MWEB Abuse Notices Complaint

Latest?

Paul Hjul said:
I haven't picked up any T&C amendments over the last 13 months on their official documentation but they have a problem which they are outright ignoring - and it is what the complaint centres on two separate issues:
[1] The ISPA guidelines on the use of the term uncapped
[2] MWEBs oft repeated advertisements and statement that they do not throttle - preserved in the metadata of their webpages


I am not aware of any provision of the contractual arrangements with MWEB that disclaim any representations or descriptions used by MWEB on their products - and on the contrary the product description is of a higher ranking in resolution of conflict between clauses.

The proposition that they "have difficulty identifying the complaint" either suggests gross incompetence or a pinnacle of arrogance - either of which should make a person worry.

In any event the matter now awaits ISPA adjudication and it is clear that MWEB have no defense other than the hope that by being the bully on the school yard they can get away with being a dishonest louse. Frankly I do fear that ISPA will cow to MWEB but then the matter goes to ICASA. If there is an approach of denouncing the guidelines and precluding jurisdiction on representation then the matter goes to ASA and DMMA and back to ICASA.
Click to expand...
 
Matter referred to adjudication - now it is a waiting routine for up to a couple of weeks
 
Keep at it Paul!

Sooooo glad I left this company. Totally disgusted by their conduct. I will have nothing to do with them ever again if I can help it.
 
Bump...thread is dying...I prefer to see this thread right on top...sticky anyone?
 
sparke said:
Bump...thread is dying...I prefer to see this thread right on top...sticky anyone?
Click to expand...

Um thread is not dying, adjudication pending. To further comment absent an update from ISPA or further papers being given to me by MWEB is simply silly.

When the ASA Application to Intervene and Appeal is lodged by the end of the week that will trigger its own thread.

Of course I thought you got the answer of what MWEB believes the outcome will be at yesterday's staff meeting
 
TEXTILE GUY said:
The thing that has got my back up .... and believe me when I say, I am being as active as possible on this one .... is that inter alia..

1. The CPA has been ignored .... completely.
2. I pleaded with MWEB to reconsider this silly business move, to wit, I was patronised, and subsequently have been blocked from corresponding with MWEB, despite being a customer
3. The arrogance and impunity of MWEB in this matter
4. The consumers value for money has simply devalued overnight, by MWEBs unilateral policy change.

MWEB in turn have simply ignored the wave of protest, refused to offer any meaningful explanation of the ''parameter'', meaning they can throttle at will.

Rudi Jansen - May 2010:-
"MWEB has a top quality, reliable network that has been engineered to world-class standards and is able to support the demand for this service," said Jansen. "We operate and manage a high capacity and highly redundant carrier grade network with sufficient bandwidth allocation to enable the streaming of video content online. Importantly, MWEB also does not throttle its ADSL service ''

These comments brought to MWEB in the first place.....

New CEO, and that has all changed..... without discussion or agreement ,,, and that I find unacceptable!
Click to expand...

The New CEO is the problem that needs to be thrown away from this reality in order to turn MWEB back into one of the best ISPs.
 
Paul Hjul said:
Um thread is not dying, adjudication pending. To further comment absent an update from ISPA or further papers being given to me by MWEB is simply silly.

When the ASA Application to Intervene and Appeal is lodged by the end of the week that will trigger its own thread.

Of course I thought you got the answer of what MWEB believes the outcome will be at yesterday's staff meeting
Click to expand...

Not sure if the [-]Customer Service Representative[/-] retention department gets to go to those meetings... see pm
 
Last edited:
Paul, as much people who sees this as much people will see how the regulators unfavourably work, what I suggest you do at this point is find someone who was not notified of throttling, legitimately so, most people just didn't see the mail, nail mweb with CPA, they did not give them official notification as they explain they will in their ts and cs.

I asked a few questions, I hoped you would have responded so I could better know where you are going so I can pass you my artillery though you never responded....this is why I feel this was dying down
 
You forget I am here out of my own will and opinion necuno, you forget I choose freely who give my internet, as for the department, I have left as well. I am a techie and have gone to my roots. I represent my own opinion here.
 
Quick one, why didn't you ask me first? It's fairly simple to remove your comments, but that suggests I have something to hide. I am personally not aware of the meeting you are referring to. Then again been in bed with flu
 
sparke said:
Paul, as much people who sees this as much people will see how the regulators unfavourably work, what I suggest you do at this point is find someone who was not notified of throttling, legitimately so, most people just didn't see the mail, nail mweb with CPA, they did not give them official notification as they explain they will in their ts and cs.

I asked a few questions, I hoped you would have responded so I could better know where you are going so I can pass you my artillery though you never responded....this is why I feel this was dying down
Click to expand...
The CPA arguments are more contrived and dependent on legislation rather than the terms of the actual relationship and presentation of MWEB. The complaint line is to specifically structured to address MWEB's business malpractice and dishonesty rather than to approach the matter from the perspective of "consumers" in need of "protection". The very simple reality which MWEB faces is that their own defense is recalcitrance and obfuscation. The ASA ruling for example is dependent of their (MWEB) advancing an argument which I am hoping to establish - namely the applicability of the ISPA Terminology Guidelines which by failing to state their shaping and throttling policy in any detail they are clearly violating.

There is a lot of MWEB coolade that needs to be disentangled from basic facts.
 
Paul Hjul said:
The CPA arguments are more contrived and dependent on legislation rather than the terms of the actual relationship and presentation of MWEB. The complaint line is to specifically structured to address MWEB's business malpractice and dishonesty rather than to approach the matter from the perspective of "consumers" in need of "protection". The very simple reality which MWEB faces is that their own defense is recalcitrance and obfuscation. The ASA ruling for example is dependent of their (MWEB) advancing an argument which I am hoping to establish - namely the applicability of the ISPA Terminology Guidelines which by failing to state their shaping and throttling policy in any detail they are clearly violating.

There is a lot of MWEB coolade that needs to be disentangled from basic facts.
Click to expand...

Thanks Paul I now understand much better what you are after, been waiting, unfortunately cats out the bag so I can't help you in this agreement
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X