Telkom can get Away

[dojob]

I was just thinking that Telkom always stated that they Guarantee nothing.

They can turn around say that if speeds are slow tough luck. Gaming is slow, we told you no "Guarantee's" Therefore technically they can screw us anyway they like.

This "No Guarantee" BullS*h*t must stop. What if I tell them there is No Guarantee that im going to pay for ADSL!

 

[microfast]

I'm no lawyer, but I believe one cannot "guarantee nothing".

When one orders service, a contract is agreed between two parties. The agreement is quite simple
Telkom agrees to provide a service and the consumer agrees to pay a sum for the service.

Just as it is unreasonable for the consumer not to pay for the service it is unreasonable for Telkom not to provide the service.

The courts I believe, will want to define "the service" and what could be expected to be reasonable.

The cap would be reasonable.

Intentionally disabling international browsing would be unreasonable.

Disabling access to any legal internet source would be unreasonable
(e.g. crippling ports so that functionality becomes disabled is unreasonable)

There is no law that can allow Telkom to do as it wishes and Telkom cannot just write anything into its contract. Nothing is above the law.

It is the same with an employment contract: An employer cannot write any condition of employment. All conditions must be in accordance with the law as a whole. If an employer writes an unlawful clause into an employment contract such contracts are void.

I would guess that Telkom is acting unlawfully by <font color="red"><i><b>intentionally</b></i></font id="red"> disabling ports and disabling internet browsing.

I would suggest that we should all at least inform Telkom that
we believe that it is acting unlawfully and we reserve the right
to claim costs for the "<i><font color="red"><b>intentional and deliberate disabling </b></font id="red"></i>of
a service it advertises and agrees to provide".

It is the intent which makes Telkom's actions unlawful.

 

[bullstein]

True very true.

If an accident occurred and their station were disabled for instance, it would not be the intention of Telkom. It would be classified as an accidental loss of internet usage.

The fact that Telkom is willfully limiting our internet usage might be considered as unlawful. As you said, the intent is in handicapping the service. With the 3 Gig cap, it would be difficult to prove unlawfulness, but in the case of port capping it would be unlawful, because no mention of this was made to any customer prior to the purchase of adsl.

So this would be at least one point where Telkom have been overstepping their bounds.

Telkom, bear this in mind: The longer you keep on with this INTENTIONAL ignorance of the complaints about adsl, the harder it will be for you to rectify the wrongdoings that you are committing now.

 

[kaspaas]

Telkom can get away with a lot simply because they can afford lawyers to drag out a case till no average consumer can afford to continue with the case.

Unfortunately the reality of our legal system is that the law is in favour of the rich and wealthy.

Friends recently had to go to court on a matter. It was an urgent application. They were about 2 hours in court. Their bill was more tahn R30 000 of which only R25 000 was awarded as costs. The issue still cost them plenty money although they were right and the others got a lashing from the judge on some basic aspects of the law.

Moral of the story: Telkom can do what they like...they have a billion or so to counter you in court.

 

[rpm]

Hi there guys

You all make very valid points. I believe legal action will be a lost cause unless it is done in another way than taking Telkom to court. But I don’t think we even need to consider these options. I am fairly certain Telkom will be increasingly positive in their responses to us. We have the media’s ear and I have been contacted by various organizations interested in helping us with our battle. If need be we can make use of these options, but lets first see what materializes in our discussions with Telkom. It will be excellent if they can are willing to change the service the suit our needs.

I know it sound optimistic, but I also know that no company enjoys sustained hassles with consumer councils and the media There are now too many of us to keep all of us quite. Even if half of us simply disappear, there are still enough members to drive this initiative!

Regards,

RPM
[email protected]

 

[VQuest]

I agree, I think Telkom will start to work with us, as they can no longer claim we are a handful of unhappy clients.


----------------
United we stand!
----------------

 

[ASF]

Clearly we have no alternative BUT to try and work with Telkom in the short term. I agree that a legal route with Telkom directly at this time will prove utterly fruitless.

The only solution to the problem a systematic and total deregulation of the telco industry. Unfortunately that in itself is not an easy process in any economy. Add on top of that the technophobe in charge of communications and her excellent track record of monumental screwup's.

So it's not going to a smooth transition for us telco users BUT IT CANNOT GO ON INDEFINATELY. Telkom take heed - you have been given a reprieve by the ICASA SNO decision (I still think the Scorpions should look at the Next / ICASA / Telkom / Dept of Communications relationships though) - you have a GOLDEN opportunity to make your client's a little happier through better communications with us and transparency regarding product performance.