Legal Action Against Virgin Media

[NTLVictim]

Ok, just a guess..4 undeclared VM employees on this thread.

[gazzzman]

lets hope he signs up with SKY broadband
so far the reliability has been so good amongst my customers...
well lets just say I have had no e-mails complaining er actually I have got no e-mails from them at all for some reason lol!!!

[Rik]

Originally Posted by andyr2005

They offered me a free 10MB connection for the remaining 7-8 months of me contract, and also when the problem was resolved I received a bill for rougly £180, which they very kindly withdrew, and I was not billed that month .

My word, FREE 10Meg connection for 7 - 8 months of your remaining time on contract, and waived a £180 bill.

Seems you got rather a good deal there.

Is this the reason you dont want to jump ship and leave VM? because of all these good deals you get?

Looking at this guys previous threads, there are some things that just dont add up.

[AndyCambs]

Originally Posted by gazzzman

lets hope he signs up with SKY broadband
so far the reliability has been so good amongst my customers...
well lets just say I have had no e-mails complaining er actually I have got no e-mails from them at all for some reason lol!!!

And of course, not forgetting that Sky's upto 8MB broadband will probably only give you around 1MB....

[NTLVictim]

Make that six..

[Rik]

Originally Posted by NTLVictim

Ok, just a guess..4 undeclared VM employees on this thread.

Plus 1 Sky Troll

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by AndyCambs

And of course, not forgetting that Sky's upto 8MB broadband will probably only give you around 1MB....

Do you ever say anything constructive?

[AndyCambs]

Originally Posted by andygrif

Do you ever say anything constructive?

That is constructive.
It's pointing out that you're less likely to get the "promised" 8MB with ADSL rather than the 10MB with Virgin Media.

[andygrif]

No it isn't. You said that you'd probably only get 1mb of the 'up to' 8mb offered. And if you take what the O/P says verbatim and quite a few other posts on here, the 10mb from Virgin seems to be suffering too.

But that wasn't my point Andy. I very rarely see you enter into (IMHO) sensible discussion. Instead you throw in random insults, snide remarks and when confronted with real facts you go quiet or move on to another snide remark in reply to something else said.

Have you stopped to consider that this could be quite rude?

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Mick

...it's sold 'Up to 10Mb' and there are no guarantees for a consistant speed of 10Mb.

Has this ever been tested in a court of law?

Would a publican sell beer in volumes of "up to one pint"?

[Toto]

Originally Posted by TheNorm

Has this ever been tested in a court of law?

Would a publican sell beer in volumes of "up to one pint"?

LOL, I love the way people throw around words such as "court" and "law" when most here have little or no idea what they are actually talking about.

No ISP in their right mind would provide a contract guaranteeing that their customers will always get the advertised speed. And if any do, then they have no idea how the Internet works, and should not be trusted to offer such services, no matter how attractive the offer seems.

Please guys, move on, this has been done to death.

[Mick Fisher]

ISP's generally have been getting away with blue murder with all this upto crap for far too long.

It's about time that a firm definition of what is acceptable service is included in the TOS and is referred to, in readable print, in the advertising.

If it's gonna take a court case to achieve this then I for one say "Go for it"

[banjo]

Originally Posted by Mick Fisher

ISP's generally have been getting away with blue murder with all this upto crap for far too long.

It's about time that a firm definition of what is acceptable service is included in the TOS and is referred to, in readable print, in the advertising.

If it's gonna take a court case to achieve this then I for one say "Go for it"

I'll second that

[georgepomone]

Hi All,
I've read through the posts with interest.Even the bit about the beer.I can remember arguments about that when lined glasses first came in.The argument there was could you call froth a part of the measurement up to the line.Best to leave that one.
If I could see some success in taking ISP's to court to clarify just what is expected from the customers point of view I can see that would be a good thing. Trouble is I don't think you would get any recompense for the money it would cost to take it to court.
Without taking logs etc, the ISP would always find a way round what is complained about.We all know that when we ring most ISP's they usually blame it on something from the customers end because it's a way of not taking ownership of a fault.It's a sad fact that what is promised and what is provided are not always the same thing.
When I ring about a fault, like a lot of people on here I have already checked things out at my end. It's not always the case that a customer has done this. Some customers wouldn't know what to do anyway. Because of this the ISP's can sometimes if not all the time get round a complaint by saying it's the customers equipment at fault.
The way things are at the moment I can't see any quick change to this situation.
Still we can dream.
George.

[TheNorm]

Originally Posted by Toto

...No ISP in their right mind would provide a contract guaranteeing that their customers will always get the advertised speed. ...

So you would be happy if an ISP advertised "speeds up to 100Mb (see Terms and Conditions)", even if this could only be achieved by sitting in the company's headquarters?

Most of us understand that advertised speeds cannot be guaranteed, just as trains cannot guarantee to run to their published timetables. But if a train company consistently failed to meet its own published standards, shouldn't a revised timetable be released?