cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Trading Standards

N/A

Trading Standards

Has anyone tried getting trading standards onto these bandwidth limits?

I signed up based on completely unlimited bandwidth. Thats what the adverts said. Thats what the terms and conditions said. Whether or not this is a valid business model for plusnet is nothing to do with me. MacDonalds don't complain to me that they can't make a burger for 99p etc.

Now I get only 15Gb, and start getting restricted after 10Gb.

Thats not what I agreed with Plus Net when I joined up?

John.
127 REPLIES
JonathanW
Grafter
Posts: 2,648
Registered: 02-10-2007

Trading Standards

None of the packages were advertised as unlimited when you signed up, especially not the Premier package which it seems you are on from your post.

The traffic management that is in place now, and the changes that will be made during April as part of the product refresh, are covered by the AUP which you agreed to during the signup process.
N/A

Trading Standards

Hi and welcome to the forums.

At the risk of going over old ground, Plus net did not sell unlimited products or mention the word unlimited on any of its products since the latter end of 2004.

There seems to have been a misunderstanding of the product descriptions in use, but certainly by the time of your join date, unlimited was not an option and we had already seen the move towards sustainable use and limitations, in fact we were already 6 months down the road from the first move towards introducing sustainable usage.

Many have talked about and to trading Standards since November 2004. TBH I have yet to see or hear of anyone having much or any success.

The terms and conditions, as amended, which we all agreed to in September 2005, cover all the bases, so whilst not an expert in these things, by any stretch of the imagination, I believe you may just be out of luck.
N/A

Trading Standards

PlusNet are well and truly covered in terms of the legalities. I'm really surprised that people still bring it up.

The levels of problems, miscommunication, customer support (and customer dissatisfaction) may be of interest to a consumer group, but legally there is nothing that anyone can do, even if all our connections suddenly died and didn't come back for a week. (We as customers do not have any guarantee or legal entitlement to any levels of bandwidth, uptime or well... anything).

Oh, I should point out that this is partially due to the fact that BTW do not offer ISP's any guarantees or SLA's for home accounts... AFAIK.
N/A

Trading Standards

Well, I'm utterly, utterly disappointed with this scam. What's more, they had the audacity to tell me it's an "UPgrade".

I'd be very interested to hear when Plusnet expect to be able to offer me a single improvement to justify the word upgrade. As it is, all I can see are several downgrades to my service.

Are Plusnet really so well covered legally? English civil law is based largely on fairness rather than the letter of the law, so there are things like "unfair contracts" and "changes to the status quo" which may render their changes unworkable to anyone who objects.

I run my own business and I can tell you, it's a lot harder to win new customers than it is to keep the old ones, so what in the world are they doing trying to rid the existing customers by taking away the very reasons they signed up?

It's an utter disgrace and a hugely short-sighted, ametuerish practice. Even AOL would be an improvement.
Saturn
Grafter
Posts: 732
Registered: 30-07-2007

Trading Standards

Quote
Hi and welcome to the forums.


The terms and conditions, as amended, which we all agreed to in September 2005..........


I don't think so. Some disagreed and left PN and some disagreed but didn't push the point to be invited to leave by PN. Although PN said they would regard silence as agreement, some legal advice obtained by another customer at the time suggested the strategy by PN had dubious legal basis. Whether it would be easy or difficult to challenge the position is a different matter, but to say we all agreed is wrong.
ceridwen
Grafter
Posts: 937
Registered: 14-10-2007

Trading Standards

As has been pointed out at the time you joined (July 2005) the premier products were not advertised as unlimited.

However, PN did not advertise any limits at the time but not advertising limits is not the same as advertising unlimited.

Where PN may be on more shakey ground re trading standards would be:

Taking money for products when they are unable to provide them (e.g. the 4Mb and 8Mb accounts) - we are yet to see how they advertise the new Option 2 and Option 3 products to see if they repeat this.

either
breaching their own T&Cs during Sept 2005 - January 2006 by introducing changes to the Agreemeny without the notice required by clause 24 (How this Agreement can be changed)
or
Misrepresenting the new T&Cs introduced last August by claiming that they reinforced PN's commitment to giving reasonable notice of any changes

- it looks like PN might be improving on this in the way they have introduced the product refresh though.

Only applying clause 23.5 (If you have paid any Charges for a period after the end of the Agreement we will either repay it or put it towards any money you owe us) to migrations and not to cancellations - last I heard was that the PUG was pressing PN on clarification on this one.

Matthew
shellsong
Grafter
Posts: 2,191
Registered: 03-08-2007

Trading Standards

Although at the time xiasma joined the Premier product was not advertised as contended (edit: Shockedops: I meant to say unlimited not contended), PlusNet had just decided to withdraw the FUP without bringing it into operation and had stated quite categorically that what would control usage was contention and I for one was happy to go along with that after studying what this meant..

This was the next best thing to "unlimited" since, allegedly, the only limit was the number of customers competing for the bandwidth at any given time and that couldn't be worse than 30:1 or 67Kbps at peak times could it, since that was PlusNet's promised worse case scenario?

The answer is history!
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,438
Thanks: 686
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

Trading Standards

Quote
Although at the time xiasma joined the Premier product was not advertised as contended

Although unlimited did appear for a very short time, I am certain that all ADSL products have always been described as contended.
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)
N/A

Trading Standards

oh it's that old chestnut again. Why do plusnet keep hiding behind the 'we didn't advertise it as unlimited since blah blah blah'? I signed up in April 2005 to an unlimited product whatever the views from PN. Now what do we have - a product that can hardly even be called 'plus' let alone 'premier'. I tell you what. Given the things we've put up with 't&cs', 8am to 4pm, 8am to midnight, dropouts, gaming problems shall we start a poll for the new names of plusnets products? I really don;t think plus and premier are appropriate anymore. Or maybe a CS member would like to tell me what's premier about getting restricted after 10gb a month peak time. And I thought wanadoo used to be a joke! Silly me.
shellsong
Grafter
Posts: 2,191
Registered: 03-08-2007

Trading Standards

Please note my edit of my slipup above that elvin picked up on!-- Apart from that, what I said applies!
N/A

Trading Standards

Mine was advertised as Unlimited when I joined, and I am sure plusnet will confirm this.

Anyone know any good ISPs? - I damn sure need one.

I would get more service and speed from AOL! - And they suck.
N/A

Trading Standards

It certainly seems that many of us were under the impression that we were signing up to UNLIMITED use, regardless of the exact wording (which I'll dig out later). So it seems we may have been deliberately mislead or that plusnet did intend to offer unlimited use.

Personally, I've no interest if file sharing utilities except to back up my important files to my brother's computer some 60 miles away, but I'll use my 15 - sorry 10gb of file transfer from MSDN within days of the month start. As I said, an utterly unprofessional decision and I struggle to see why PN feel obliged to impose it on existing, rather than only new subscribers.
N/A

Trading Standards

Quote
It certainly seems that many of us were under the impression that we were signing up to UNLIMITED use, regardless of the exact wording (which I'll dig out later)..


Somewhat irrelevant...... that all changed when the new Terms and Conditions came out 16th Sept 2005 which like it or not the fact you are still here indicates that you agreed to them.... otherwise I would be able to quote the T&C's that I agreed to in 2002.
N/A

Trading Standards

....