The allowance of interactive services on NTL for minors..

[jonoathome]

Before Ntl did their latest software update and channel change shakeup and introduction of the on-demand service there was a overall unique pin system that would stop anyone from purchasing anything on the ntl box, such as children using the box and selecting interactive services, to confirm purchase a pin number would need to be entered.. Normally the pin number you would arrange with an ntl operator to lock the box against unauthorised use for purchases. Granted yes you can still do this for the on-demand services, by locking them via the menu system but not for the interactive services availble to children from channels such as cartoon network. What a ridiclous oversight on NTL's behalf!

Now they have done away with this... and there is nothing stopping children from accessing these interactive services on your set-top box. Hey you could lock the channel to stop them viewing the channel, but why would you want to do that if its something like Cartoon Network which kids enjoy to watch.. ON the downside it is full of pay interactive services which are 60p at a time.


I have two children and when im not around they like to get a bit click happy.. especially my special needs daughter.. Who just loves playing games and pressing buttons.. Why have ntl done this, i think its disgusting no system is in place to stop this from happening... To think how much money they would be bringing in from this... Last months bill had near £10 (which was un beknown to me till I received the bill) in interactive services alone from cartoon network! after much arguments with NTL I managed to get the monies refunded.. but even so its not the point services like this should not be availble to minors (without permission) and a pin system should be implemented to stop the unauthorised use...

anyone else been caught out from this ???

[Peil]

At the risk of being labelled a troll, prehaps more parental supervision and setting of limits as opposed to asking for the cable provider to nanny the kids would be in order?

Originally Posted by Peil

At the risk of being labelled a troll, prehaps more parental supervision and setting of limits as opposed to asking for the cable provider to nanny the kids would be in order?

With all due respect I'm not saying you don't have a point BUT if the service was provided before but has been rescinded it still would have been polite of NTL to inform everyone of the change.

[jonoathome]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

With all due respect I'm not saying you don't have a point BUT if the service was provided before but has been rescinded it still would have been polite of NTL to inform everyone of the change.

thats my point... totally... agree with that comment 100% But more to the point what happens when you are not around like at work etc, kids have their freinds over.. before you know it a great big whopping bill has happened, without you knowing! This interactive service thingy is across the board so it generally can cover any interactive pay service available on any channel on the NTL digibox. This for one deeply concerns me..

BTW i dont use NTL as a nanny service (did my post sound that bad)! But the kids do like their TV... not that they are glued to it 100%.... and well my special needs child can be a right handful, like to press many buttons, so if she catches you off your guard!... .... beleive you me i'm more in control of the remote control these days

[Horace]

A pin number requirement for any pay per view program is pretty much essential and not requiring it is simply profiteering. In a situation where a parent isn't able to supervise their children one hundred percent of the time the only recourse is to lock all VOD or get rid of NTL totally. Sounds like NTL being very short-sighted or just plain dumb.

[Chris W]

ah yes it is ntl's fault that you can't control your child.

special needs or not that is not excuse. babies like buttons, tbat is a well known fact among responsible paretns i know, if you are not in control of your child then how is that ntl's problem?

---------- Post added at 03:11 ---------- Previous post was at 03:09 ----------

Originally Posted by Horace

A pin number requirement for any pay per view program is pretty much essential and not requiring it is simply profiteering. In a situation where a parent isn't able to supervise their children one hundred percent of the time the only recourse is to lock all VOD or get rid of NTL totally. Sounds like NTL being very short-sighted or just plain dumb.

sounds like poor parenting if you ask me. How much porn can a child look at by attacking an unattended laptop? A hell of a lot more than a tv. If you want to look after your children then IMHO you should supervise them properly.

[lostandconfused]

IMHO i think you got a good deal by having the calls credited back to you, granted it would probably cause a lot less hasle if there were a pin to block these, however you are responsible for the services there, if your children are trigger happy with the remote, then maybe you should block the channel when you arn't available to supervise them.
that way the kids learn that its not a toy and you dont get a huge bill?

[Horace]

Oh I see, the reason for not removing the pin requirement isn't motivated by profit but to encourage better parenting.

[lostandconfused]

no your right out of the two options profit would be the factor, the point i was trying to make was that some parents (and i dont mean anyone in particular especially in this thread) are all to keen to blame others.

they are your children, you are ultimatly responsible for them, kids make mistakes god knows ive run up a huge phone bill in the past, but rather than blaming the phone company for allowing me to do it, their response was, ok ill pay the bill as i am responsible for him and then ill deal with it as i see fit.

in the case above it is a bit different as the op wasnt aware that the kids can run up a bill from these channels, but the point still stands you take responsibility for your children until they can take responsibility for themselves, its one of the jobs of being a parent

btw this post was aimed at society in general not to the op above

I think the OP's complaint is not that it's been removed but that she wasn't warned about it.IF she had known then no doubt she would have taken the appropriate steps right away as a concerned parent.

Why you lot are blaming her for NTL's lack of respect for it's customers beats me...From one posting some of you have judged her to be unfit parent.Seems a bit of a stretched point to me.

[Tod]

I did not even realise cartoon network had a pay for use system running on it until I read this post, and I assumed that the TV service REQUIRED a pin number for any additional charges to be added to my account. I assumed this because that is what is required when you order films.

It is very unfair that people are ripping into jonoathome for not knowing this to be the case.

Looking at cartoon network, it displays a large hand pressing a red button to entice kids to go into this pay per use service - now having in mind the parents might not be aware of these extra pay for service - what do you think the kids are going to do??

At least with Sky you can unplug the phone lead to stop any unwanted spends.

[Stuart]

TBH, bad parenting or not, I think NTL should give the option to protect against accidental usage of pay services. After all, a baby or child randomly pushing buttons can theoretically build up a large bill quickly.

Originally Posted by Stuart C

TBH, bad parenting or not, I think NTL should give the option to protect against accidental usage of pay services. After all, a baby or child randomly pushing buttons can theoretically build up a large bill quickly.

Ah but Stuart you are aware of the consensus that anyone who leaves their baby anywhere near the TV unsupervised is a bad parent.Amazing the number of folk who are surprisingly not guilty of giving in to tiredness once in a while and using the tv to get a spare 5 minutes to go to the loo.

[jonoathome]

Originally Posted by Incognitas

I think the OP's complaint is not that it's been removed but that she wasn't warned about it.IF she had known then no doubt she would have taken the appropriate steps right away as a concerned parent.

Why you lot are blaming her for NTL's lack of respect for it's customers beats me...From one posting some of you have judged her to be unfit parent.Seems a bit of a stretched point to me.

Yep... thats part of the reason... (P.S im a bloke )

Originally Posted by Stuart C

TBH, bad parenting or not, I think NTL should give the option to protect against accidental usage of pay services. After all, a baby or child randomly pushing buttons can theoretically build up a large bill quickly.

Yep.. Definately!!! ... which leads me on to my next point.....

Originally Posted by lostandconfused

IMHO i think you got a good deal by having the calls credited back to you, granted it would probably cause a lot less hasle if there were a pin to block these, however you are responsible for the services there, if your children are trigger happy with the remote, then maybe you should block the channel when you arn't available to supervise them.
that way the kids learn that its not a toy and you dont get a huge bill?

So you would block a childrens channel would you.. specifically designed for children... Hummm er...

Originally Posted by Horace

A pin number requirement for any pay per view program is pretty much essential and not requiring it is simply profiteering. In a situation where a parent isn't able to supervise their children one hundred percent of the time the only recourse is to lock all VOD or get rid of NTL totally. Sounds like NTL being very short-sighted or just plain dumb.

Yep I would definatly say so... Anyone remember the telephone chatline boom years back... and the outrage people where having over the easy access to it for minors.... Today kind of restriction are shown in competition line's for children.... what do they say on TV nowadays... ?? Please ask permission before using the telephone... Now where on ntl Cartoon NetWork interactive services does it say that ??? Bear in mind its not just Cartoon Network offering these services.. Music channels etc etc.. the list could go on... In my opinion NTL should be more responsible in the way it offers it services, as its far easier to press a red button than to dial a number.....

Originally Posted by Chris W

ah yes it is ntl's fault that you can't control your child.

special needs or not that is not excuse. babies like buttons, tbat is a well known fact among responsible paretns i know, if you are not in control of your child then how is that ntl's problem?

---------- Post added at 03:11 ---------- Previous post was at 03:09 ----------

sounds like poor parenting if you ask me. How much porn can a child look at by attacking an unattended laptop? A hell of a lot more than a tv. If you want to look after your children then IMHO you should supervise them properly.

WTF!! thats just a stereotype scenario you have come up with there.. Of course you cannot keep an eye on your kids 100% of time, such is life. As responsible parents go... Im about as responsible as most... theres things like cooking, tidy of the house, telephone calls to deal with in every day life.. and even nipping the loo! Since when are kids suppose to be tied to your ankles ??? Not saying that the tv is to act as a Babysitter in no respect... But jees you cannot have eyes in the back of your head 24/7 m8!... Do you realise how hard it is raising special needs children and the complications you have to deal with on a day to day basis... Comments like you come out with there make me so flamin angry!!!

Incidently regarding laptop... you have preferances which u can set up which restrict the content a child can access.. and well if the child was to attend an unattended laptop couldn't you set it so they have to input a password first to gain access!.. Its more common a child will watch a TV unattended than have access to a laptop unattended...

Originally Posted by Tod

I did not even realise cartoon network had a pay for use system running on it until I read this post, and I assumed that the TV service REQUIRED a pin number for any additional charges to be added to my account. I assumed this because that is what is required when you order films.

It is very unfair that people are ripping into jonoathome for not knowing this to be the case.

Looking at cartoon network, it displays a large hand pressing a red button to entice kids to go into this pay per use service - now having in mind the parents might not be aware of these extra pay for service - what do you think the kids are going to do??
At least with Sky you can unplug the phone lead to stop any unwanted spends.

Could not of put that better myself, thankyou.. !