100M : Will VM ever match BT's upload speeds?

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

18 month contracts aren't legally binding.

Yes they are, where on earth did you get that idea from?

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Yes they are, where on earth did you get that idea from?

No they aren't Ben. The companies involved tell people that they are, but the truth is that they can't legally enforce it. And I'm sure that the companies also tell their staff that they are legally binding, which would explain your view.

Unfortunately many big companies think that their policies are above the law. As someone who runs a consumer advice website, I see this all the time.

Someone challenged one of the mobile companies over it a year or two ago.

[hjf288]

Elaborate please.. I'd like to get off o2 since the signal is absolutely pants in my house, pretty much have to lean my head out the window to talk or go outside..

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by hjf288

Elaborate please.. I'd like to get off o2 since the signal is absolutely pants in my house, pretty much have to lean my head out the window to talk or go outside..

Contact Trading Standards

[BenMcr]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Someone challenged one of the mobile companies over it a year or two ago.

Link?

Also if anything over 12 month is not legally binding, why did the EU (and OFCOM) take time out to only specifically ban contracts over 24 months
http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/eu-b...fect-50003718/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011...year-contracts

therefore implying anything up to 24 months is quite legal and valid

I am aware that as part of that ruling 12 month contracts must also be offered, but I can't find anything to say that's the only thing that is actually legal

[qasdfdsaq]

Originally Posted by BenMcr

Yes they are

I agree.

---------- Post added at 10:26 ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 ----------

Originally Posted by BenMcr

therefore implying anything up to 24 months is quite legal and valid

I am aware that as part of that ruling 12 month contracts must also be offered, but I can't find anything to say that's the only thing that is actually legal

At the basic level contracts of any length can be legal and valid. Contracts of over 24 months in the communications industry tend to be unfair (Unfair terms in contracts legislation) and detrimental to consumer interests, but not necessarily so.

B2B mobile and fixed line contracts frequently still operate on 24 or 36-month minimum terms. If >24 month MT contracts weren't legal, BT and VM wouldn't be operating some of their most lucrative business on them.

[Chrysalis]

I am surprised not much fuss has been made over this, we now in a era where to get modern broadband you have to commit to 18 months. (even small BT resellers cant do monthly now due to openreach been 18 months) yet the most common length of term for rented property is 6 months. So basically if someone wants FTTC or cable they need to commit to 3x the length of their tenancy agreement and hope they dont have the landlord not renewing.

I am still of the opinion if the companies had faith in their own products they wouldnt need to have such long contracts, I can udnerstand giving discounts with longer contracts but to have no short term ones available at all is bad.

[kwikbreaks]

I think the long contracts reflect the fact that most ISPs absorb setup costs and dish out free routers. There are usually reduced/free periods and cashback site payments too. My first year on O2 cost me £18. There should be paid install + own equipment options but the ISPs like to pretty much force their free offerings down everyone's throats because then they can script support for it and use cheap minimally trained (and paid) staff on the phones.

[qasdfdsaq]

Most FTTC ISPs actually don't absorb setup costs, BT Infinity being the notable exception. Yet despite £60-100+ setup costs and no free router on some providers you're still stuck with the Openreach minimum term. Most ISPs there also charge you to move your service to a new address - due to Openreach charging them for the same, again BT being the notable exception

[telfordcable]

Virgin Media won't stand a chance to get 20 Meg upload, they won't do it. Only Sky and BT will do it. If BT or Sky FTTC is available to me then I off to Sky FTTC and bye bye as I don't mind 80/20 as it far better than 100/5 with virgin media (crap upload)

[APS]

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Actually none of the speed is guaranteed over the wider internet, but is guaranteed on the Openreach fibre leg.

Are you saying they should guarantee the speed for a given sync rate? In general I believe they do not guarantee the sync rate, hence the need for the presales speed tester, which takes into account distance to the nearest cabinet and reports a lower than ideal speed. (Something which should not be a problem with VM due to the better quality cable for instance.)

Originally Posted by qasdfdsaq

Note that there are a few teething problems on the 80/20 service, in particular, some people are being capped at 10mbps upload due to a systems error. This usually solves itself over the first few days with a few modem and router reboots. Unfortunately BT don't let you see your sync speed, though Sky do, and Sky also provide a different service level over the same infrastructure....

First I believe if you use the BT test site (http://speedtester.bt.com/) the diagnostic option for the test results shows your sync speed and your performance against it. I am not sure where that info comes from? For us it reports the 20 Mb upload speed and the low performance in comparison to it.

I did not mention before, that although our service is carried over BT Openreach, we bought the service through Zen. They did not mention the possibility of a BT bug, I think after a couple of test power cycles on the BT modem, I will probe them as to whether this bug might be affecting me.

[kwikbreaks]

Zen always had a good reputation for support. If you think the performance is down on what it should be then give them a call - if the modem might need rebooting to clear the issue and they have heard that then they'll just ask you to do it even if you already have.

[AdamD]

I must admit, I really don't understand how a minimum 18 month contract is allowed.

[APS]

Originally Posted by kwikbreaks

Zen always had a good reputation for support. If you think the performance is down on what it should be then give them a call - if the modem might need rebooting to clear the issue and they have heard that then they'll just ask you to do it even if you already have.

I have already complained to Zen and tried several reboots soon after the install. Contrary to earlier posts in this thread about speed guarantees their tech support said:

". In relation to your upstream result, I would consider this to be a 'normal' level of upstream bandwidth. Though your modem is in sync at 80/20, it may be that the bandwidth available at the exchange is reducing your own throughput due to other fibre users and the available level of data bandwidth to all customer at the exchange. "
AND

"In relation to the upstream speeds achieved being officially a problem, BT have no official performance expectations for upstream, and so it does not fall into a fault condition unless upstream throughput was hitting service impacting levels, somewhere around 0.2meg upstream would be an estimate of this."

I will try some reboots and do more tests at quiet times of the day (PC connected directly to BT Openreach via PPPoE so no router issue) then get back onto them if the speed is no better.

[kwikbreaks]

If you don't want to have one look elsewhere.

The 18 month contract doesn't commit you to use the service of course - it just commits you to pay for it. If I got tied into a contract I wanted out of I would seriously abuse the service. That's exactly what I did when I wanted out of UKOnline 3 months early because their IWF filter was breaking access to other services. They wouldn't oblige so I ran a crawler for http://www.majestic12.co.uk/ 24x7 at over 3TB a month for the final 3 months. They didn't bat an eyelid - now that was an unlimited connection.