Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob
If you haven't directly complained to VM about it, how do you expect to be able to justify to VM that they are in breach of contract for the service being not fit for purpose. That is the only reason why you can terminate services within the 12 moth service periods, after your 30 day trial.
|
I am perfectly able to justify that they are in breach of contract for the service not being fit for purpose because I am experiencing the very same problem that countless others are experiencing - a problem that renders a significant part of the service that I am receiving all but unusable. That I haven't complained to VM doesn't alter that they aren't providing me with the service that I am paying them for.
Out of interest, are you or anyone else aware of any documented instances, on this forum or any other, of VM solving any individual customers stuttering problems?
---------- Post added at 00:51 ---------- Previous post was at 00:45 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by WHISTLED
I agree you have no right to cancel and they will try to fix the problem rather than
|
How do you propose that VM will try to fix the problem? As far as I can ascertain, there isn't a known fix for the problem (hence it still being on their list of things to fix) so anything that they try, unless it is something new and previously untried, is simply going to stall and draw out the process of telling me that they are not able to fix the problem. Of course, if they lead me on a wild goose chase for long enough, it may be the case that their engineers eventually solve the problem and roll out a fix for everyone, by which time I'll have spent yet more time paying for a substandard service which doesn't do as it was advertised to do.
Are there any examples that you can cite (I'm not saying they don't exist, it's just that I'm not aware of them) where VM have permanently solved an individual customer's stuttering problem?