Legal action taken against Virgin Media throttling practices - Page 3

Martyn · 10-03-2009, 20:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by idontpirate

I know they're tight but dont you think their a bit busy at the moment. Rolling out 50meg and upgrading alot of stuff anyways will most likely fix your problems if/when it does come to your area. It uses new technology.

All my equipment (Except modem) is NTL equipment. The box on my wall, the cables from my house to the green cabinet.

The one thing i can suggest is make sure you have the newest modem and dont stop bugging VM until they give you one.

Go to start > run > cmd > then type this
tracert bbc.co.uk

PM me the results

Microsoft Windows [Version 6.0.6001]
Copyright (c) 2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
C:\Users\Martyn>tracert bbc.co.uk
Tracing route to bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.138]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 2 ms 2 ms 2 ms cpc2-ashf1-0-0-cust212.asfd.cable.ntl.com [80.6.
68.213]
2 17 ms 7 ms 103 ms 10.245.240.1
3 11 ms 9 ms 10 ms asfd-t2cam1-a-ge92.network.virginmedia.net [80.3
.98.1]
4 11 ms 15 ms 8 ms asfd-t3core-1a-ge-010-0.network.virginmedia.net
[195.182.174.41]
5 133 ms 10 ms 10 ms pop-bb-a-ge-410-0.network.virginmedia.net [212.4
3.163.30]
6 14 ms 12 ms 22 ms nth-bb-b-as3-0.network.virginmedia.net [213.105.
172.13]
7 * * * Request timed out.
8 16 ms 23 ms 116 ms pos6-1.rt0.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.239.237]
9 16 ms 75 ms 16 ms 212.58.238.129
10 18 ms 16 ms 112 ms virtual-vip.thdo.bbc.co.uk [212.58.224.138]
Trace complete.
C:\Users\Martyn>

idontpirate · 10-03-2009, 20:53

2 17 ms 7 ms 103 ms 10.245.240.1

This if im correct is part of the VM network. This may be why you have problems with the high latency meaning you cant get the full service speed. Ping it a few more times if you feel like it, see what you get.
ping -n 20 10.245.240.1

Martyn · 10-03-2009, 21:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by idontpirate

2 17 ms 7 ms 103 ms 10.245.240.1

This if im correct is part of the VM network. This may be why you have problems with the high latency meaning you cant get the full service speed. Ping it a few more times if you feel like it, see what you get.
ping -n 20 10.245.240.1

C:\Users\Martyn>ping -n 20 10.245.240.1
Pinging 10.245.240.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 10.245.240.1:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 0, Lost = 20 (100% loss),

idontpirate · 10-03-2009, 21:08

Weird o_O contact VM and ask if they have oversold in your area. only way to find out. although if they say "LOL WE OVERSOLD BUT UPGRADE AND U CN GET RELI FAST SPEEDZ" just hang up

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martyn

C:\Users\Martyn>ping -n 20 10.245.240.1
Pinging 10.245.240.1 with 32 bytes of data:
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Request timed out.
Ping statistics for 10.245.240.1:
Packets: Sent = 20, Received = 0, Lost = 20 (100% loss),

Milambar · 10-03-2009, 22:20

It will be interesting to see how this progresses, but I can't see the OP getting very far. Not because VM have covered their legal arse (my lawyer friend in America tells me that contracts which allow one party to vary the terms and conditons are on "shaky ground", and relies on one party having a larger legal budget than the other), but purely because VM have a larger legal budget than the OP.

BenMcr · 10-03-2009, 22:32

The contract allows Virgin to vary the terms - however conversly if Virgin DO vary the terms and a customer doesn't wish to accept them, they have a right to cancel without penalty - as is stated in the T&Cs

If Virgin did not allow this THEN it would be shakey ground

So in regards to the OP, he had apportunity when Virgin's T&Cs were introduced in Feb 2007 to decide that he did not wish to abide by them.

Once however, he continued with services past the 30 days get out clause then the terms became part of his contract, including the bit about being able to manage the connection

---------- Post added at 23:32 ---------- Previous post was at 23:22 ----------

Oh and I just found this in the Telewest terms

34. Telewest reserves the right to restrict access to the Service and to impose data traffic restrictions at its discretion, in order to implement new facilities, allow data retrieval and maintain Service levels

broadbandking · 10-03-2009, 22:46

Shame we are no longer Telewest o the good ol days

BenMcr · 10-03-2009, 22:47

Either way - similar terms have been there since the Telewest days - so for the OP to say that it's VM is not legally correct

Turkey Machine · 10-03-2009, 22:53

Telewest currently no longer exists as a residential broadband provider, as they are now a part of Virgin Media, so technically they do!

BenMcr · 10-03-2009, 22:54

I know, but the way the OP is suggesting it is only VM that introduced the terms about managing the nework. They didn't

Why did the OP not take Telewest to court over clause 34 in their terms?

broadbandking · 10-03-2009, 22:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by BenMcr

I know, but the way the OP is suggesting it is only VM that introduced the terms about managing the nework. They didn't

Why did the OP not take Telewest to court over clause 34 in their terms?

Telewest never really did anything about high users just had the terms there to keep people happy, Telewest was a very good ISP I never had a speed issue with them, unlike Virgin

BenMcr · 10-03-2009, 23:00

That's not the point. The OP is trying to sue VM by saying that the term has been introduced and is detrimental to his service.

The clause has been in the Telewest terms from 12/06/2001.

Whether the company chooses to take advantage of that clause is another matter.

The OP chose to accept the Telewest terms and then the Virgin Media terms by continuing to be a customer.

The Traffic Managment has been in place for almost 2 years now - why did he not take VM to court earlier?

broadbandking · 10-03-2009, 23:03

Never said it was the point Ben, whilst I see your point and the fact that you have outlined I understand the OP has no grouns to stand on I do wish him luck, because I can see Virgin really ****ing things up because they have a monopoly in the cable business and feel they can do whatever they feel like.

Mike_A · 10-03-2009, 23:05

Interesting replies. Well, the on-topic ones. Please keep them coming for I welcome every fraction of input.

Some assumptions being made. Perhaps I should have mentioned that not only do I have considerable experience of representing in court but I have taken on much bigger players than Virgin Media. The government, for example, when I cut through debate by identifying the idea of, wrote and submitted a proposed bill which is now the Act of Parliament governing all late payment of business debt. I do not care about the size of the other side's wallets or the trickery they get up to, as very senior litigation practitioners have discovered.

What I care about is honesty and fairness.

Here, Virgin Media have bungled. They operate a practice knowingly and deliberately unfair to their clients, who they have sold to in the knowledge that their equipment cannot handle what they profess to sell (also fraud), and they take away what the client has paid for when in all fairness they should rebate pro-rata for service withheld.

To the ordinary person, the situation is wholly inequitable and unlawful. However, on a commercial basis, the longer they can get away with it the greater their income. That is why this case will soon be converted to a class action. Indeed, anyone here may join it (expense guestimate between Ã‚Â£10-25 for paperwork and court lodgements). I should emphasise I am not touting - the subject seems to be of common interest to many here. It is akin to banks making excessive charges for what they do (I know, I know: they were eventually taken to task and forced to repay too).

As I mentioned, I welcome feedback. The references to VMs contract and how they implement it are wrong in law though. A contract is a treatise between two agreeing parties and must be fair and reflect what the parties intended. All but the most profoundly gentle or unaware people would not accept parts of an agreed service being withheld for no good reason or an excuse equivalent to "we're sorry, we've done too much business, we remove some of your service at the most important times, and we will continue to charge the same rate".

The matter is simple: if they vary the contract then a quid-pro-quo must be provided.

Welshchris · 10-03-2009, 23:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by leexgx

you want cable to do monthy download caps (over my dead body) like bt or other ISPs do that is very Bad idea i can download more in 1 day then what i can in 1 month on cable even with the throttling in place

quite sure thay have in there terms about throttling or something close to it

NTL before they became Virgin used to do Monthly caps and i found it a far better and fairer way.