cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Been puzzling me

N/A

Been puzzling me

without starting a flame war, it has been bugging me for ages about the fact that i signed up for an unlimited account and then hearing about the usage emails been sent.

It has been quoted by plus that they sold the account as unlimited for a brief spell but this was a mistake

I have just come across this

PlusNet ADSL residential services

Grades of service

Name
Upstream
Downstream
Features

Broadband Home Lite 512 K / 1 Mb / 2 Mb
250 Kbps
Choice of 512; 1 and 2 Mbps
Usage based plan; 1 GB data transfer; 1 static IP address; three domain names; unlimited email accounts; 250 MB web space; contention ratio 50:1

Broadband Home Premier 512 K
250 Kbps
512 Kbps
Unlimited usage; 1 static IP address; three domain names; unlimited email accounts; 250 MB web space; contention ratio 50:1

Broadband Home Premier 1 Mb
250 Kbps
1 Mbps
Unlimited usage; 1 static IP address; three domain names; unlimited email accounts; 250 MB web space; contention ratio 50:1

Broadband Home Premier 2 Mb
250 Kbps
2 Mbps
Unlimited usage; 1 static IP address; three domain names; unlimited email accounts; 250 MB web space; contention ratio 50:1

nowhere can i see the words or implication of approx 100gb per month, i was categorically told there was no limits on my account.


http://www.point-topic.com/content/ukplus/email%20archive/emailtest01.htm

so how can a company so big deny this, surely they must have sent the press release or at the least confirmed these details

what i find more amazing is the dates and facts

PlusNet is an ISP, which offers dial up and broadband services in the UK. It was established in 1997. PlusNet also offers its Internet services via the ‘Free-Online’ and ‘Force9’ brands. Its total broadband subscribers increased from 77,657 as of 30 Sep 2004 to 89,825 as of 31 Dec 2004.
13 REPLIES
N/A

Been puzzling me

They havn't allways denied it...
read the link in my sig Wink
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

Been puzzling me

Thanks for pointing that out, I've passed it up the chain so we can ensure they are provided with our latest product details.
N/A

Been puzzling me

...meanwhile a load more mugs sign up for what they have been told, yet again, is an "unlimited" service. What do you tell them when you've taken their money and they discover the PlusNet party line that no products are sold as "unlimited"? Can they get full refunds, including of their BT charges?

Simon
N/A

Been puzzling me

I've just signed up. You're calling me a mug?
N/A

Been puzzling me

thy then tell them it cost them money to leave lol
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

Been puzzling me

Simon, you know as well as I do that we can't be responsible for every single bit of information on the Internet about us. If we or anyone else sees anything that is clearly incorrect then we will ask them to put it right.
N/A

Been puzzling me

It used to be correct though, Dave, didn't it?

Simon
N/A

Been puzzling me

"Unlimited usage" is what you advertise....but it's not the product you are providing. This is a BLATANT mis-representation of service, which is not fit for the purpose it was sold for.

Thanks anyway Dave - 2005s most annoying cunstomer support agent.
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

Been puzzling me

Lets not start that old chestnut again.

For any newcomers that missed the fiasco of the chesterfield 4 and the bannings etc etc when FUP was announced and the whole unlimited debate reigned - Ill summarise:

o The product was advertised as unlimited. Numerous dredgings of cache's around the planet proved that beyond doubt.

o PN admitted that it was advertised as unlimited for a period of time.

o The T's & C's state that they can alter the product with 30 days notice, they have.

o The time frame betwen the latest proven advertising of "unlimited" and the proposal of the FUP was so short that only a handful of customers may have been subject to charging if they had decided to leave due to this. (i.e. almost a 12 month gap).

o As far as we are aware it does not state anywhere in Plusnet advertising now that the product is unlimited.

Another point that is certain, is that should this whole issue be brought up again, it will no doubt lead to many of the newer members being drawn into a debate which I think we were all glad to see the back of eventually, even those of us that were the ones who cried foul the loudest. (that includes myself).

It will lead to bannings, and chaos. The whole wasit or wasnt it unlimited debate has now transformed into a "well what is the cap then" - which in my view is a much more valid point.

Appologies if this upsets or angers anyone, but even as a "vocal one" I wouldn't want to see a return to those days.
N/A

Been puzzling me

Just a bit of a history lesson to show where all the present troubles started...

Simon
N/A

Been puzzling me

..
Metalguru
Grafter
Posts: 791
Registered: 04-08-2007

Been puzzling me

Hey Chesterfield.

I know you got a yellow card back then so this probably won't be what you want to hear .

But (IMHO) I thought +Net handled that matter, better than they are now handling these present issues. Not great mind you, but I don't recall any blatant lies back then. Or am I wrong ?
Community Veteran
Posts: 2,322
Registered: 01-08-2007

Been puzzling me

Simon, I have to admit I did chuckle when I read:

Quote
It used to be correct though, Dave, didn't it?


I personally think that many matters are not handled to well by PN, but over recent days my perception has changed. The PN staff on here are having to answer questions that they are not in a position to do well.

It would appear from a recent email quoted on another thread, that at least one PN employee empathises with the position of the customers, however I suspect I would be close to the mark if I suggest that he would never say so publicly for fear of disciplinary action.

It would then seem that our questioning need to be directed at a person or persons that actually have the authority to change the policies being employed.

Dave and others at PN may say one thing, and then say onther a few days later, but we all know that the decisions being made are not of their making.

In the thread I reffer to, I suggested that a possibility would be for a board member to visit the forums, perhaps in a thread with restricted posting ability, so they did not get swamped by users trying to get their 2p in.

I don' t think some of the PN staff have done themselves any favours in some of their postings, but I feel that it is the responsibility of the board to clear up the latest round of PR disasters, and not the support agents which are ultimatley a sheild for the senior staff.