Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Chris T
I don't think it is outrageous - not necessarily, anyway. The regulations have changed, so those who use diallers for legitimate purposes have to follow a code about how the dialler gets there, and how it should not become the default dialler, etc etc etc.
If the rules are breached, ICSTIS can order NTL not to take the money owed on the bill, and then not pay out to the operator of the dialler. NTL is not obliged to do any of this without a ruling from ICSTIS but I can understand, with the regulatory situation now a lot clearer than it used to be, why they would simply deal with it as they have here.
The info is all in the PDF I posted above.  |
If ICSTIS had ruled then I agree, but they haven't.
ntl themselves haven't investigated anything, they've just taken the easiest option without really giving it any thought.
Cobblers, absolute cobblers....
