Cancelling Virgin subscription

Armitage Shanks · 14-07-2007, 22:58

The missus and I have had V+ for about 3 months now and she is pretty much at the end of her tether with it now. I don't watch a great deal of TV myself but she uses the recording feature to watch an average of 2 hours of programming per day.

Unfortunately, there barely ever seems to be a recording which isn't rendered almost unwatchable by the constant stuttering sound.

Now, I haven't even bothered to report it to them as I know from this and other fora that the problem isn't specific to me, rather it is an inherent flaw in the service that they provide - which leads me onto the point of my post...

We have now reached the point where having tolerated this problem for months and having seen it fail to be solved that we would sooner cancel our subscription with VM entirely and defect to Sky, lock and stock.

Of course, they may argue that we could downgrade our package and switch to a non-V+ service but we signed up for our package on the basis that the package would correctly perform the fuction that we subscribed for it to perform - we would rather get a working Sky+ package (which we had for over 3 years previously) than a non-V+ package.

Essentially, my question is whether or not I have a legal basis on which to terminate my contract before the 12 month tie-in expires on the grounds that the service is not as advertised and is not fit-for-purpose.

Does anyone know of a precedent for this and has anyone else used the fact that the recording and stuttering renders the service all but unusable to succesfully cancel their contract early?

Just in case I get a backlash from the VM fans on here (I'm not saying I will, I'm just not looking for a ruck), I'd like to point out that I have no inherent interest in VM bashing and if they provided a service which was of equal quality and functionality, in my opinion, to the service I received from Sky for several years then I would be quite happy to see out my contract and beyond, receiving a service which can be used to the full.

As it stands, I think I'll be giving VM a ring on monday and I am anticipating all kinds of stalling tactics to try to grind me into losing the will to carry on - suggesting that the problem may be specific to me when they know full well that this is a widespread problem, sending out engineers to mess about with cables and the box, getting me to reformat (again - I've done it myself several times), getting me to turn off the box for several minutes and seeing if that fixes it, etc...

This isn't intended to be a rant and if anyone can offer/add anything constructive to solve my stuttering problem or help me to get myself out of the 12 month contract, it would be gratefully received.

MovedGoalPosts · 15-07-2007, 00:15

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.

WHISTLED · 15-07-2007, 00:26

I agree you have no right to cancel and they will try to fix the problem rather than

Quote:

all kinds of stalling tactics

Armitage Shanks · 15-07-2007, 00:51

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?

**Hugh** · 15-07-2007, 08:21

There must be a fix for it, as my V+ (and lots of others, including my neighbours and family, who have v+) doesn't have this "feature".

Surely, if it was "an inherent flaw in the service that they provide", we would be noticing it in Leeds?

btw, how can it hurt to report and let them attempt to remedy it? You seem to have made up your mind without allowing VM a chance to fix it, and it can only help any case you may bring if you show that you let them attempt to fix it (imho).

Paul K · 15-07-2007, 09:08

If you don't report the fault then you are making your target of cancelling the service a lot harder to achieve without penalty. If you were to take your complaint to arbitration because VM refuse to cancel without penalty the arbitration group will tell you that you must follow the complaints procedure as outlined in VMs Ts and Cs/ complaints procedure. Failing to do this just makes it difficult for you to prove your case that the service is not fit for purpose.
VM are not breaching the contract if they are not aware that you are not getting the service you feel you are paying for. As far as they know you are happy with the service and have no problems.

15-07-2007, 10:43

V+ has so many errors that VM know about (not as described) - just site a few of these in your cancellation and they'll let out without a struggle

Armitage Shanks · 15-07-2007, 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

There must be a fix for it, as my V+ (and lots of others, including my neighbours and family, who have v+) doesn't have this "feature".

Surely, if it was "an inherent flaw in the service that they provide", we would be noticing it in Leeds?

While it would be nice and simple if what you were saying was the case, your logic is, in my opinion, rather flawed.

If there were a fix, there would very likely be documented examples on the web of individual customers having their problem fixed. I've yet to see any although, again, I'd be happy to be corrected on this.

With regard to your assertion that the fact that the problem doesn't affect everybody means that there is not an inherent flaw in the service, your logic, again, doesn't seem to me to stack up. The problem exists and many people are experiencing it - that is a statement of fact. That you and many others aren't experiencing the problem doesn't negate that fact that this flaw exists. It could be that it only affects certain channels, it could be that it only affects certain programmes, it could be that it is only a problem at certain times of day, it could be that it is only a problem in certain geographies - it could be any number of things which mean that you simply haven't experienced the problem but that doesn't mean that there isn't an inherent flaw in the service.

When a car manufacturer issues a recall because there is an inherent flaw in the braking system, that doesn't necessarily extrapolate to everybody's brakes catastrophically failing at the same time, or under the same conditions, or even at all. That's not to say that the flaw doesn't exist, merely that not everybody has experienced it yet. It is still an inherent flaw and it still needs to be fixed and the stuttering sound is no different. Many people experience it and many don't, seemingly nobody knows how to fix it, and VM have failed to come up with a fix despite having had months to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

btw, how can it hurt to report and let them attempt to remedy it? You seem to have made up your mind without allowing VM a chance to fix it, and it can only help any case you may bring if you show that you let them attempt to fix it (imho).

I haven't made up my mind not to report it but I am happy to put my head above the parapet and say that it is my prediction that they will give me the runaround by trying out 'fixes' which have no proven track record of solving the problem in order to try to appear as though they are keeping up their side of the bargain. For example, rebooting and reformating (I and many others have tried this many times) will have no more positive an effect on the problem than smothering my V+ box in jam but do you think that they won't waste my time and theirs by getting me to try it anyway?

I'll give them a call on Monday and report back here with the outcome of my efforts.

---------- Post added at 13:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:01 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

If you don't report the fault then you are making your target of cancelling the service a lot harder to achieve without penalty. If you were to take your complaint to arbitration because VM refuse to cancel without penalty the arbitration group will tell you that you must follow the complaints procedure as outlined in VMs Ts and Cs/ complaints procedure. Failing to do this just makes it difficult for you to prove your case that the service is not fit for purpose.
VM are not breaching the contract if they are not aware that you are not getting the service you feel you are paying for. As far as they know you are happy with the service and have no problems.

It's hard to disagree with what you are saying. My only caveat is that if VM know that they don't have a fix for the problem (and it is my belief that this is the case) then the right and proper thing for them to do would be to concede from the off that they don't. That way, I can get on with cancelling my subscription and getting a service that does what I want it to do. If they give me a timescale by which they anticipate that the problem will be fixed, I will be able to make a judgement call about whether I am prepared to wait or not but, again, I don' think that is something that is going to happen.

I can just see this requiring far more effort and hassle than it needs to have although I stand to be corrected and will report the outcome on here.

---------- Post added at 13:10 ---------- Previous post was at 13:08 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by JethroUK

V+ has so many errors that VM know about (not as described) - just site a few of these in your cancellation and they'll let out without a struggle

I do hope that you are right. Are there any documented examples of people successfully cancelling early without a struggle, having cited known problems with the service?

15-07-2007, 12:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armitage Shanks

..I do hope that you are right. Are there any documented examples of people successfully cancelling early without a struggle, having cited known problems with the service?

Several examples - i'll try find some - there's lots V.M. could or couldn't do but they just don't want unhappy customers - it's obviously not good business, especially a high profile company such as VM

.

on in an hour! · 15-07-2007, 12:31

your post doesnt add up.you say its an inherent fault,but then go on to say it could be to do with any No of things,that said,dont you think VM deserve a chance to come out and fix it.if you had a recall for your cars brakes and didnt bother to take your car in on the recall you wouldnt have a leg to stand on if you were then involved in an accident where your brakes failed,you are contradicting yourself,thats not to say i dont sympathise with you,but i dont suffer with the problems on my V+ box that you do on yours,and as many other posters have said, neither do they,so to say the fault is 'inherent' isnt quite correct.

Armitage Shanks · 15-07-2007, 12:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by JethroUK

Several examples - i'll try find some - there's lots V.M. could or couldn't do but they just don't want unhappy customers - it's obviously not good business, especially a high profile company such as VM

.

That's reassuring to hear - I'm not looking for a drawn out squabble with VM, I'd sooner just cut my losses and take my business elsewhere without any aggro so that I don't have to put up with the missus huffing and puffing of an evening when her latest episode of CSI or Criminal Minds turns into a bad impression of a Norman Collier skit.

---------- Post added at 13:53 ---------- Previous post was at 13:40 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by on in an hour!

your post doesnt add up.you say its an inherent fault,but then go on to say it could be to do with any No of things,that said,dont you think VM deserve a chance to come out and fix it.if you had a recall for your cars brakes and didnt bother to take your car in on the recall you wouldnt have a leg to stand on if you were then involved in an accident where your brakes failed,you are contradicting yourself,thats not to say i dont sympathise with you,but i dont suffer with the problems on my V+ box that you do on yours,and as many other posters have said, neither do they,so to say the fault is 'inherent' isnt quite correct.

Ok - this is turning into a game of semantics here. If people object to my use of the word inherent because their interpretation of its definition is different to mine then I am happy to concede and drop it.

The problem isn't an inherent one - rather it is a known, widespread, longstanding and, as yet, unfixed problem which renders a significant part of the service for which I and many others subscribe unusable.

I will give them the chance to fix it, in the same way that I would take my car back to have its brakes fixed. What I won't take kindly to is time wasting by VM getting me to try out 'fixes' that have no track record of solving the problem. I'll keep my fingers crossed that they do the right thing and makes this as hassle-free as possible.

on in an hour! · 15-07-2007, 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armitage Shanks

That's reassuring to hear - I'm not looking for a drawn out squabble with VM, I'd sooner just cut my losses and take my business elsewhere without any aggro so that I don't have to put up with the missus huffing and puffing of an evening when her latest episode of CSI or Criminal Minds turns into a bad impression of a Norman Collier skit.

---------- Post added at 13:53 ---------- Previous post was at 13:40 ----------

Ok - this is turning into a game of semantics here. If people object to my use of the word inherent because their interpretation of its definition is different to mine then I am happy to concede and drop it.

The problem isn't an inherent one - rather it is a known, widespread, longstanding and, as yet, unfixed problem which renders a significant part of the service for which I and many others subscribe unusable.

I will give them the chance to fix it, in the same way that I would take my car back to have its brakes fixed. What I won't take kindly to is time wasting by VM getting me to try out 'fixes' that have no track record of solving the problem. I'll keep my fingers crossed that they do the right thing and makes this as hassle-free as possible.

how do you know their fixes have no track record if you havent had an engineer out to 'waste your time' yet???

chickendippers · 15-07-2007, 13:29

The engineers in my area are excellent (we've only have them out 3 times, once to install, second time to upgrade to digital, and once when the box was fried by lightning). It would seem there is a lot of regional variation on the network and service, don't know it until you've tried them.

Hornet · 15-07-2007, 13:32

From past experience of taking companies to court you will have to allow them a chance to fix it first. Ring them and tell them what the fault is then let them come out and sort it. At this stage it would also be worth sending a recorded letter about it being there one chance to fix it before you terminate the contract as for the money you are paying it is unacceptable...etc...

If its still like it after fixing send them a letter canceling and saying if they don't collect box and and terminate you will comence CCP in 30 days.

Armitage Shanks · 15-07-2007, 13:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by on in an hour!

how do you know their fixes have no track record if you havent had an engineer out to 'waste your time' yet???

If they have a fix for the problem then they would have rolled it out and there would be examples on this site and others of individuals for whom the problem has been solved.

I've already said that I'll phone them tomorrow and I'll listen to what they have to say.

I've stated my belief which is that they do not have a fix for the problem. I am basing that belief on the fact that I have never seen any evidence to the contrary and that if VM had a fix, it would be in their interests to roll out the fix immediately in order to make customers such as myself and many others content. Is it your belief that a fix exists?