be worth trying the nice approach rather than the nasty...;)
AndyCambs
15-09-2008, 04:33
I'll try that when I'm about to pay for the week's shopping at Tesco - get it all on the check out belt then say I don't want it....
CrowmanUK
15-09-2008, 18:20
Wait till its really busy then do what they do in real business and demand a 16% reduction or you'll take your money elsewhere. It worked for Ford at the company I worked at last.
cook1984
19-09-2008, 21:19
Wouldn't work as all disconnections are subject to 30 days
That's okay, I go on holiday for 30 days :)
The 12 month contract thing is a bit of an issue, but I have never actually signed a VM contract (or NTL, or C&W, or Nynex...) so it doesn't really worry me. Can always just cancel the direct debit.
whydoIneedatech
19-09-2008, 21:23
That's okay, I go on holiday for 30 days :)
The 12 month contract thing is a bit of an issue, but I have never actually signed a VM contract (or NTL, or C&W, or Nynex...) so it doesn't really worry me. Can always just cancel the direct debit.
Might not have signed a contract but you have paid for and used said services as provided for a period exceeding 12 months or more, sounds like a contract.:)
xspeedyx
19-09-2008, 23:35
That's okay, I go on holiday for 30 days :)
The 12 month contract thing is a bit of an issue, but I have never actually signed a VM contract (or NTL, or C&W, or Nynex...) so it doesn't really worry me. Can always just cancel the direct debit.
Cancelling the direct debit is the stupid thing I have ever heard make sure you have some money to pay the debt collection
JethroUK
19-09-2008, 23:59
Might not have signed a contract but ...... sounds like a contract.:)
Technically (and hence legally) impossible to enter into a verbal contract without 'knowing' you have
judge will look for evidence of 'agree'ment - & you can't 'agree' if you dont even 'know'
Contracts are different to terms and conditions though.
By continuing to recieve the service, you are legally agreeing to be bound by the Terms and Conditions of the service.
These Terms and Conditions specify that each side must provide 30 days notice of any change
It is like whenever you buy a Train ticket. By buying the ticket and getting on the train you are agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the train network, however you don't stand there for 1/2 an hour at the Ticket Office whilst they get read out to you. You wouldn't however, be able to claim that you didn't know they existed if you were taken to court for breaking them.
whydoIneedatech
20-09-2008, 10:18
Technically (and hence legally) impossible to enter into a verbal contract without 'knowing' you have
judge will look for evidence of 'agree'ment - & you can't 'agree' if you dont even 'know'
If you are paying for the services from a provider then you have an agreement in the eyes of the law, no if's or buts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Day in Court!!!
You stand up in court and say "I have no agreement with that company"
Magistrate says " Are you or have you been paying for their services then?"
You say "Well yes but I never signed anything"
Magistrate says " You paid in full every month, every bill they sent"
You say "Well yes I always pay my bills"
Magistrate says "You are fulfilling the terms of your contract, I find for the company and you must pay a fine and all legal fees, plus any monies owing"
A short version of any court proceedings but probably quite accurate.
cook1984
20-09-2008, 19:01
The simplest thing to do is edit the contract, sign it and send it back. I'm pretty sure VM won't bother checking it or complain about the edits.
Most people don't realise but in order for a contract to be legal, it must be negotiable. Of course, one party can refuse any and all changes, but the option must at least be there. So, when you get any kind of contract for anything you can just delete or edit the bits you don't like and then sign it. The other party may decide not to agree, but I find that most of the time they do.
If you do edit the contract, make sure you keep a copy for yourself.
Contracts are different to terms and conditions though.
By continuing to recieve the service, you are legally agreeing to be bound by the Terms and Conditions of the service.
These Terms and Conditions specify that each side must provide 30 days notice of any change
It is like whenever you buy a Train ticket. By buying the ticket and getting on the train you are agreeing to the Terms and Conditions of the train network, however you don't stand there for 1/2 an hour at the Ticket Office whilst they get read out to you. You wouldn't however, be able to claim that you didn't know they existed if you were taken to court for breaking them.
your a little confused there Ben, it is in fact the Terms and Conditions that constitute the contract clauses, to put it simply the T&Cs are the consumer contract.
CONSUMER contracts (I.e the T&C clauses) are given extra legal protections as so called generic contracts, giving the consumer more automatic protections and rights that any other type of contract might not automaticly receave.
a simple example being the consumer Vm broadband T&C contract gets these extra considerations, however the business virgin media/NTL/TW broadband T&C contract would not, something to consider if you want more than one Cable Modem at your address and chose to take the business contract to get them offically.
any consumer T&C contract clause that is deemed unlawful,not in "good faith,as defined in legal terms", or inequitable (not equitable; unjust or unfair: an inequitable decision. )to the consumer , is an invalid contract term and so not valid or enforceable in law.
Ignitionnet
20-09-2008, 20:00
Good companies should look after long serving customers, I have been with the AA for 20 years, I get Relay free with my Home Start & Roadside pack.
Customers who've been with UK cable for a long time definitely deserve something, either parole or a psychiatric exam.
Joke! Honestly, I was joking but it had to be done :dunce:
your a little confused there Ben, it is in fact the Terms and Conditions that constitute the contract clauses, to put it simply the T&Cs are the consumer contract.
Ah, was confusing the T&Cs with a minimum term ;)
But the whole argument over 'I've never signed nothing' doesn't hold water
The last time Virgin changed their T&Cs was in Feb 2007. By now I reckon that even the most relaxed court would judge a customer to have accepted them. Therefore the 30 day rule would be enforceable (especially as it applies to both side and therefore is not 'unfair')
If you are paying for the services from a provider then you have an agreement in the eyes of the law, no if's or buts.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Your Day in Court!!!
You stand up in court and say "I have no agreement with that company"
Magistrate says " Are you or have you been paying for their services then?"
You say "Well yes but I never signed anything"
Magistrate says " You paid in full every month, every bill they sent"
You say "Well yes I always pay my bills"
Magistrate says "You are fulfilling the terms of your contract, I find for the company and you must pay a fine and all legal fees, plus any monies owing"
A short version of any court proceedings but probably quite accurate.
a very bad assumption and not very likely im afraid , VM and many other Uk companies sell off their valid and invalid delinquent accounts to 3rd party debt recovery agencys so your day in court would be more like this, if it even got to court that is.
Your Day in Court!!!
Magistrate asks, is the defendant in court?, yes sir/madam.
is the plaintiff in court , no sir/madem.
Magistrate asks the defendant (you) do you owe this company this money?
you reply NO, the DRA has NOT provided me with a valid and signed contract, infact they cant as they doesnt have a valid legally signed contract signed by me sir/madam.
Magistrate to plaintiff council (if they even bothered to pay and send anyone in there to represent them),
is this correct, do you have a valid and legally binding signed contract?
plaintiff council, NO sir/madam, we cant seem to locate it at this time.
Magistrate case dismissed, i order the plaintiff (them) to pay the defendant (you) all costs as layed out in his/her counter claim (you MUST mention the CRAs records or the court cant rule on this part etc.... i also order that all references to the plaintiff as regards any and all CRA (Credit Reference Agency) records be removed, not mearly marked as payed etc....
So that would probably also apply to Sky, BT, be broadband, and quite a few other companies then?
As none of them have asked for to send back a written contract, and be broadband never sent anything in hard copy (was all done through the net)
---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:31 ----------
Oh and if you are saying that you can get out a contract if the company can't produce a written and signed contract, does that mean that Virgin can't be sued for loss of services etc for the same reason?
Ah, was confusing the T&Cs with a minimum term ;)
But the whole argument over 'I've never signed nothing' doesn't hold water
The last time Virgin changed their T&Cs was in Feb 2007. By now I reckon that even the most relaxed court would judge a customer to have accepted them. Therefore the 30 day rule would be enforceable (especially as it applies to both side and therefore is not 'unfair')
thats ok Ben, loads of people forget these basic rules, the best bet to get upto speed is to seriously look at the old bank charges cases and legal avenues it helped educate the consumer masses to these county court small claims and court rules etc.
CAG is a very good thing for this purpose have a read some time
http://search.virginmedia.com/results/?channel=homepage&vml=ntl&vmt=t9&q=CAG+consumer+contract&cr=
sure the 30 day rule clause is perfectly valid as it is legaly binding on both partys, not just the consumer, VM are just as tied to it as you are.
the fact some silly VM executive signed off on the removal of the official "Electronic notice" was a very bad thing for VM though, :angel:
as NOW, legally Virgin Media cant send you a simple EMail as an official 30 day notice of contract change for instance :dozey:
only written signed and delivered paper/fax counts now and most consumers dont have or give out their fax No.s but VM do :)
whydoIneedatech
20-09-2008, 21:04
a very bad assumption and not very likely im afraid , VM and many other Uk companies sell off their valid and invalid delinquent accounts to 3rd party debt recovery agencys so your day in court would be more like this, if it even got to court that is.
Your Day in Court!!!
Magistrate asks, is the defendant in court?, yes sir/madam.
is the plaintiff in court , no sir/madem.
Magistrate asks the defendant (you) do you owe this company this money?
you reply NO, the DRA has NOT provided me with a valid and signed contract, infact they cant as they doesnt have a valid legally signed contract signed by me sir/madam.
Magistrate to plaintiff council (if they even bothered to pay and send anyone in there to represent them),
is this correct, do you have a valid and legally binding signed contract?
plaintiff council, NO sir/madam, we cant seem to locate it at this time.
Magistrate case dismissed, i order the plaintiff (them) to pay the defendant (you) all costs as layed out in his/her counter claim (you MUST mention the CRAs records or the court cant rule on this part etc.... i also order that all references to the plaintiff as regards any and all CRA (Credit Reference Agency) records be removed, not mearly marked as payed etc....
Maybe it would not end up in court but having bailiffs after you and any of the Major ISP's on the case is a sure fire way to destroy your credit history.
So why don't you prove us otherwise, oh and by the way you will need provide written documentary proof to the contrary, not hot air, actually stop paying your bill to whoever your ISP is and tell them all the above and see how far it actually gets you.
I have nothing to prove you are the one stating otherwise so prove it!
So that would probably also apply to Sky, BT, be broadband, and quite a few other companies then?
As none of them have asked for to send back a written contract, and be broadband never sent anything in hard copy (was all done through the net)
---------- Post added at 20:34 ---------- Previous post was at 20:31 ----------
Oh and if you are saying that you can get out a contract if the company can't produce a written and signed contract, does that mean that Virgin can't be sued for loss of services etc for the same reason?
thats a very good question :angel:
its a general rule OC that the courts always try and favour the consumer over any companies and their legal teams, as your not as learned as these payed council in the ways of the law.
hence the special attention to the above consumer to business contracts, wereas the business to busines contract is another kettle of fish altogether.
if virgin Media did ever get taken to (small claims)court by the consumer rather than Ofcom that usually has to deal with these unlawful/invalid consumer T&C contracts.
and VM was foolish enough to let it get to court day without agreeing to the consumers terms or comeing to an agreement with them, i guess VM could try it and see if the magistrate sees it that way and throws it out too.
---------- Post added at 21:51 ---------- Previous post was at 21:06 ----------
Maybe it would not end up in court but having bailiffs after you and any of the Major ISP's on the case is a sure fire way to destroy your credit history.
So why don't you prove us otherwise, oh and by the way you will need provide written documentary proof to the contrary, not hot air, actually stop paying your bill to whoever your ISP is and tell them all the above and see how far it actually gets you.
I have nothing to prove you are the one stating otherwise so prove it!
its bit OT for the thread but you asked the quiestion so OK ill give you and any interested readers a starting point IF YOU care to read it.
im also sure you REALLY beleve all your saying here as perfectly valid assumptions on what you know and learned in your life, if you cant accept my posts as true and researched, just read and learn,ill gladlly hold my hands up and learn by it when im wrong as Ben knows.
im only trying to help you and other readers discover new things, and how it all fits together , its your choice to take it and learn or leave it, but CF has been getting real boreing of late and im only really come here and helping out of habit now, although the tech stuff is interesting the last few days OC :D, so ill not take to much effort to prove anything as i dont need to ,iv done my research and know what i know and test my assumptions with more research every day, if you chose to show me links to read i may take the time and see if you have a point and change my stance if its proves out .
the old company bailiff like official letter scare tactic doesnt work so well today with all the help out there to guide your consumer actions and responses to these bogus bailiff things sent through the post.
first of all to make it clear in your head, A COURT ORDERED bailiff is one thing, any other type are something totally different.
as a court ordered bailiff, YOU as the consumer have all the rights to submit your papers to the courts outlining why they are wrong BEFORE any such Bailiff order is granted and you are advised to make sure you do follow it through without fail.
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bailiffs-sheriff-officers/107376-what-bailiffs-can-cant.html
as for the likes of Vigin Media etc using the CRAs to try and destroy your credit history by passing any and all (including invalid closed accounts that are wrongly still being billed by the Vm systems that many here and elsewere post about) defaults, thats another popular UK company scare tactic today.
the Credit Reference Agences DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO STORE YOUR PERSONAL DATA IN LAW other than court ORDERED rulings,WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT END OF STORY.
thats why its always included in any company T&C contract to grant them this required permission, you can remove that right AT ANY TIME by sending an "official notice" on writing to the data controller of said companies, see my link in all my posts below to find that address.
http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legalities/24013-defaults-proposed-method-removal.html
you might need to sign in there as for some strange reason it didnt work without, as it did before.
its a REALLY GOOD thread to learn why the CRAs are conning YOU into thinking they have some law that states they must collect/retain your data today, and how you can stop them in their tracks with this tryed and trusted rule of thumb .
as for "having the Major ISP's on the case" is just plain silly, the Uk major banks that hold this countrys long term finantial viability in it hands, and keeps vast armys of legal teams on retainer,(that the ISPs cant even begin to finance) couldnt justify the "unlawful charges" under the existing UK common law , so the so called UK major ISPs like the debt encumbered Virgin media dont hold any scary thoughts or real serious finantial risk to any consumer considering taking them to 'civil' small claims court for whatever reason.
infact the likes of VM and BT are hopeing that the UK consumers dont infact get a clue and finally get off their backsides and take on the broadband STM and fair use policys to the courts as they did with the far more powerful UK banks, the ISPs will surely loss if they ever gave the consumers real reason to finally say enough is enough and fill in the D1 small claim form rather than do the easy option and run away to another ISP.
if BT are so mighty and legally sure of their plans and past actions, dont they just run the new Phorm trials and get it over and gone with without a care of what the Uk consumers might then do to them in court.... why dont virgin Media and CPW also do the same trials,the answers obviously they are not so sure of their legal positions.
as for the likes of Vigin Media etc using the CRAs to try and destroy your credit history by passing any and all (including invalid closed accounts that are wrongly still being billed by the Vm systems that many here and elsewere post about) defaults, thats another popular UK company scare tactic today.
the Credit Reference Agences DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO STORE YOUR PERSONAL DATA IN LAW other than court ORDERED rulings,WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT END OF STORY.
Not acording to the leflet I got from Experian when I ordered a copy of my credit file. It said that licended credit agencys are allowed to collect info about you and there nothing you can do about it. You can't even get them to correct something unless the company agrees with you, if they don't the only rights you've got is to have a explaination attached to your credit file.
For a company to search your credit file you've got to give permission but not for the credit agencys to keep the info.
Otherwise I could take out loads of loans, defualt on them, withdraw my permission for the data to be collected, have my credit file wiped of the bad debt and then start the process all over again. Ummm its a massive loophole don't you think to be left open.
hehe Experian dont you just love em, ask them to show you this UK law that says they can collect,process or store your data info without your consent or agreement , it does not exist.
they cant show you this law, so will give you the run around, without your data they cant profit from it, thats why they are also looking to use DPI kit to collect your online data too and add it to their ever growing databanks without once paying you for its use.
its YOUR PERSONAL DATA, YOU OWN IT,you say what can and cant be done with it,not them or anyone else for that matter.
seriously, make the time to read that link and his other posts there, it explains it ALL in plain english,and how he got Experian to finally admit they DONT INFACT HAVE THAT RIGHT without your consent, its a real eye opener...
No, they don't have the right without your consent, but the consent is built into the Terms and Conditions of the credit agreement, and I'm sure it would be an either/or situation
Either you accept the Terms and Conditions in full (which would include passing information the Credit Reference Agencies) or you accept none of it, and therefore don't get whatever it is you were applying for
Even if you withdraw consent at a later date, the CRA would still legally be allow to keep the data you had previously given consent to, it just would not be able to update it from that point. After six years, the data would expire as it does at the moment
Also, even if you withdrew consent for updates, and then had a CCJ found against you, I'm sure that would be entered onto the credit file anyway (as it would be a matter of public record which I think means the DPA would allow it to be entered by the court)
---------- Post added at 23:57 ---------- Previous post was at 23:47 ----------
if BT are so mighty and legally sure of their plans and past actions, dont they just run the new Phorm trials and get it over and gone with without a care of what the Uk consumers might then do to them in court.... why dont virgin Media and CPW also do the same trials,the answers obviously they are not so sure of their legal positions.
I'm sure that is question for another thread, but I will say I'm not quite sure who your target is here.
Neither Virgin or CPW have ever said they would run trials without first gaining consent from the people involved.
If that is the case, and full consent was gained, then it would be legal.
yes its OT, so i dont want to post reams of text, i dont have a target, it was just WDINATs contention or implication that consumers cant and shouldnt fight the big and brave UK ISPs and their legal teams, as they are always right in their legal thinking and implimentations of the law.
Phorm being the current in voge legal subject and a perfect example to show why these companys can infact be influenced by little old you and me without needing to withdraw our cashflow and run away to another ISP instead.
at some point VM and CPW will have to officially trial it or dump it.
they cant just install it and switch it on one day hopeing it works first time every time, assuming if they do have another lapse in corporate judgement, install and run it over consumers and websites generated dataflow, and forget the real possibilitys they the executive team signing it off, can potential face real jail time under current RIPA (existing UK executive stanford case law etc).
that potential legal threat comeing from any single uk person or world wide website owner taking the company to court and getting a guilty ruling at any time.
---------- Post added at 00:46 ---------- Previous post was at 00:21 ----------
yes as i already said any court orders such your CCJ example would be public record and so a viable entry for the CRA database, if its in the courts official public data its a valid order.
your other personal data not covered by the courts rulings IS NOT legally retainable without consent as you say,and we need to look at the EU and UK DPA laws as already covered by the Phorm thread so we all know these facts if you followed that OC.
the 6 years is again a made up rule the private CRA companys made up to keep their profits running, no data no profits to charge the other companys for access.
as the official court rules (as in some court ruleing somewere,i looked and found some once way back, so this case law already exists if you care to look and learn more)made clear, once a consumer contract is finished any and all right that gave the company to collect,process and/or store your data is also null and void see DPA,so they cant legally retain it, with the EXCEPTION they can retain money owed data UNTIL that account is payed in full.
the laws not difficult to understand, no current valid contract in place,
no rights to retain data of a person can be legally enforced by said private company.
cook1984
21-09-2008, 23:08
The last time Virgin changed their T&Cs was in Feb 2007. By now I reckon that even the most relaxed court would judge a customer to have accepted them. Therefore the 30 day rule would be enforceable (especially as it applies to both side and therefore is not 'unfair')
Actually, the fact that they changed them probably works against them. Unless they notified you in writing, which they didn't, they can't just randomly change the contract and expect you to be bound by it.
Also, the contract says that the T&Cs can change any time they like, but legal president says that if they did do that then the contract could be cancelled immediately by you.
You have to remember that contract law says there are certain things you can't sign away, including the right to cancel a contract if any part of it changes. Since the contract says that you agree to the T&Cs, if they change what you agreed to change and sure enough courts have always ruled that you can then cancel the contract.
Consider the alternative: Contact says you are bound by the T&Cs for one year, VM change the T&Cs to say you are only allowed to download 1 byte per day and hay too bad you agreed to it and are locked in.
So that would probably also apply to Sky, BT, be broadband, and quite a few other companies then?
Yes, it does. I think there is additional regulation for ADSL providers anyway, but most seem to offer 1 month minimum contracts.
As none of them have asked for to send back a written contract, and be broadband never sent anything in hard copy (was all done through the net)
You agree to the T&Cs when you sign up. A signature is not necessary for agreement but is the preffered method. You can agree when signing up online without one, for example.
However, if they change the contract in any way then it would have to be agreed with you again, and you would have the option to back out regardless of previously agreed minimum contract lengths.
Maybe it would not end up in court but having bailiffs after you and any of the Major ISP's on the case is a sure fire way to destroy your credit history.
That won't happen. It doesn't work that way in the UK.
In order to get the bailiffs involved, there needs to be a decision made in court. That means time and money over what is usually a relatively small amount of money, so companies hardly ever bother. Also, even if they did go to court, it's far from a sure thing they would win.
Instead, they usually just ask a "debt recovery" company to get involved. These companies have no legal rights like bailiffs, they can't come and take stuff from your house and there is no mark on your credit record. All they can do is write deceptive and threatening letters, or try to call you up on the phone. PayPal uses them a lot, and generally they get bored and give up chasing debts that people are refusing to pay after a few weeks.
There will definitely not be a mark on your credit report unless you loose in court. Otherwise, you are free to dispute any debt and there is no legal way anyone can claim that debt or put a mark on your credit report for it. If you look at your credit report, you will notice that it doesn't list debts specifically, only loans taken, inquries made, missed regular payments etc. Unless there is a decision in court, it will not list money owed.
So why don't you prove us otherwise, oh and by the way you will need provide written documentary proof to the contrary, not hot air, actually stop paying your bill to whoever your ISP is and tell them all the above and see how far it actually gets you.
I did just that a few months ago. VM were charging me too much so I cancelled the direct debit. I had already called and written to them a few times and got fed up wasting my time, so I just cancelled it and waited for them to contact me. Eventually they did and we sorted things out. I had been with them for over a year anyway, but I did check and there is no mark against my credit record or anything like that. The bailiffs didn't smash my door down either.
Actually, the fact that they changed them probably works against them. Unless they notified you in writing, which they didn't, they can't just randomly change the contract and expect you to be bound by it.
Actually when Virgin changed the T&Cs, they sent them in the post to all ntl and telewest customers as part of the 'Welcome to Virgin Media' packs. So customers were informed in writing
Also, the contract says that the T&Cs can change any time they like, but legal president says that if they did do that then the contract could be cancelled immediately by you.
Yes, the contract can be cancelled. Which is already built into the Virgin Terms anyway, so nothing special there. It is the same clause that allows the contract to be cancelled if the prices change
You have to remember that contract law says there are certain things you can't sign away, including the right to cancel a contract if any part of it changes. Since the contract says that you agree to the T&Cs, if they change what you agreed to change and sure enough courts have always ruled that you can then cancel the contract.
Again, agree completely.
Consider the alternative: Contact says you are bound by the T&Cs for one year, VM change the T&Cs to say you are only allowed to download 1 byte per day and hay too bad you agreed to it and are locked in.
For the 3rd time, the Virgin terms allow you cancel your contract if things change
Yes, it does. I think there is additional regulation for ADSL providers anyway, but most seem to offer 1 month minimum contracts.
Be Broadband is a 3 month contract, both Sky and BT run 12 month contracts, and TalkTalk are currently on 18 month contracts
You agree to the T&Cs when you sign up. A signature is not necessary for agreement but is the preffered method. You can agree when signing up online without one, for example.
Then how can you prove in court that you didn't see or agree to the terms and conditions was my point.
Poppers argument was that a company would have to show a signed written document to do that to prove that you agreed.
It is either one or the other.
However, if they change the contract in any way then it would have to be agreed with you again, and you would have the option to back out regardless of previously agreed minimum contract lengths.
I agree for the 4th time. As does Virgin
There will definitely not be a mark on your credit report unless you loose in court. Otherwise, you are free to dispute any debt and there is no legal way anyone can claim that debt or put a mark on your credit report for it. If you look at your credit report, you will notice that it doesn't list debts specifically, only loans taken, inquries made, missed regular payments etc. Unless there is a decision in court, it will not list money owed.
But even the the fact you have missed payments etc don't help
---------- Post added at 23:58 ---------- Previous post was at 23:50 ----------
the Credit Reference Agences DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO STORE YOUR PERSONAL DATA IN LAW other than court ORDERED rulings,WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT END OF STORY.
Not the end of the story, as it seems they DO have a legal right ;)
This is from the Information Comissioners Office
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/credit_%20agreements%20-%20data_%20sharing.pdf
Part of which says the following:
The complainants’ argument is based on the assumption that the credit reference agencies need consent to process account information. This is not the case.
It is our view that the condition for processing below covers the sharing of account data with the credit reference agencies for the duration of a contract and six years beyond.
and it even covers why there is no legislation on the six year rule ;)
The Act does not prescribe the period for which information is retained by credit reference agencies. However we understand that the Crowther Report on Consumer Credit 1971 expressed support for the view that a statutory time limit should be considered and suggested a period of six years should be adopted. At the time this was already the practice common to some of the major credit reference agencies. The Younger Committee on Privacy considered that as the prevailing practices of the agencies were coordinated, there was no immediate necessity for statutory recommendations to be made but prepared the ground for the Data Protection Act 1984 by recommending that periods should be specified beyond which the information should not be retained.
and a bit further on
As a consequence this historical information would appear to be relevant to the purpose of credit referencing and by holding this information the agencies would not appear to be in breach of the fifth principle.
---------- Post added at 23:58 ---------- Previous post was at 23:50 ----------
Not the end of the story, as it seems they DO have a legal right ;)
This is from the Information Comissioners Office
http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/library/data_protection/practical_application/credit_%20agreements%20-%20data_%20sharing.pdf
Part of which says the following:
The complainants’ argument is based on the assumption that the credit reference agencies need consent to process account information. This is not the case.
It is our view that the condition for processing below covers the sharing of account data with the credit reference agencies for the duration of a contract and six years beyond.
and it even covers why there is no legislation on the six year rule ;)
The Act does not prescribe the period for which information is retained by credit reference agencies. However we understand that the Crowther Report on Consumer Credit 1971 expressed support for the view that a statutory time limit should be considered and suggested a period of six years should be adopted. At the time this was already the practice common to some of the major credit reference agencies. The Younger Committee on Privacy considered that as the prevailing practices of the agencies were coordinated, there was no immediate necessity for statutory recommendations to be made but prepared the ground for the Data Protection Act 1984 by recommending that periods should be specified beyond which the information should not be retained.
and a bit further on
As a consequence this historical information would appear to be relevant to the purpose of credit referencing and by holding this information the agencies would not appear to be in breach of the fifth principle.
"Not the end of the story"
LOL, now that totally depends how much time you look and realise that above ICO underlings reply came about Directly from the surlyBonds bank charges/CRA posts, and peoples formal papers to the ICO to make best efforts to then go directly to and use in court, so they were quite happy with that wrong view and note, as it allows them to go directly to court and show best effort to resolve the points.
i assume everyone knows and is aware that the ICO dont make the law,and so can only give a "view", just as the home office gave a "view" and got the "view" wrong many times.
only the courts can rule on the law, and they have slapped the ICO and HO several times for getting it wrong and giving bad advice and bad views to the public as official bodys of the govt.
you got to love it, the way that underling wormed that cover note, without once refering to the legal passages that matter in the DPA in this case , and how its a view of this lower first line ICO person in the ICO not a law :rolleyes:, yes the ICO also have bad customer care DPA agents, he should have perhaps passed it up the line to someone higher to get a far better non commital announcement.
the key words clearly state
"This note sets out the Information Commissioner’s view on the matter."
"It is our view that the condition for processing below covers the sharing of account
data with the credit reference agencies for the duration of a contract and six years
beyond."
i like this bit best he makes it out as though they rather than he that didnt put in the research and time to get the answers "argument" and "assumption" and "this is not the case" LOL :angel:
"
"The complainants’ argument is based on the assumption that the credit reference agencies need consent to process account information. This is not the case."
heres a direct quote from the Experion Executive legal person to surlyBonds legal papers from that link above, you can find it in several places infact if you look..
Experion said "“As far as Experian are aware there is no specific legislation that provides us with the right to retain your information for six years from the date an account is settled.
It was agreed throughout the credit industry alone, that the six years is considered as a reasonable amount of time for account data to be retained from the point that an account is settled in accordance with the 5th Data Protection Principle.
This information would only be retained with your consent as per the terms and conditions of the particular account you held”
you said it yourself "it even covers why there is no legislation on the six year rule ;)"
and even Experion had to finally confirm it after legal threats and papers, there is NO LAW.,
"end of story" as somone said somewere ;)
the unsigned ICO view above that consent is NOT required is clearly wrong.
"industry practice" does NOT a law make ;)
---------- Post added at 07:26 ---------- Previous post was at 06:39 ----------
the SurlyBonds footer:
"The legal bit: My views based on a post-grad law degree and an uncle who's a QC. But, I accept no liability for any outcome as a result of anyone invoking any of my advice - clarify your own personal stuation with an insured solicitor.
Last edited by SurlyBonds; 24-04-2007 at 09:23 PM."
Experion said "“As far as Experian are aware there is no specific legislation that provides us with the right to retain your information for six years from the date an account is settled.
It was agreed throughout the credit industry alone, that the six years is considered as a reasonable amount of time for account data to be retained from the point that an account is settled in accordance with the 5th Data Protection Principle.
This information would only be retained with your consent as per the terms and conditions of the particular account you heldâ€Â
you said it yourself "it even covers why there is no legislation on the six year rule ;)"
and even Experion had to finally confirm it after legal threats and papers, there is NO LAW.,
"end of story" as somone said somewere ;)
So the case where they filed the legal papers went to court and was found agains Experion then? Because if it wasn't then it is again a VIEW and not a legal ruling ;)
And just because there isn't legislation, doesn't meant to say it is illegal. We used to do fine in the world before the idea that everything needs a law
cook1984
23-09-2008, 19:39
Actually when Virgin changed the T&Cs, they sent them in the post to all ntl and telewest customers as part of the 'Welcome to Virgin Media' packs. So customers were informed in writing
I never received anything. If I had, I could have chosen not to agree to it and had my account terminated there and then, despite any minimum contract periods.
For the 3rd time, the Virgin terms allow you cancel your contract if things change
No, the law allows it.
Be Broadband is a 3 month contract, both Sky and BT run 12 month contracts, and TalkTalk are currently on 18 month contracts
Zen, Demon, Tiscali and just about every other ADSL provider who is not BT is 1 month.
Then how can you prove in court that you didn't see or agree to the terms and conditions was my point.
How can they prove that you did? The "EULA" is usually just a text file. Edit it and print it off, the click "I agree". I remember one company tried to claim that their EULA was copyright so you couldn't change it, but of course the court threw that out as non-negotiable contracts are not legally enforceable.
But even the the fact you have missed payments etc don't help
Sorry, should have been more clear, they only list missed loan repayments. Missed payments for services like BB or TV are not listed. In fact, it doesn't even mention that you have a subscription.
A credit report only covers loans (including credit cards), legal judgements and some personal data such as time in your current job and at your current address.
I'm not at all sure what the point is that you are trying to make? No one has disputed the ability to break a contract if the terms/price change.
As for minimum contract periods, they will vary between companies. That is one of things you look at when you take out services
And as has been said, this gone very off topic
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.