Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

Hence the reason I put "cap" in inverted comma's.

But what people seem to overlook is that a lot of people signed up for a service with no specific usage limits in the T&C's or the AUP at the time, reading the contract they signed, would not do them any good whatsoever in that case (which was answering the post I quoted).

I've never maintained that the cap was actively enforced at the moment. If NTL can't enforce it due to the sneaky and underhand way it was introduced, then that's their problem.

Originally Posted by Chris T

What cap? So far as I'm aware, nobody who signed up with NTL before the 'cap' was introduced has ever been sent a letter accusing them of exceeding it. This is possibly because they did not announce it properly to existing customers in accordance with the contract, so it's not enforceable.

Originally Posted by orangebird

No Towny, that's not the reason. It IS enforceable, because as part of the T&Cs states that it is the CUSTOMERS responsibility to check the AUP regularly themselves, not ntls to announce every change. Like it or not, that's the LEGAL and BINDING way it is :)

Originally Posted by ianathuth

You show quite a lack of understanding of human nature with those statements.

Some people want the biggest and fastest no matter what the cost or what their usage is like. £37.99 is a lot of money to some people and small change to others. Experience has nothing at all to do with the speeds people want, the amount that they are willing to pay or the volume that they download. Both experienced users and newbies download small files and very big files. They both can use well below the caps or well above them.

A few gamers know the pings are no better but use 3Mb because of the upload speed

Originally Posted by Chris T

I'd be interested to see them defend that clause in Court, were it ever to come to that. There is such an offence as Unfair Term in a Contract. The fact that NTL gets you to sign something doesn't mean that it's legally fair and enforceable.

Originally Posted by orangebird

I'd be even more interested to see a customer be able to take ntl to court because of a clause in a contract they never knew about because they couldn't be arsed to read it....

Originally Posted by Neil

<Devil's Advocate>Just because it's there doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable.

ntl could (without telling you) change your T's & C's of employment, & alter whatever they wanted about your job role. They could then argue that your original contract stated that they could change the Ts & Cs at will, & that is was your responsibility to check for updates.

Doesn't make it legal or legally enforceable though. </Devil's Advocate>

Originally Posted by orangebird

ntl don't do that though.

Originally Posted by orangebird

And do you honestly think that ntl would spend 10s of thousands of pounds a year on legally qualified people to write this stuff just for sport?

:dozey:

Originally Posted by Neil

Yes they do-they did just that with the AUP.

Originally Posted by orangebird

But you were referring to employment t&cs... :confused:





And how exactly can those that negotiate contracts be held responsible for those that screw up the said negiotiated service? :dozey:



Only when it suits eh?



It's not about the t&c's being right or wrong or legal at the end of the day Neil. It's about abiding by what you (the company and the customer)agree to when the services are accepted. Why can't people take responsibility for themselves? :shrug:

Originally Posted by Neil

Calm down dear, it's only a discussion forum! :D :angel:

I'm not suggesting people shouldn't be responsible for their actions, just that ntl moved the goalposts, & that's not what people signed up for. :)

Originally Posted by ianathuth

LOL, any change in terms and conditions is a moving of the goalpoasts and not what people signed up for. :)

Originally Posted by ianathuth

The speeds that NTL broadband customers are getting now are, for the majority of its customers, not what they signed for but are welcomed by them.

Originally Posted by ianathuth

The terms and conditions that people did sign for contained details of how those terms and conditions could be altered in the future.

Originally Posted by ianathuth

Whether any term or condition is legally binding is a matter for the courts. It does not matter how much NTL or anyone else pay for legal opinion and representation, it is a matter of what the courts decide.