No Compensation ?

[popper]

well the only official way to tell their customers is not the web page they might not ever see or know exists, but rather as stated and layed out in the T&C contract.

that being an official notice , funny enough they removed the electronic notification option from the last T&C update so they cant officially use Email now, it will have to be a postal letter to each effected user to be legally official for their part of the consumer contract.

[BenMcr]

I don't see how the T&Cs relate to this.

Anyone who signed up for the service after the 20Mb service upgrade got a modem that was compatible.

Anyone who signed up before the upgrade, didn't sign up for a 20Mb service, they signed up for a 10Mb service, and that is what they were getting.

In fact the modems that were incompatible with the 20Mb service were issued about 3/4 years before the 20Mb upgrade.

[popper]

your point was that any customers signing up to the 20Mbit/s service were told that they may need a modem replacement to get the increased speed they were then expected to pay for.

my point is to officially inform said users would require an official notice as layed out in the VM T&C contract,simple really.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by popper

your point was that any customers signing up to the 20Mbit/s service were told that they may need a modem replacement to get the increased speed they were then expected to pay for.

No, I said that any customer signing up for the 20Mb service, once it was advertised as such GOT a modem that was compatible.

Anyone that was already on XL broadband had signed up for it as a 10Mb service, not a 20Mb one, and that they modems they had were compatible for that service.

Those customer did not require a new modem to continue to recieve the service they had signed up for, therefore a written notice was not required.

The speed increase was actually free. There was a £2 price increase on XL broadband, but that was across the board, whether the upgrade had taken place or not, so was not connected.

The upgrades didn't start till May 07. Anyone upgrading to 20Mb after that, should have been directed to the website to order the free modem replacement if required, or advised that if they kept their current equipment they would only recieve a partial speed increase.

ntl had been issuing the home 200/250 for a couple of year previous, and these are fine for the 20Mb service.

The incompatible equipment is STB broadband and home 120 modems and below, which basically hadn't been issued since 2004/5

[popper]

and your point might be valid EXCEPT they made a new increased charge and so it is officially a new package and treated as such in that pesky official T&C contract were it states we shall inform you of any price increase by official notification.

ok so its just a £2 increase, but non the less an increase thats covered in consumer law and the T&C.

and again 'should have been directed to the website to order the free modem replacement' is not an official notice.

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by popper

and your point might be valid EXCEPT they made a new increased charge and so it is officially a new package and treated as such in that pesky official T&C contract were it states we shall inform you of any price increase by official notification.

The price increase and the modem issue was in written notification (and I quote from the letter):

"We’re writing to tell you about changes to your broadband charges that will be coming into effect from 1st May 2007.

The price for Broadband Size: XL will go up from £35 to £37 a month.
From May onwards we’ll be rolling out a programme to increase your speed from 10Mb to up to 20Mb.*

*In some cases, a modem upgrade may be required in order for you to get the speed increase. Please go to www.virginmedia.com/updates
to check whether you will need a new modem. Internet connection speeds are subject to network capacity and all components working
at optimum speeds."

This was sent to all XL broadband customers in March 2007

[popper]

ohh right , so your stating that you infact did receave an official notice (quote from the letter), so in your case that is indeed currect, and VM have forfilled their part of the consumer contract with you.

the same cant be said for everyone though not perhaps even a select few that read this thread.

i didnt receave any such notification for instance..., as i already have the required cable modem (ntl250) and didnt need to be hardware upgraded,just the modem config sent and the account amount changed.

however perhaps many if not everyone else here did?, did they also receave the official notice as you did?.....

[BenMcr]

Ok, so I've said Virgin published the changes online. You said that wasn't good enough, and that written notification was required.

I said, that written notification was provided, you said that wasn't good enough and Virgin now have to prove that everyone got it?

The issue was, did Virgin do enough to advise customers that a modem upgrade was required. They sent a letter, put up a website, I'm sure there was a phone message if you phoned in.

Short of going round and knocking on everyone's door, I would argue they did.

[popper]

for the people that got sent an official notice letter, fair enough, they cant complain on this matter (theres plenty more things in the T&C to contest if they look through it though LOL) .

if VM personel hadnt taken out the electronic notification in the last update they might have had a valid case to say they did send official notification, but now they cant really prove it can they.....

well, if that letter is covered by the data protection act they may have a record of the letter so perhaps they are OK.

who knows, until some VM customer sends an official data protection act notice to the designated VM DPA officer asking for that data,using registered post as proof of said notice( or indeed, ANY and ALL data relating to them and supplyed to said user in readable form), no one really, and so here we are

[BenMcr]

but even then, contract law states you only have a certain amount of time to dispute it till you agree by default

e.g Distance Selling Regulations state you have 3 months and 7 days to say you have had not recieved any written information from the company. After that you are bound by the contract. I would expect that T&C changes are 30 days after they come into effect.

As per J3 of the Virgin terms and conditions

If you do not give us notice of cancellation within 30 days of any increase in charges or changes to the services or this agreement being notified to you or, if later, receipt of your first bill following such increase in charges, we and Virgin Media Payments will assume that you have accepted the increase in charges and the changes to the services and this agreement and you will no longer be able to cancel your services under this paragraph.

[popper]

well Mr A is better served to clarify these matters , but its clear to many people that have looked at the bank charges options they were forced to persue as they were not getting any 'in good faith' as it were.

that 'Distance Selling Regulations' and 'contract law' are not 'consumer law', and any clause in any consumer T&C contract that favours one party at the expense of the other party (not in good faith)can be deemed an invalid clause in most consumer contract cases.

but im not sure were the 'you will no longer be able to cancel your services under this paragraph' come in to this interesting thread...

the user is more likely today to contest the clause(s) in small claims court if VM give them reason to, rather than run away just as happened in the banks cases.

so perhaps its a fine line VM are playing, it almost seems VM dont think the UK user cash base are brave enough to take the US based board room on in the UK small claims court using the online webpage option now available? or generic SM claim forms at the court(see bank charges CAG website for info).

at the very least id think VM wouldnt want everyone getting fed up with the run around, and so start sending Data Protection Act notices for any and all data, that VM would then have to comply with each and every request, thats got to be a LOT of PAPER for a one off price for the users

[BenMcr]

Do you have problem with Virgin, the T&C or what?

What exactly did they do wrong? They notified customers of a need for a possibility new modem, by all legal requirments that were supposed to. Some customers didn't get it. How is that Virgin doing wrong?.

They put it on the customer section of their own website. If people choose not to look at it, Virgin cannot force them to (however when a price on it is 50p different that the one they are paying, apparently everyone looks at it)

How you would you have handled it?

As soon as any customer asks why they are not getting the speed they should, Virgin say 'oh look you need a new modem, here is one for free'. How is that not doing the right thing?

The T&Cs don't favour one party over the other. The Virgin T&Cs give both parties the right to cancel the services with 30 days notice. It even says, you can cancel after the 30 days, if that is when you get the bill. How is that favouring Virgin over the customer?

The Distance Selling Regulations are Consumer Law as they come from the 'Office of Fair Trading', which are the same people who are looking at the bank charges (as you brought it up)

Even if you could convince Virgin that you hadn't been informed of the need for a new modem you are looking at a maximum of £18 in compensation.

BB XL 10Mb service = £35 per month. BB XL 20Mb Service = £37 per month. So it is a difference of £2 per month.

It's been 9 months since the upgrades started. Total £18