Dishonest advertising by BT is a scam I say.
I’m looking for a broadband provider, but I got fed up of the dishonest “unlimited” claims by broadband providers which are anything but when you read the small print. So I thought I would do something about it.
This is the complaint I made. If anyone else is as fed up of this sort of sleaze, do what I did and contact http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/
BT are claiming to offer “Unlimited” Broadband.
They are not. Hidden away is a “Fair Use Policy” which makes it clear that it is not unlimited use. I have been unable to find on their site any information the actual quantity of download that is regarded as “fair use”.
To my mind this is dishonest. They should specify an honest limit. I have not entered into a contract with them for this reason.
Other Broadband providers seem to have almost the exact same policy, which suggests collusion or a cartel operating.
I believe this should be looked into and that they should not get off with dishonest advertising.retro83Free Member
Good for you, they are cheeky bastards.
I don’t see how this is dishonest. It’s in their t&cs. When you visit the site it clearly states that there is a fair usage policy.
It states that if you select options 1 or 2, you get limited bandwidth, and only option 3 is unlimited. All plans will undergo traffic management at certain times.
Seems fair enough to me.
Fair to say ‘Unlimited’ when it clearly is not unlimited?
What if I wanted to use my broadband package to host a high traffic site using their ‘unlimited’ package?LongarmedmonkeyFull Member
I think unfair would be downloading movies 24/7 or spamming the entire world. But perhaps I am a little naive.
It would be like saying ‘get this car for free*’
*But it isn’t free because, like, you have to pay for it you see.
You’ll probably find if you read the terms and conditions you’re not allowed to host your own ftp or web servers. They’ll make it harder to do this by not providing you with a static IP address
That said, my new home hub can barely hold a wifi connection and over the phone I was explicitly told to expect around 6mbs for my address even though I was paying for 8mbs which I thought was fair enough – yet I only get 2mb (ethernet cable not wifi which isn’t working)
Does no one read the small print any more?!
Every ADSL package will advertise it’s speed as “up to” with a variety of disclaimers saying that you wont get this speed because you live to far away, to close to, at the wrong angle to, to high up, to low down to the exchange that you wont get maximum speed.
Read the small print!
Can’t see the problem as its a ‘don’t take the piss’ clause inserted as there is always some people who do…same as ‘all you can eat buffets’ where they’ll be some person eating the restaurant out of food!
have been unable to find on their site any information the actual quantity of download that is regarded as “fair use”.
I’d imagine because if you set say a 100Gb download limit per month, you’d get people downloading 99.9Gb every month so its probably done case by case.
….I’d imagine because if you set say a 100Gb download limit per month, you’d get people downloading 99.9Gb every month so its probably done case by case.
I have no problem if they set a quantity. Unlimited means just that, and if they do not wish to provide unlimited, they should set a quantity.
At the moment they are getting away with advertising a service that they do not have sufficient resources to provide. Wasn’t there a case in UK where some company offered a prize they could not afford and were made to provide it?
If you are taking money to provide something, then you have no excuse for not providing it.
If you are paying for 100Gb a month then what is wrong with downloading it?
Oh, and I read the small print, that’s how I realised it was a scam.
just because it is in the small print doesn’t make it “legal, decent and honest”matt_outandaboutFull Member
Exactly – banks charges were in small print, we all put up with them until some people had the balls to say ‘enough, thats not fair’, and now the courts agree.
over the phone I was explicitly told to expect around 6mbs for my address even though I was paying for 8mbs
I understand your rather sh**tily put point – but if you reread what I said, I didn’t assume I’d get maximum speed.
In fact, BT chose to test my line there and then and told me to expect 6MBs out of a possible 8MBs
Bit different if you ask me!WackoAKFree Member
epicyclo – most ISP’s have this clause, not just BT.
So who has actually been affected by a “fair use policy”?
WackoAK – Member
epicyclo – most ISP’s have this clause, not just BT.
I know, that’s why I said to Fair Trading that there may be collusion between the providers, or a cartel. (There are colossal fines for that, by the way)
Just because they are all being sly doesn’t make it right or acceptable.cinnamon_girlFull Member
BT are changing their t’s and c’s for Broadband. Basically if you change providers and don’t use migration process or leave BT, the amount you pay has increased from £18.11 to £25.
I find these telecoms companies are devoid of morals and common decency.RudeBoyFree Member
(Notices thread about how bastard BT are. Gets wound up. Needs to take Valium to calm down)
BT are utter, utter *****. The Worst Company In The World.
I had over a year of grief with them. ‘Phone calls to ‘Customer Service’, on a regular basis. ‘Phone calls which could take over an hour, before I actually got to speak to anyone. And when I did, they would be incapable of addressing any issue, that was not on their script.
Sorry, but they are shit. **** their T+C’s; I sacked them off, for failing to provide a service as advertised. ‘Up to 8 meg’. I was lucky if I got up to 800k. And they deliberately throttled all P2P services (I live near Canary Wharf, and BT throttle their residential customers, to provide their business customers with more bandwidth. BT engineer told me this). So, no iPlayer, etc.
Lying, cheating, no-good robbing bastards.
They tried to have me over for about £600 or so, when I told them to get fecked, and switched ISPs. I told them I’d be more than happy to see them in court (I had more than enough proof they weren’t giving me a satisfactory service). Et Viola, all ‘charges’ dropped, and I even got a cheque for £25, as an ‘apology’!!
I find these telecoms companies are devoid of morals and common decency.
All of them. But BT are the worst of the worst.
“Other Broadband providers seem to have almost the exact same policy, which suggests collusion or a cartel operating.”
That’s not true. An “industry standard” doesn’t necessarily suggest collusion or a cartel. It might just be the obvious and sensible rule. (Unless, of course, you think Mr Wong’s All-You-Can-Eat Chinese restaurant in Soho is colluding with Jocky McSweat’s All-You-Can-Eat Haggis House in Dingwall because they both have “no taking the piss” rules).
But BT are scum.
I dont get why people get so angry with companies like bt. They clearly state how they intend to screw you in the t&cs, so why the suprise and animosity towards them when they do what most businesses do and attempt to stuff you? Give them some credit, at least they generally stick to thier own policies rather than make them up as they go along 🙂simonkFree Member
on the option 3 there is a “hidden” 50gb limit as i found out a few months ago, once you cross that limit your speed is limited to 512k between 6pm and midnight for a month. Given they do not define their fair useage clause it kinda annoyed the hell out of me as i had lots of work to do and it made my net useless for that period plus they did not even bother to tell me i had gone over the limit, once my contract is up then i am going over to O2.
Simon formerly Devoninbred
BT are scum.
After complaining of a slow CONnection speed, they asked me if my next-door neighbour had Sky tv installed.
‘Yes’ I curiously answered.
‘Ah, well that’s it then, their signal is interfering with yours’. 😯
‘But my line comes up out of the ground and into my house directly’.
‘It could be that moles have bitten into the cable, then’. 😯
Not a word of a lie I kid you not. Just some of the excuses that made me cringe. Only when I told them to cancel my deal did they sound interested. Even then they tried to charge me to fix their problem!
I told them not to expect the next quarterly payment as I had no phone/internet line so was incapable of paying it.
It was fixed two days later for free.
Oh, and as an aside, because I only have a BT line in for internet purposes (we use mobiles only in our house) I do not accumulate any ‘call charges’ fee on my bill (only line rental). So because of that the scum that they are charge me for the unwanted voice messages that my sons school leave on my answering machine. The cheek of them!!! Surely it’s illegal??? 👿
bt scum.mysterymurdochFree Member
dan1980 you are completely missing the point. It’s not a technical internet issue, we know the ins and outs and what the smallprint says. It’s the fact they are boldly advertising something that’s not true that’s the issue. They shouldn’t state in such clear simple words unlimited. That’s the bottom line. They should rename the advertising to something like “Over 10Gb” instead of “Unlimited”.
If they can say ‘up to 8mb download speeds’ in their adverts, why can’t they say ‘up to 50 gig of d/l-ing per month’?
Had no problems with BT ever, always polite, fast and courteous. Connection speed was poor but I expected that due to location and the “up to 8mb” didnt make me think I’d get 8mb. I was on a 40 gig limit, passed it a few times by 10+ and didn’t get moaned at, switched to unlimited as it was a better deal (odd, but they called me and asked if I wanted to as it was cheaper, so that was good of them). Since then I’ve never passed 15Gb a month anyway so no problems there.
Its just put there to catch idiots who abuse the system, the idea being that within reason everyone can download what they like, no-one will get upset if you download a little more this month, or a little less next month, or if your exchange has mostly old people checking emails and you’re consistently on a very high DL rate they’ll ignore you as you’re not causing problems and everyone wins. It’s just there in case they get a whole bunch of people excessively DLing every month, and even then they only send out a warning letter to ask you to ease off a bit.
Can’t imagine what any normal person is doing to be transferring more than 40 gig though, other than downloading a lot of illegal stuff. I was regularly downloading linux distros for work, watching iplayer, downloading music, online gaming while at the same time web and SVN serving and only twice IIRC got over 40 gig!AdamWFree Member
That is why I went for IDNet. I *know* that they don’t do packet shaping (though I don’t download torrents and stuff) and I pay for a limit of 30GB/month.
If an advert says ‘unlimited’ it should mean ‘unlimited’. If there is a fair usage policy then what that is should be defined and not left to the imagination, else when the networks get more and more congested the ‘fair use’ definition becomes tighter and tighter.
Each firm should define what the fair usage policy means. It is only fair.sq225917Free Member
regardless of what their T&C’s say, if they call the package unlimited then i imagine that the ASA will block them from advertising this as such.
It is ‘misleading’ and you aren’t expected to read T&C’s adverts have to present you with balanced information, that’s the law.
Follow up with the ASA
similar and i know similar has been aired before last week our landline was so noisy you couldn’t even understand messages let alone have a conversation
so i plugged in another phone = same problem – tried phone in adjacent socket – we have two lines – other line fine and dandy
after hanging on 15minutes to report fault get told line test shows no fault – so i went through what i’d done – then i get told to open the masterbox to ensure no cables “you don’t know about” – so i have to ring back and hold again – told line check = no fault and then i’m put on hold to listen to instructions to do all the stuff i’ve already done so i have to ring and start again
Ok we’ll send an engineer but if no fault £60 call out and £60/hr min 1 hour
– ok so what am i paying my line rental charges for? can understand the call out charge to tell me i’ve got a duff phone/crappy extension problem which i should have sorted which is probably five minutes work? but £120?
anyhow 2 engineers spent 2 minutes to tell me my wiring is fine and then 5 minutes to fix the cable at the pole
quote “it fell out of the connection as soon as i touched it” then sat in vans outside for an hour or so
i can only assume that OAP’s and others that really need help just don’t get faulty lines fixed
coffeeking – Member
…Its just put there to catch idiots who abuse the system…
Can’t imagine what any normal person is doing to be transferring more than 40 gig though, other than downloading a lot of illegal stuff….
Abuse? If you are paying for a high limit it’s not abuse to be using it.
Illegal stuff? why the gratuitous insult? There are several people in my household and the cumulative use is high. BTW none of them are idiots.
My objection is to the lie, the dishonest claim, that their service is “unlimited” when in fact it is limited, and they do not specify at what point or when.
I will happily pay for a high limit and high bandwidth, but I want exactly what I pay for, not something else.
epicyclo – I wasnt specifying YOU or your house as idiots, I was saying (as you quoted) it is there to catch people who abuse the system, not regular joes who occasionally stray over. I’m not sure why you took it as an insult, I’ll not try to guess, but rest assured I was simply saying that some people try to go OTT (I know at least one person who downloads a constant stream of DVDs and torrented music, clocking up 100s of gig a month and are constantly getting warned) – it is these people that it is there to catch. That is why no limit is specified, so that people can sometimes massively exceed their limit,without complaints, just not all the time.
They accept some families use it a lot, but if theres a 24/7 full-data-rate flow they’ll assume you’re taking the mick. You get unlimited access but theres no sensible reason I can think of off the top of my head for even a large family *regularly* clocking in 40+ gig a month. Bear in mind they will watch what sites you visit, what time of day and whether you leave the computer running etc (all ISPs do this) so that they can identify if you’re being excessive. If you’re viewing a lot of iplayer stuff they’ll ignore you, if you are torrenting all day long they’ll collar you, its just too complex for them to write that down and explain it all.
The problem is that the service is restricted in maximum overall capacity, to provide all customers with 100% unlimited, full bore downloads would make the monthly cost to the customer excessive, so they assume most people wont use it all but reserve the right to moan if you regularly us a lot.
What you may not realise is that most ISPs that offer fully unlimited will also use traffic shaping and will simply throttle your connection if you take the mick, without telling you.bigyinnFree Member
*Technical point. Its vitually impossible to get 8meg download speeds full stop due to technical reasons. The most you’re likely to get is around 7.5meg thereabouts)*
It should be made clearer that there is a finite download allowance for most, if not all ADSL connection, and that if exceeded then penalties will be applied.
It is virtually impossible to actually get a clear statement of their FUP from most ISPs at the moment, mainly because a lot of it is discretionary on the part of the ISPs. Regular offenders are more likely to be penalised than a one off oversight.
I exceeded my FUP last month and the ISP (Zen) lets you buy extra gigs to top up capacity, or you can chose to have your service limited until the start of the next month. Thus you have a choice.
It will happen when the ISPs get the knuckles rapped in the same way they did for offering misleading download speeds without any caveats to the liklihood of actually achieving such speeds.
…Its just put there to catch idiots who abuse the system, the idea being that within reason everyone can download what they like, no-one will get upset if you download a little more this month…
I think we are at cross purposes. I want to have high bandwidth. I want to have a big download limit. I also expect to get what I pay for, and I am prepared to pay for it.
If I am asked to pay for something that claims to be NOT limited, and then that is precisely what I would expect to get, a service without limit.
It is not abusing the system if you are using what you have paid for, nor are you an idiot. You are a customer getting what they have paid for.
If the provider does not have the capacity to offer an unlimited service, then it should not tell lies to entice people to pay their money to buy that service.
By all means put a limit on the service (that’s not the issue), but pretending it is anything other than a limited service is dishonest.
The topic ‘Dishonest advertising by BT is a scam I say.’ is closed to new replies.