inbox seems to have been emptied (thunderbird, imap)

[#1]

My apologies, I was uncertain as I sort of implied. The link is :-

http://portal.plus.net/info2/legal/tandc_limited/aup.html

It doesn't say archived or anything like that, and as there is no date on the page - it can infer current. There is no date of publication on the newer page either. The copyright notice at the bottom is as standard "fetched" reference/

Anyway, the page should be removed.

[#2]

Sorry, Kevin, I knew yours was the current position - my comment was aimed at users who don't refer to that information, but instead rely on Google &c to 'find' it.

[#3]

---

wrote:
https://www.plus.net/help/legal/acceptable-use-policy/ - see section 9 for the email FUP.

---

Again, sorry for the outdated link.

The thing is, my comment about removal of all the OP's email is still relevant. Those T&Cs say the excess (above 1GB) may be removed after 30 days, not the whole lot. This sort of makes IMAP access an issue. I wonder how many other users lose emails due to IMAP access (or indeed pop leaving messages on server), expecting them all to be there. Naturally they've all read the T&Cs ...

I feel that if the account has reached various sizes, then a system email should be sent warning the user. For example say 25% left, then 10% left. It is then down to the user to remove/backup stuff they want to keep.

[#4]

---

@jelv wrote:

---

---

wrote:

I might be a bit simple, but should you only get current FUP's or data on anything with a 'legal' position from the current link on the website of ANY organisation? Some (e.g PayPal) make major changes on a fairly regular basis.

---

 No because generally the conditions apply that were in force when you entered the contract. If you change product or re-contract the current conditions then apply. If Plusnet do impose a retrospective change the user must be given the option to leave at no cost.

---

@jelv

I understand that and AFAIK that is what happens.

[#5]

---

@SpinDryer wrote:

My apologies, I was uncertain as I sort of implied. The link is :-

http://portal.plus.net/info2/legal/tandc_limited/aup.html

It doesn't say archived or anything like that, and as there is no date on the page - it can infer current. There is no date of publication on the newer page either. The copyright notice at the bottom is as standard "fetched" reference/

Anyway, the page should be removed.

---

Agreed ... how did you NAVIGATE to the link ... or was it found from a Google search?

The thing is, my comment about removal of all the OP's email is still relevant. Those T&Cs say the excess (above 1GB) may be removed after 30 days, not the whole lot.

This sort of makes IMAP access an issue.

I feel that if the account has reached various sizes, then a system email should be sent warning the user. For example say 25% left, then 10% left. It is then down to the user to remove/backup stuff they want to keep.

It does indeed say ABOVE, but I guess that is technically difficult to implement - where do you cull - which of several mailboxs contributing to the total usage is to be culled?  An answer is not being sought here.

IMAP - yes when things go wrong bad workmen will blame their tools.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with IMAP, it is people's behaviours in using it which are flawed.  There is a FUP and when it is breached there are at least 3 email notices sent at least 7 days apart before action is taken, some 7 days after the 3rd warning (total warning period being 30 days). 

Now if people don't read those emails and act ... is that the fault of IMAP?  No!

Superuser citation

This topic has been cited by one of the Superusers; the purpose of which is to provide a note for information which might help to focus continued discussion (but might not result in a staff response).

[#6]

Townman, sorry but you've effectively made an assumption that the OP didn't read the FUP emails. They haven't said this, so clarification is needed to see if they saw them.

Again, they say the whole lot of their emails were removed, so it is relevant to the discussion. Where you cull doesn't mean cull everything.

The link was found by a Google search. A lot of ISPs have outdated details of various topics when searching. That is bad housekeeping by the isp web teams. Archiving to their intranet is fine, but remove from public view in a timely manner.

[#7]

Given the scenario, it is a fair conclusion that...

1. The mail boxes have been archived
2. The user has not taken remedial action to avoid archiving
3. The user might not have read the emails
4. The user might not have seen the emails
5. The user might not be monitoring the designated email address to which Plusnet sends account notices

Archiving does not happen out of the blue.  In the several cases where one or another of my referral accounts reports that their emails have vanished, I have always been able to point them to the warning emails ... which they confirm they ignored.

In spite of the precise wording of the FUP, it is simply not technically practical to cull down to 1GB ... without taking some insight into the user's account ... which some would site as a DPA / privacy issue.

[#8]

Hopefully the OP can pop back and give a few more details, so I do agree with your points - particularly 3. Some folk probably see service emails and ignore them, and depending on how they're written, might even seem to the user as phish/scams!

In my view, it is inherently wrong in deleting the whole account. There is no need to read any of the emails, surely it can be done on dates. Gmail spam folder is "rolling deleted" based on date

[#9]

Thanks @Townman - feels like a good idea.

@JonoH / @LouisaMartin can you pick this up & review how simple it would be? I've definitely seen it in other Lithium instances.

[#10]

Hi everyone

thanks for alld the comments.

I've just checked and PN have recovered the mail (via webmail at least, will check at home later)

I'll do some archiving tonight, but I dont recall any emails about mailbox space at all.  We've had them several times over the last decade or so & each time I have acted & trimmed it down, which was why I was surprised that I havent seen anything on either the home email or the other one that picks up PN emails

thanks

Richard

[#11]

@PlusnetLiam,

Has this got attached to the wrong topic? This one is about the practice of archiving the whole of a users mail store when the FUP is exceeded. The FUP suggests an action which is not practical - that is to part archive down to the FUP limit.

[#12]

@Townman

I assume its a reply to the wrong thread. I'll ask him what he meant when he passes next  

[#13]

Nope - right thread @JonoH & @Townman - should've quoted it. Apologies. 

It was in reference to your suggestion of a different styling for Archive material/content to make it clear Kevin. 

[#14]

---

wrote:

It was in reference to your suggestion of a different styling for Archive material/content to make it clear Kevin. 

---

So were the OPs emails deleted due to the FUP being broken? AFAIK that has yet to be explained.

If it was, then the T&Cs need to be amended and say so, unless something is done to rolling delete "old date" emails

[#15 · Accepted solution]

@gunsmoke2 From what I can see we've fixed this now?

Let us know if you're still having issues.