Legal action taken against Virgin Media throttling practices - Page 17

Ignitionnet · 13-03-2009, 13:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiefrost

I still fail to see the difference between getting STM'd to 5meg and paying 20meg on cable and paying 24/16 meg and only geting 8meg on ADSL.

Sign up to Be / O2 / Sky and they'll automatically offer you the chance to downgrade to the lowest product that matches your performance, they will also give you an estimated speed before you commit, as required by the guidelines they are signed up to, so yes there's quite some difference.

13-03-2009, 13:32

sorry BROADBANDINGS..... but are you trying to say that Virgin Media does not offer you down grade if you don't receive that service... This is absolutely ridiculous. They should get shut down for this..... That's it, Virgin Media has gone too far with abusing customers and system... we all must do something about it.

jamiefrost · 13-03-2009, 13:40

So what about every one on the lowest tiers that still get no where near the up to limit.

Been a customer for ages so I don't know about how new customers are informed but the STM limts are clearly defined by Virgin.

JJ

---------- Post added at 14:40 ---------- Previous post was at 14:34 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr_SEO

sorry BROADBANDINGS..... but are you trying to say that Virgin Media does not offer you down grade if you don't receive that service... This is absolutely ridiculous. They should get shut down for this..... That's it, Virgin Media has gone too far with abusing customers and system... we all must do something about it.

Not recieving the advertised limit (STM aside) on cable is a different issue than on ADSL as it's not a function of distance to the exchange.

If you sign up to 20 meg and Virgin can't supply it after what ever fixes they try you can cancel the contract. Would this be possible on ADSL if I pay for 8meg told I should get 4 but only get 3?

JJ

Mike_A · 13-03-2009, 13:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonglet

At least its closer than india mike

.

Spoke to a call centre in India once and asked if what I heard was a motor boat outside. "No", said the operator: "I have a stutter".

Gary L · 13-03-2009, 13:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamiefrost

If you sign up to 20 meg and Virgin can't supply it after what ever fixes they try you can cancel the contract. Would this be possible on ADSL if I pay for 8meg told I should get 4 but only get 3?

Most of the time ADSL providers under estimate what speeds you will get. happens all the time on the Be forums where people are getting faster speeds than what was estimated.

Horace · 13-03-2009, 14:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gary L

So because a company owes massive debts you should be leniant towards them?
because they owe so much money, one could say that that is the reason why they don't and can't supply the high speeds they sell. feel the need to have to hide the fact that STM is in place.

If it was suggested that they just supply a speed they can supply such as 5MB they would argue that they would go out of business if they did that. but at the same time they are saying that we offer the higher speeds but with the hidden STM as that is how we can make money without actually having to provide the speed paid for.

I'm all for a company making money. but not when it means doing it in a way that can be seen as being deceitful and dishonest.

The question is why don't you want us to know about STM?
the answer is the deciding factor that unravels the use the use of the words Unlimited and Fastest when selling the product to the public.

As far as I'm concerned they didn't hide it, I knew about it before I was ever affected by it and there's been plenty of other restrictions in force before STM, even if it's been down to congestion. STM just attempts to balance the congestion between customers.
I've had plenty of opportunities to cancel out of contract and indeed could cancel right now, I've always known about the clause that allows them to restrict broadband as I would if I signed up with any broadband provider. It's a common clause to allow them to protect their services against abuse.

AndyCambs · 13-03-2009, 14:37

If I am a normal user, and don't download that much to impact others, but like the fast speeds for those things I do download - when I do get poor quality service because someone other user is downloading terrabytes of information - can I have a refund or sue them for the degraded service?

13-03-2009, 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

If I am a normal user, and don't download that much to impact others, but like the fast speeds for those things I do download - when I do get poor quality service because someone other user is downloading terrabytes of information - can I have a refund or sue them for the degraded service?

Yes you can sue them. Although virgin media does make you sign on terms and conditions but these terms and condition must be in line with standards set by the government. Virgin Media has laid out their terms in extreme side of it. At this moment legal experts are looking into if Virgin media intereperted goverment guideline correctly.

Every company would have their terms and conditions but at the end of the day, these terms and conditions must always be in line and comply with government rules and regulations, furthermore now days European Regulations also apply to the U.K. This means if a company interprets their terms and condition wrongly and but makes you sign on them or something that was not recommended or mentioned in the government or the European body guidelines, then that contract is void. Hence you can sue the company. Believe me out there, there is a lot of hate for Virgin Media. So if you dig, you will a lot supporters... Or you can even just post leaflets in your area or display them on your local shops. if you had a bad service or internet then someone else in you must be experiencing this too. So you will get a lot of support.

I know you will think this should not happen as the companies are quite smart, but believe me it happens to a lot of companies and in fact many of them do to gain profit. But it only gets noticed by the general public.

Gary L · 13-03-2009, 14:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by Horace

As far as I'm concerned they didn't hide it, I knew about it before I was ever affected by it and there's been plenty of other restrictions in force before STM, even if it's been down to congestion. STM just attempts to balance the congestion between customers.

I don't think there be so much congestion if they didn't supply such high speeds and didn't over subscribe in certain areas. I think they can balance it all they like, but take some blame yourself and not make the paying customer feel guilty for using it as the reason why others have to suffer.

Quote:

I've had plenty of opportunities to cancel out of contract and indeed could cancel right now, I've always known about the clause that allows them to restrict broadband as I would if I signed up with any broadband provider. It's a common clause to allow them to protect their services against abuse.

How come you get so many chances? I would have thought if you have accepted it before now then you can't think again later. especially as you said you've known about STM some time ago.

It might be there to protect them from abuse, but it can be used to protect them from not being able to squeeze more people on at the expense of the already paying people.

Ignitionnet · 13-03-2009, 14:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

If I am a normal user, and don't download that much to impact others, but like the fast speeds for those things I do download - when I do get poor quality service because someone other user is downloading terrabytes of information - can I have a refund or sue them for the degraded service?

You can't sue the other user no, they are using the product as sold to them.

13-03-2009, 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by Broadbandings

You can't sue the other user no, they are using the product as sold to them.

I don't think he meant user. I think he meant virgin media.

Stabhappy · 13-03-2009, 16:43

Just as a note, I am suprised at some of the personal attacks at BenMcr. You can attack the company as much as you like but Ben is just a member of the public like anyone else, seems like you're all ready to assume he's representing VM.

Mike_A · 13-03-2009, 16:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stabhappy

Just as a note, I am suprised at some of the personal attacks at BenMcr. You can attack the company as much as you like but Ben is just a member of the public like anyone else, seems like you're all ready to assume he's representing VM.

No. Ben has made some interesting points which are being probed in the light of other factors. That the probing is extensive is both thanks and respect for what he mentions. He seems knowledgeable and stalwart enough to take the points made.

Stabhappy · 13-03-2009, 16:54

Definately; but it is not an excuse. I'm sure Ben has things that he could be doing other than defending himself here.

Mike_A · 13-03-2009, 17:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stabhappy

Definately; but it is not an excuse. I'm sure Ben has things that he could be doing other than defending himself here.

He's no need to defend himself. He began by making assertions as regards contract and segments of the debate ran from there.

Ben, as a matter of interest, do Virgin Media adopt deep packet inspection to identify packets for delaying/taking apart as part of throttling methodology? Oh, and do they use Phorm?