Openweb - Be Cautious.

[hj2k_x]

The lesson is simple ... If you don't like onions on your Hamburger, tell them that BEFORE they make your hamburger... and then accept that they are still going to charge you full price for that Hamburger.

Ya, I don't get it. Seems simple enough to me.

 

[hj2k_x]

How does one go about reading these terms and conditions when not connected to the internet?

ASK them!

Don't got and transfer R1300 to them before you know what you are getting for it. Specially if it is a contract.

 

[Necuno]

Does the Engen Garage Till Attendant have to read all the terms and conditions of the Axxess pre-paid Gig when Joe Public runs in to top up his bandwidth?

thank god i don't do business with cowboy Garyvdh :erm:

to speak for 10 second more, does not take much of you its called asserting your customers needs before your greed, to make sure he/she knows wtf they are doing.

its not like openweb's sales person had to read out a 3 hour statement, no all he/she had to do was ask if thriel knew that he would have to pay again if he requests the services now vs end of the month.

i was wondering when the messiac defenders would jump in and start to defend jesus openweb. that has always been the case here anyways. say one little thing wrong and you will be burnt at the stake- go search and its the same thing over and over again.

at end it was incorrect and pathetic to just take thriels money and asume the he would have made a case study of all the details before hand, seriously what kind of ****ed up sales person asume that your client just know every little thing there is to know about what he is about to buy ?

once again thank god i don't have to deal business with that kind...

 

[thriel]

1) Did he expect to pay "something" for the three days?
2) If he did then he should have asked what he could expect to pay.
3) It is not a huge assumption that for "uncapped internet" he would probably be paying more than just a pro-rata rate. That much seems common sense to me.

ISPs are not baby sitters... it is tough in the real world. Should Spar have to tell every customer that if you actually open that Milk Bottle that it might go sour in a few days? No... the instructions are on the bottle. Let the customer read the instructions.

Ah.

So users should ignore the fact that they cant get through to the isp for 5 days ?

they should ignore the fact that their emails go unreplied ?

I am sorry, but when you do a verbal agreement telephonicly i am sure it is their responsibility to notify you of any extra costs or hidden clauses.

even if i do a bank loan or apply for a cellphone over the phone, the guy makes sure i undertsand everything, i know i just did it the other day with my cell c contract.

But besides all of that.

Wouldnt the right thing to do when you treat a client so badly that he is clearly unhappy and your name is being tarnished on the forums be to look at his account, you notice he used barely any internet for those days, so you show some curtousy and overlook the matter, and assume your sales guy obviously didnt explain properly as he is suppose to ?

I dont understand how you can defend them. you must surely work there ?

 

[hj2k_x]

thank god i don't do business with cowboy Garyvdh :erm:

to speak for 10 second more, does not take much of you its called asserting your customers needs before your greed, to make sure he/she knows wtf they are doing.

its not like openweb's sales person had to read out a 3 hour statement, no all he/she had to do was ask if thriel knew that he would have to pay again if he requests the services now vs end of the month.

i was wondering when the messiac defenders would jump in and start to defend jesus openweb. that has always been the case here anyways. say one little thing wrong and you will be burnt at the stake- go search and its the same thing over and over again.

at end it was incorrect and pathetic to just take thriels money and asume the he would have made a case study of all the details before hand, seriously what kind of ****ed up sales person asume that your client just know every little thing there is to know about what he is about to buy ?

once again thank god i don't have to deal business with that kind...

You wouldn't want to do business with me, either then. Or the majority of other businesses out there.

You speak as if it was some minute detail which was unclear. Which was not the case. Like the topic of this thread says - BE CAUTIOUS. Don't just sign contracts and transfer cash when you are not sure what you are going to get.

 

[davemc]

ASK them!

Don't go and transfer R1300 to them before you know what you are getting for it. Specially if it is a contract.

By the same reasoning, the company accepting the money has a responsibility to provide the services that the company sold to the client on the phone.

No mention was made of the expiry date over the phone, and therefore a suitable arrangement should be made.

The phone "contract" is the only contract in place, irrespective of whatever terms and conditions are in place at a location unavailable to the client at that time.

 

[hj2k_x]

Ah.

So users should ignore the fact that they cant get through to the isp for 5 days ?

they should ignore the fact that their emails go unreplied ?

I am sorry, but when you do a verbal agreement telephonicly i am sure it is their responsibility to notify you of any extra costs or hidden clauses.

even if i do a bank loan or apply for a cellphone over the phone, the guy makes sure i undertsand everything, i know i just did it the other day with my cell c contract.

But besides all of that.

Wouldnt the right thing to do when you treat a client so badly that he is clearly unhappy and your name is being tarnished on the forums be to look at his account, you notice he used barely any internet for those days, so you show some curtousy and overlook the matter, and assume your sales guy obviously didnt explain properly as he is suppose to ?

I dont understand how you can defend them. you must surely work there ?

I can assure you he does not work there, and neither do I. What we are saying is general practice and common sense.

It was not a hidden clause, and as such did not need pointing out to you explicitly.

The fact that they did not reply to you and that their service levels have dropped is a valid one. This, is not.

 

[Necuno]

You speak as if it was some minute detail which was unclear

not telling him 1 sentence isnt ?

anyways, it doesn't help to argue with those with their heads in the sand...

 

[thriel]

You wouldn't want to do business with me, either then.

glad you pointed that fact out. altho i am sure many other users here are sure to be cautious now as well.

I am just sick of people treating their clients like ****. this country is consumed with greed.

its one thing to say "he could have used 80gb in 3 days"

but the fact is i didnt, and their records reflect that.

and btw. its not a contract. it was for month to month, i could cut off at anytime i was told.

 

[hj2k_x]

By the same reasoning, the company accepting the money has a responsibility to provide the services that the company sold to the client on the phone.

No mention was made of the expiry date over the phone, and therefore a suitable arrangement should be made.

The phone "contract" is the only contract in place, irrespective of whatever terms and conditions are in place at a location unavailable to the client at that time.

That is not the case. Do you do much law? There will be a clause saying exactly the opposite of that.

I understand that what has happened was not ideal, but there is no chance, legally, of anyone siding with the OP, based on the info he has given us. In terms of the billing that is, not the generally poor service he received in terms of contact etc.

 

[hj2k_x]

not telling him 1 sentence isnt ?

anyways, it doesn't help to argue with those with their heads in the sand...

Not a sentence which should be clear. And one which due to what the OP has said, makes it seem as if he is/was aware of.

 

[hj2k_x]

glad you pointed that fact out. altho i am sure many other users here are sure to be cautious now as well.

I am just sick of people treating their clients like ****. this country is consumed with greed.

its one thing to say "he could have used 80gb in 3 days"

but the fact is i didnt, and their records reflect that.

and btw. its not a contract. it was for month to month, i could cut off at anytime i was told.

As I said, I can understand you being upset. I would be, too. But treat it as a lesson learned and move on.

I can assure you that if you had contracted with any other ISP, it would have been exactly the same. And if you had told me what you have said you told them, I would also not find your exception understandable.

It does not matter how much you used or did not use. You pay for the service, which you said you could not live without, they provide it, you pay for it.

It sucks, but you have to move on, I think.

 

[davemc]

That is not the case. Do you do much law? There will be a clause saying exactly the opposite of that.

I understand that what has happened was not ideal, but there is no chance, legally, of anyone siding with the OP, based on the info he has given us. In terms of the billing that is, not the generally poor service he received in terms of contact etc.

My understanding is that all parties to a contract must be able to access and understand and agree upon all the terms and conditions to a contract before the contract can be declared binding.

I am probably mislead, but I am lead to understand that companies that create contracts over the phone are required to record the telephonic conversations and put the client through prescribed identification processes.

There is definitely a clear case of misunderstanding here, and as such, the misunderstanding must be dealt with by all the parties concerned.

But, perhaps my understanding of the law is a lot flawed.

 

[thriel]

As I said, I can understand you being upset. I would be, too. But treat it as a lesson learned and move on.

I can assure you that if you had contracted with any other ISP, it would have been exactly the same. And if you had told me what you have said you told them, I would also not find your exception understandable.

It does not matter how much you used or did not use. You pay for the service, which you said you could not live without, they provide it, you pay for it.

It sucks, but you have to move on, I think.

you can call it whatever you want. but service it was most definitely not.

its like staying at one of those downtime lodges of the 1600's where you sleep with the pigs. Far from 5 star quality.

And if i am so wrong and have no leg to stand on, why has a openweb consultant still not contacted me, neither on this forum of via telephone. i requested it in all my emails, i even left my number on the last thread. i know they plague mybb on a daily basis.

The law i am sure would be on their side, why would it not, this is south africa afterall. the guy in the street does not matter ...

but somewhere there is a thing such as client abuse, i am pretty sure that somewhere their must be such a thing to protect the client.

 

[hj2k_x]

you can call it whatever you want. but service it was most definitely not.

its like staying at one of those downtime lodges of the 1600's where you sleep with the pigs. Far from 5 star quality.

And if i am so wrong and have no leg to stand on, why has a openweb consultant still not contacted me, neither on this forum of via telephone. i requested it in all my emails, i even left my number on the last thread. i know they plague mybb on a daily basis.

The law i am sure would be on their side, why would it not, this is south africa afterall. the guy in the street does not matter ...

but somewhere there is a thing such as client abuse, i am pretty sure that somewhere their must be such a thing to protect the client.

There is a lot to protect the client - The Consumer Protection Act for example. I just don't think it applies here.

Also, as I mentioned above, I agree fully that the service levels were poor. Should stick to ranting about that, rather. As has been said, there have been a number of threads on there about similar things. So you are not alone in that regard.

 

[hj2k_x]

My understanding is that all parties to a contract must be able to access and understand and agree upon all the terms and conditions to a contract before the contract can be declared binding.

I am probably mislead, but I am lead to understand that companies that create contracts over the phone are required to record the telephonic conversations and put the client through prescribed identification processes.

There is definitely a clear case of misunderstanding here, and as such, the misunderstanding must be dealt with by all the parties concerned.

But, perhaps my understanding of the law is a lot flawed.

I hear what you are saying and it is not totally wrong. However, in this case, judging only by what the OP has told us transpired, I am not sure how Openweb were meant to glean anything other than that a company needed uncapped internet ASAP, for the last three days of the month - that costs R1300. That is how I would have understood it.

 

[[OUPA]MrNutz]

my 2c:

it's prolly a mistake from the sales/tech rep and you got the bad end.

could have happened at ANY I.S uncapped product selling isp if the person didn't focus.

1+1=3 or in this case 1+1=-3

 

[LazyLion]

LOL... If you care to search my threads, you will see that I have defended WebAfrica and other ISPs as well. This is not just about OpenWeb... it is about poor little consumers who want their noses wiped and their bottoms powdered. Funny how I never seem to have these problems with getting into contact with people at OpenWeb or Telkom or wherever. I never sign anything or pay money over until I am satisfied with the terms of the agreement. It seems to work for me so far.

If I had R5 for every thread where people come on here and whine about "poor service" or "bad treatment" and then when you actually start asking a few questions you start getting the truth.... "well, no I didn't really try that" or "no, I forgot to ask them that".

I wonder how you guys would cope in the real world where you have million dollar contracts that depend on specific wording and it has to be reviewed once, twice, up to five times to make sure you have not left something out... cos I can guarantee you the guy in China is not gonna phone you back and say "Hey, I noticed you left out a word here, do you wanna fix it before I sign this contract"?

I am the guy who is usually looking for the free stuff, the best deal, the fair prices... but yet I also seem to be the one who also doesn't excuse poor customer behaviour.

R1299.00 is a lot of money. I would ask a LOT of questions before I laid out that much money... oh wait... I did. cos I singed up for the same product.

 

[Gatecrasher]

As I said, I can understand you being upset. I would be, too. But treat it as a lesson learned and move on.

I can assure you that if you had contracted with any other ISP, it would have been exactly the same. And if you had told me what you have said you told them, I would also not find your exception understandable.

It does not matter how much you used or did not use. You pay for the service, which you said you could not live without, they provide it, you pay for it.

It sucks, but you have to move on, I think.

I wouldn't move on. I would fight the friggin' thing until I was blue in the face. You may be happy to rollover and play dead in this situation, but I think the OP has a very good case if the particulars of the account have not been spelled out to him by the sales person. Whenever I have bought bandwidth, the details have been made very clear to me, whether I have communicated by email, or filled in online application form.

The act of selling a very expensive uncapped account 3 days prior to the end of the month when they could just as easily have sold a cheaper 15 day version of the product is indication enough that their intention was to rip the OP off. Who treats new customers like that??? It disgusts me that people on this forum think this kind of thing is acceptable. It is not. It is a disgrace.

 

[hj2k_x]

I wouldn't move on. I would fight the friggin' thing until I was blue in the face. You may be happy to rollover and play dead in this situation, but I think the OP has a very good case if the particulars of the account have not been spelled out to him by the sales person. Whenever I have bought bandwidth, the details have been made very clear to me, whether I have communicated by email, or filled in online application form.

The act of selling a very expensive uncapped account 3 days prior to the end of the month when they could just as easily have sold a cheaper 15 day version of the product is indication enough that their intention was to rip the OP off. Who treats new customers like that??? It disgusts me that people on this forum think this kind of thing is acceptable. It is not. It is a disgrace.

*Sigh

Suffice it to say that mine and Gary's posts above address the content of this post fully.