Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DieDieMyDarling
The way ntl are introducing the caps says it all really, when they changed the AUP in the first place, they did it in secret, overnight, sneakily, and now with these caps, there's no information made available to the cumstomers, most people will probably never even know there's a cap being enforced, it won't be mentioned in the adverts, there won't be any letters or emails, we'll only find out on here, because some people know where to find information like this out. Bt send out their letters/emails in November (i think it was november), stating that caps would be introduced in 2005.
Ntl's cap is apparently being introduced in the first quarter of 2005, yet there's nothing being mentioned. So they're happy enough to take on all the new customers, not telling them of any caps that are planned, then any new customer that joins, only to find out their useage is capped, can't really complain, as ntl reserve the right to change the T&C any time they wish.
Would new customers be different, as they'll have signed into an initial 12 month contract, and thus their T&C can't be changed in that time?
|
NTL have given no information to customers because the new service has not started yet. There is plenty of time to notify customers before the new service starts. Existing customers will not be automatically put on the new service but will have to apply for it, terms and conditions being given to them at that time so that they can either agree to them and go ahead or disagree and stay as they are now. I would imagine that eventually customers who have not asked to move to the new service will be moved on to it with adequate notice and they would then have the option to agree the new terms or cancel their service.
Customers within their 12 month contract CAN have their terms and conditions altered but they then have the right to cancel that contract if the changes are substantial
A point that Chrysalis was making that "even if they are making a loss on some customers its good business practice to accomodate them" is flawed if that accomodation of them results in massive expenditure or massive disruption to other users. If you consider a UBR with several really heavy users on it that are disrupting every users service on that UBR you have the coice of getting the heavy users to modify their usage or upgrading the infrastructure to cater for them. If the necessary infrastructure upgrade will cost several thousand pounds is that a choice that should be made. Someone has to pay for that upgrade.