Cable Forum - View Single Post - Legal action taken against Virgin Media throttling practices

Mike_A · 10-03-2009, 23:05

Interesting replies. Well, the on-topic ones. Please keep them coming for I welcome every fraction of input.

Some assumptions being made. Perhaps I should have mentioned that not only do I have considerable experience of representing in court but I have taken on much bigger players than Virgin Media. The government, for example, when I cut through debate by identifying the idea of, wrote and submitted a proposed bill which is now the Act of Parliament governing all late payment of business debt. I do not care about the size of the other side's wallets or the trickery they get up to, as very senior litigation practitioners have discovered.

What I care about is honesty and fairness.

Here, Virgin Media have bungled. They operate a practice knowingly and deliberately unfair to their clients, who they have sold to in the knowledge that their equipment cannot handle what they profess to sell (also fraud), and they take away what the client has paid for when in all fairness they should rebate pro-rata for service withheld.

To the ordinary person, the situation is wholly inequitable and unlawful. However, on a commercial basis, the longer they can get away with it the greater their income. That is why this case will soon be converted to a class action. Indeed, anyone here may join it (expense guestimate between Â£10-25 for paperwork and court lodgements). I should emphasise I am not touting - the subject seems to be of common interest to many here. It is akin to banks making excessive charges for what they do (I know, I know: they were eventually taken to task and forced to repay too).

As I mentioned, I welcome feedback. The references to VMs contract and how they implement it are wrong in law though. A contract is a treatise between two agreeing parties and must be fair and reflect what the parties intended. All but the most profoundly gentle or unaware people would not accept parts of an agreed service being withheld for no good reason or an excuse equivalent to "we're sorry, we've done too much business, we remove some of your service at the most important times, and we will continue to charge the same rate".

The matter is simple: if they vary the contract then a quid-pro-quo must be provided.

10-03-2009, 23:05	#44
Mike_A Inactive Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 53	Re: Legal action taken against Virgin Media throttling practices Interesting replies. Well, the on-topic ones. Please keep them coming for I welcome every fraction of input. Some assumptions being made. Perhaps I should have mentioned that not only do I have considerable experience of representing in court but I have taken on much bigger players than Virgin Media. The government, for example, when I cut through debate by identifying the idea of, wrote and submitted a proposed bill which is now the Act of Parliament governing all late payment of business debt. I do not care about the size of the other side's wallets or the trickery they get up to, as very senior litigation practitioners have discovered. What I care about is honesty and fairness. Here, Virgin Media have bungled. They operate a practice knowingly and deliberately unfair to their clients, who they have sold to in the knowledge that their equipment cannot handle what they profess to sell (also fraud), and they take away what the client has paid for when in all fairness they should rebate pro-rata for service withheld. To the ordinary person, the situation is wholly inequitable and unlawful. However, on a commercial basis, the longer they can get away with it the greater their income. That is why this case will soon be converted to a class action. Indeed, anyone here may join it (expense guestimate between Â£10-25 for paperwork and court lodgements). I should emphasise I am not touting - the subject seems to be of common interest to many here. It is akin to banks making excessive charges for what they do (I know, I know: they were eventually taken to task and forced to repay too). As I mentioned, I welcome feedback. The references to VMs contract and how they implement it are wrong in law though. A contract is a treatise between two agreeing parties and must be fair and reflect what the parties intended. All but the most profoundly gentle or unaware people would not accept parts of an agreed service being withheld for no good reason or an excuse equivalent to "we're sorry, we've done too much business, we remove some of your service at the most important times, and we will continue to charge the same rate". The matter is simple: if they vary the contract then a quid-pro-quo must be provided.