ICASA gives consumers the finger

T

Tommygun

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2006
Messages
681
Reaction score
1
Location
Cape Town
Not only do Telkom give the consumers the finger but so too do ICASA.
Heres an update in my ongoing battle to see ICASA enforce its own policies, namely gazette 29141 and local bandwidth not beign counted towards usage caps. To be fair Ive had one or two charming phonecalls from great sounding individuals who proclaim they are behind me 100% and will fight all the way but the reality is that nothing meaningful is happening and if it is no one from ICASA is bothering to reply to my mails (with what I think are reasonable questions)any longer or to keep me up to date. I am a consumer who is not going to go away until I get answers and I will make a point of getting under everyones skin and irritating ICASA untill such time as they do their job properly. From my interactions they are pathetic and need goading and kicking every step of the way. I suggest more people activly stick the boot into their collective and well cushioned behinds. Heres my last email to them where I have mailed every address I could get hold of.
GRRRRRRRRRR

From tommygun@ Wed Jul 4 16:14:24 2007
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2007 16:14:13 +0200 (SAST)
From: Thomas Cleghorn <tommygun@>
To: Obakeng Tlhabi <[email protected]>
Cc: Amos Hlabioa <[email protected]>, Beverly Fasser <[email protected]>, Caroline Thandi Nkosi <[email protected]>, David Railo <[email protected]>, Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>, Kanyisa Macingwane <[email protected]>, Mfundo Daki <[email protected]>, Mpilo Ngxingo <[email protected]>, Praneel Ruplal <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], Tshifularo Sigwavhulimu <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Ref #CA/WC854/06

Dear all,
firstly I must apologize for the mass mail here but I do it out of
pure frustration at the apparent lack of action from ICASA. My complaint has
been dragging on since Feb 14th of this year, apart from the fact it took me
8 mails before I even got a response (mailing the address on your web site
([email protected]) I have spoken to your sysadmins about lost mails
that councillors swore they sent and later it turns out were not, the list
goes on. Many of my mails are just ignored. With regard to this case we have
had an admission of guilt by Dr Sharon Horton and Telkom and yet still
nothing happens. What is the point of legislating if you cant enforce? All I
ask for is feedback but I suspect that the people dealing with this
complaint are hoping that Telkom do as they promise on the First of November
and I will go away. It seems ICASA are nothing but a talk shop. I have all
my correspondence since Feb 14th relating to this complaint (Ref
#CA/WC854/06) I do understand that rulings do not always go in favour of the
consumer but then let me know and give me the reasons why. I think as a
consumer who has taken the time to follow the official route I should be
treated with some respect rather than as some irritating lepper who might go
away if ignored long enough.

Mr T.G. Cleghorn
Click to expand...

Here follow my last few mails to which I have heard nothing...

Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:48:46 +0200 (SAST)
From: Thomas Cleghorn <tommygun@>
To: Obakeng Tlhabi <[email protected]>
Cc: Amos Hlabioa <[email protected]>,
Beverly Fasser <[email protected]>,
Caroline Thandi Nkosi <[email protected]>,
David Railo <[email protected]>,
Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>,
Kanyisa Macingwane <[email protected]>,
Mfundo Daki <[email protected]>, Mpilo Ngxingo <[email protected]>,
Praneel Ruplal <[email protected]>,
Tshifularo Sigwavhulimu <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Ref #CA/WC854/06 (fwd)

Hi there,
any updates on these meetings? Every day this is delayed Telkom
steal more money from consumers pockets and cripple companies trying to
compete in a global economy. Im sure I am not alone in not wanting to pay
Telkom for services that ICASA have ruled as illegal with regard to
government gazette 29141. I dont see what there is to argue, the only thing
to be resolved is what action are ICASA going to take?
No more talk, action please or tell me why you think it is Legal for Telkom
to charge for local bandwidth.

Mr T. Cleghorn
Click to expand...


Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 14:39:44 +0200 (SAST)
From: Thomas Cleghorn <tommygun@>
To: Obakeng Tlhabi <[email protected]>
Cc: Amos Hlabioa <[email protected]>,
Beverly Fasser <[email protected]>,
Caroline Thandi Nkosi <[email protected]>,
David Railo <[email protected]>,
Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>,
Kanyisa Macingwane <[email protected]>,
Mfundo Daki <[email protected]>, Mpilo Ngxingo <[email protected]>,
Praneel Ruplal <[email protected]>,
Tshifularo Sigwavhulimu <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Ref #CA/WC854/06 (fwd)

Dear sir,
in relation to my complaint Ref #CA/WC854/06 what step are we/you
at using the document "Complaints handling proceedures.doc" found on your
web site?

Mr T.G. Cleghorn
Click to expand...



This letter was in response to a call From Gumani Malebusha......

Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 11:12:40 +0200 (SAST)
From: Thomas Cleghorn <tommygun@>
To: Obakeng Tlhabi <[email protected]>
Cc: Amos Hlabioa <[email protected]>,
Beverly Fasser <[email protected]>,
Caroline Thandi Nkosi <[email protected]>,
David Railo <[email protected]>,
Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>,
Kanyisa Macingwane <[email protected]>,
Mfundo Daki <[email protected]>, Mpilo Ngxingo <[email protected]>,
Praneel Ruplal <[email protected]>,
Tshifularo Sigwavhulimu <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Ref #CA/WC854/06 (fwd)

Dear sir,
Despite my irritation I must thank you at least for the call this
morning and your mention of my complaint #CA/WC8854/06 being sent to the
ccc. However I am incredulous that you need me to reiterate my complaint and
that you are unsure if I am saying local bandwidth should not be charged for
or if I mean it should not be subject to the cap.

Did you ever read my complaint?
What part of

"Everyday I play games or move files locally My international bandwidth
allocation gets smaller because local traffic IS subject to the cap In
violation of Government gazette 29141 section 3.4.

Telkom SA/Telkom Internet should explain the mechanisms they use to ensure
local bandwidth usage is NOT subject to the cap."

Are you unsure of?

And what part of Dr Horton and Telkoms reply, specifically

"With respect to Section 3.4 of the Regulation, we indicated that, with
regard to the combination of local and international bandwidth
counting towards the cap, at this stage Telkom is not in a position to
control the ratio of local versus international bandwidth usage in
real-time."

And

"Therefore, any usage whether local or
international, will count towards the customer's cap until the
necessary development is completed on the IP network."

I personally dont understand the need to do this real time but there is no
denying that Telkom fully admit they are in breach of the regulations. I
restate that until such time as they can distinguish traffic there should be
no cap applied (or being flexible certainly way higher)

I will be sending a formal request to have this matter sent to the CCC
shortly.

Mr T. G. Cleghorn.
Click to expand...

(The next mail was in response to one I got telling me not to mail so many people and that the call I got was from Gumani and not Obakeng)

Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:39:38 +0200 (SAST)
From: Thomas Cleghorn <tommygun@>
To: Obakeng Tlhabi <[email protected]>
Cc: Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fwd: Ref #CA/WC854/06 (fwd)

Dear Obakeng and Gumani,
I appologise for the mail going to all other menbers
of the ADSL committee, Im afraid I just hit the reply to button.
I do hope you understand my frustration though at being asked questions that
I have already answered in detail. Being asked these questions again does
indeed imply that you have not read my complaint or Dr Hortons response and
gives the impression of, at best incompetance or at worst a total disregard
and lack of interest in my complaint.

My complaint (Ref #CA/WC854/06) has
now dragged on completely unsatisfactorily since my first mail of 14 Feb
2007. Telkom and Dr Sharon Hortons response to my complaint admit their non
compliance to government gazette 29141 and all allegations contained
in complaint Ref #CA/WC854/06 however I hear and see no meaningful action
from you as an authority.

Reading ICASA Act 2000 (#13 of 2000) in tandem with government gazette
28945 (22 June 2006) I see there is a Complaints and compliance committee
that you can refer my complaint to. I ask you to refer my complaint Ref
#CA/WC854/06 to The complaints and compliance committee, particularly
with reference to section 17B subsections (a) and (b) and section 17C I
hope the CCC can respond and take meaningful action where you have failed
to do so.

I have been ignored and side-lined for long enough. Maybe you should re
look at the act particularly section 2(b) and 4(a)

Yours

T. Cleghorn.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
*applause*

relying on them to earn a living is not a lot of fun
 
Maybe you should start capitalising your sentences and separating paragraphs with line breaks.

Non-internet users usually don't take you seriously if you don't.
 
i have also noticed that it seems to be ICASA policy to disable read receipts...now i don't particularly like them but when sending mail to ICASA it is nice to know that it has at least been received.........
 
I've been pondering the idea, seeming as I live in Sandton, and not that far from ICASA's offices, to maybe physically go to their offices and schedule a meeting in person with old Paris
 
Gosh, fancy that, I got sent a charge sheet at long last which i was told was done ages ago and I finally asked for on the 25th July. Im not really sure how useful it is...but its a response!

Date: Thu, 05 Jul 2007 12:34:31 +0200
From: Gumani Malebusha <[email protected]>
To: tommygun@
Subject: Charge Sheet For Your Complain
Parts/Attachments:
1 Shown ~6 lines Text
2 120 KB Application
----------------------------------------

Dear Mr Thomas Cleghorn
Please find the attached Charge Sheet for your perusal.

Regards,
Gumani Malebusha


CHARGE SHEET


Licensee : Telkom SA Limited

Complainant : Mr. Thomas Cleghorn

Regulator : ICASA

Standing Committee: CCC

Date : 19 June 2007




Allegations: the complainant is Mr. Thomas Cleghorn and he alleges that Telkom SA Limited is in breach of section 3.4 of the ADSL Regulations as stipulated in the Government Gazette 29141.


Mr. Thomas Cleghorn alleges that Telkom SA and Telkom Internet are in breach of Government Gazette, especially section 3.4 of the regulations.


The complainant alleges that he has an ADSL 384 service powered by Telkom Internet with a 3GB cap.


He alleges that Telkom Internet provide an online graphing page which displays bandwidth usage and helps users keep track of the bandwidth they have used and he further alleges that whilst playing Internet games on SAIX hosted server in the 196.4.79.0/04 range (all local to south Africa) he noticed traffic being displayed on the Telkom usage tracking page was coming from his game playing on the local servers.


He alleges that the game uses about 50MB/hour so it was very easy to correlate it with the online usage page.


He alleges that this means local bandwidth is being subjected to the cap something which is against section 3.4 of the ADSL Regulations as stipulated in the Government Gazette 29141.


The complainant alleges that proof that Telkom SA was charging for his local bandwidth was when he download any file from his ftp.saix.net(196.25.240.137)using a Telkom Internet account and match it with the usage stats that they provide @https://secure.telkom.net/cgi-bin/onlineGraph.cgi


The complainant wants Telkom SA and Telkom Internet to explain the mechanism they use in order to ensure that local bandwidth is not subjected to the cap as stipulated in the Government Gazette 29141.


The complainant is alleging that both Telkom SA and Telkom Internet are stealing the resources from customers that have paid for international bandwidth through their capping and that is a serious contravention of the Regulations as stipulated it the Government Gazette 29141 dealing with ADSL Regulations and as such the complainant wants the matter to be dealt with to finality.
Click to expand...

Its odd to me that this has to be put in such a pedantic manner (and nessessarily exclude so many other contraventions of gazette 29141 by Telkom) and that so many consumers here know exactly the enormity of Telkoms breach and theft of resourses.
It seems from this that the CCC recieved this on the 19th of June so I guess I hurry up and wait again.
 
Charge sheet -wtf? - it's a complaint no?

They still haven't explained what stage they're at in their 'process'
 
Tommygun said:
Gosh, fancy that, I got sent a charge sheet at long last which i was told was done ages ago and I finally asked for on the 25th July. Im not really sure how useful it is...but its a response!



Its odd to me that this has to be put in such a pedantic manner (and nessessarily exclude so many other contraventions of gazette 29141 by Telkom) and that so many consumers here know exactly the enormity of Telkoms breach and theft of resourses.
It seems from this that the CCC recieved this on the 19th of June so I guess I hurry up and wait again.
Click to expand...


Its a stall tactic thats all :rolleyes:

Did they take into account all other e-mails we have sent in support of your complaint?
 
Let's see: how about a Class Action lawsuit

2 weeks (at least) in supreme court @ R10k/day makes R100k
Divided by 300k odd adsl users - 30c each ...

Let's start a fund!

We want THE SAME 20Mb/s ADSL that other countries have
We want uncapped options that other countries have
We want a regulator that does its work
We want a government without it hands in all pockets

Surely if the govt-telco cartel can do so well at collecting tax, they can
fix this horrible exploitation of the people and GIVE US THE INTERNET
WE NEED TO COMPETE IN THE 21st CENTURY.

I think the constitution guards the right to the means to do one's chosen
profession. In this case it means communication without financial
punishment created and maintained BY THE SA GOVERNMENT in the
form of controlling TELKOM shareholders.

If this is not a political action deliberately to remove
money from the tech savvy, it is certainly well disguised
to look exactly like that - THEFT AND CORRUPTION.

People of South Africa, my conviction is that we are being
robbed deliberately with the permission of the state.

The supreme court will be the only way to get justice done soon.
 
Class action lawsuits are an American thing. We don't have them here in SA

Although I do like the idea of starting a legal fund
 
The problem is Telkom's got lots of money in the kitty, and will drag this case out for ages... until our money runs out, and then they'll turn around and sue us for making a case against them....
 
Not if you take them to the constitutional court - I hear there are some spots open on the roll for November - like the idea of going to ICASA's office's
 
Not if you take them to the constitutional court - I hear there are some spots open on the roll for November - like the idea of going to ICASA's office's
 
Alchemist said:
Class action lawsuits are an American thing. We don't have them here in SA

Not so: surf on over to http://www.constitutionalcourt.org.za/site/yourrights/thebillofrights.htm
and be enlightened:


Enforcing your rights
Section 38 gives a person who believes an infringement has occurred the right to go to court. This clause makes it clear that it is not only people acting for themselves who may use the law to protect their own rights: "class action" suits - by people acting for a group or in the public interest - are also allowed. See how to approach the Constitutional Court, as well as the list of organisations that can help you enforce your rights.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X