Uncapped must mean uncapped
Numerous ISPs are advertising uncapped ADSL services. But is it truly uncapped?
Numerous ISPs are advertising uncapped ADSL services. But is it truly uncapped?
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Which is the most hair-raising South African mountain pass you've driven?
copacetic
King of the Hippies
I'm getting tired of all these words. I just want affordable, functional interwebs.
supersunbird
Honorary Master
The consumer must research the products he intends to get and educate himself on the pitfalls inherent in the product, which is extremely easy to do on the internet.
Sting
Ghost in the Machine
Fair comment, but then the ISP must not change it's FUP/AUP once it has signed up customers. The original FUP/AUP must be applied to customers as when they signed on for the service. New customers can be contracted on the amended FUP/AUP.
Example: When I signed on for an uncapped service at ISP "X", their FUP/AUP stated that I could download 100's of Gb/s (if I wanted to). However, a week later they changed it to 30Gb/s and then throttle the living daylights out of me.
Fair or Unfair?
diabolus
Executive Member
It would be a fair complaint if you did not or could not get your money back, so i don't see the issue. They changed it, they offered a refund with the change....how else did you want them to do it?
Sting
Ghost in the Machine
Ummm, provide me with the product that they advertised and contracted with me? Note that this differs from the ISPA's supporting of the Openweb product as mentioned in the article. Openweb were upfront with their throttling policy.
PS. I am not targeting a specific ISP.
Uncapped at a certain speed advertised should be uncapped at the speed advertised...
How hard is that to understand... If you have a 384 uncapped offering, limiting it to below 384 speeds means the product isn't what was advertised...
How hard is that to understand... If you have a 384 uncapped offering, limiting it to below 384 speeds means the product isn't what was advertised...
terms and conditions are always subject to change. however those changes need to be communicated properly. and as contract law states; a change in T&Cs can lead to a fundamental change into the reason why a consumer entered into a contract. so as long as the ISP doesn't block you canceling, there is no problem.
They can put you on burst. 384 Kbps for 0.5 seconds, and then downwards towards 64, or something like that. You still got 384kbps, they just didn't say how long or constant it is going to be.
When faced with competition, market your product in such a way that makes it difficult or impossible for consumers to compare it with others. Under these conditions factual objectivity can easily be suppressed by emotional allure. This is the monetary system. Get used to it.
Jacques
Well-Known Member
agreed
If ISPs want to throttle, then advertise something like this:
384K Uncapped (throttled to 56K after 100GB transfer)
Then we all know what we are paying for.
mika1000
Expert Member
The 384 lines is not the problem, as the max you can download is +-100gb. The 4096k is a diffirent story, with 30gb + per day, you can do 1.1Tb, and this is where the problem lies, to get a balance between the two!
The Business ADSL is subsidizing the consumer, as the business accounts, normally only works through 9-5, and its this extra gigs that laid unused, which became the normal uncapped accounts.
MWEB look quite serious in making this work and become sustaineble. Some other ISP's don't, and they're not gonna last. If the LLU do not happen fast, some ISP's, would be only a memory.
With the new Consumer Act, taking flight on the 1st of October 2010, its sink or swim, as the customer would have 21 days to decide wheter to accept or decline any contract, and T&C must be clearly understandeble.
By Law, T&C cannot be changed, once you accepted it, but Big Business is doing the same as the ANC, just ignore it.
One interesting fact is that MWEB nowhere mention a double bill for the first month, but it covers 01/04/2010 - 31/05/2010, on the invoice.
But, the reasoning behind this is to spend the money on their infrastructure, hiring extra people, and extra bandwith on SEACOM, SAT-3, etc.
There's about 12 rulings by ASASA and the courts about uncapped adsl, and the meaning of the word, "uncapped" and ICASA desribes it very well - no cap or threshold.
The Business ADSL is subsidizing the consumer, as the business accounts, normally only works through 9-5, and its this extra gigs that laid unused, which became the normal uncapped accounts.
MWEB look quite serious in making this work and become sustaineble. Some other ISP's don't, and they're not gonna last. If the LLU do not happen fast, some ISP's, would be only a memory.
With the new Consumer Act, taking flight on the 1st of October 2010, its sink or swim, as the customer would have 21 days to decide wheter to accept or decline any contract, and T&C must be clearly understandeble.
By Law, T&C cannot be changed, once you accepted it, but Big Business is doing the same as the ANC, just ignore it.
One interesting fact is that MWEB nowhere mention a double bill for the first month, but it covers 01/04/2010 - 31/05/2010, on the invoice.
But, the reasoning behind this is to spend the money on their infrastructure, hiring extra people, and extra bandwith on SEACOM, SAT-3, etc.
There's about 12 rulings by ASASA and the courts about uncapped adsl, and the meaning of the word, "uncapped" and ICASA desribes it very well - no cap or threshold.
Last edited:
synack
Well-Known Member
As long as the fair usage policies are the similar to the ISP's in the UK, it's all fine. In the UK we never had a hard cap limit, but they did throttle you if you "abused" the network month after month. Its the same the world over really.
end of the day, doesnt matter what line speed you are on, if they say uncapped, then it must be uncapped on your line speeds, irrelivant of how much traffic is used, no ISP can actually give a proper indication of FAIR USE, if eg. they see u sending 5000 emials a day, they can look into it as it might be spam and that is not right, but normal downloading should not be barred, cause if people who have 384k lines clearly cant do more than +/- 150gb a month even at full speeds, then rather look at selling them a package that give that amount of data instead of saying its uncapped and then after x amount you see u get throttled, there is this nice posting on hellkom's site that shows what lines can do what amount of traffic handling. ISP should supply that to their clients so they get a better understanding of how its works, then tell them anything more that your prescribed data usage will then be brought down to a lower speed.
bekdik
Honorary Master
It's ingeneous for products to hide their limitations behind the small print and companies that do so will lose out.
As far as most "uncapped" offerings go, they should simply be sold as either "partially uncapped" or "mostly uncapped" thereby alerting the potential client of potential limitations.
As far as most "uncapped" offerings go, they should simply be sold as either "partially uncapped" or "mostly uncapped" thereby alerting the potential client of potential limitations.
Sentech did this to us...
Well said !
They will refer to it as the subscription is billed upfront. Across the Group they bill like this including DSTV. If the cancelation terms say you need to give a calendar month notice for termination, they raise the invoice 30days in advance as you are committed to the next month but only take the cash shortly before the new month so at the end you are only paying one month in advance.