Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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:

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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?

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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..."

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

Aren't the price plans restricted to numbers beginning 01 & 02?

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

But it mentions 'any calls made outside your call plan'.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

Does it? :shocked:

Now I didn't say that, did I :confused:
Is he a 'Managing Director' anyway?

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

According to you...

That's who everyone thinks runs Virgin Media. They have their own non-Branson CEO, although Branson is the chairman of the Virgin Group.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

It's what the letter implies. It's very misleading.

---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 13:28 ----------

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"

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

Response from the author Steve Stewart Managing Director, Customer Care who signed the letter.

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 ----------

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?

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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:

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

:wtf:

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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..

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

I love the way you use irony to demonstrate that you agree with my point.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

I'll make use of the smilies to better express what I mean.

<removed>

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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.

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

You don't fool me.
You're trying to get me to use one of them smilies again, aren't you

:xmas:

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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. ;)

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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:

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

Virgins legal people are now looking at this :)

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

Re: Oh dear someone's in trouble
 

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 ----------

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 ----------

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 ----------


Just read that, I can somehow see a mr stewart in queue 1 of the dole queue in the morning ;)