Virgin Media To Lose 'Unlimited' Or Detrimental Usage Policy

[Ignitionnet]

Just as an FYI the Advertising Standards Agency have published a report on the advertising of broadband services in terms of the speeds that operators are allowed to advertise and use of 'Unlimited'.

The advertising of speeds doesn't affect VM, however the 'unlimited' section does, and basically the Detrimental Usage Policy is against those rules, so has to change or 'unlimited' has to go from the advertising by April 2012.

"Unlimited" are likely to be acceptable provided that:

The legitimate user incurs no additional charge or suspension of service as a consequence of exceeding any usage threshold associated with an FUP, traffic management policy or the like, and

Provider-imposed limitations that affect the speed or usage of the service are moderate only and are clearly explained in the marketing communication.
The element of the service to which the "unlimited" claim relates is a key consideration in this assessment.

A general claim, "Unlimited Broadband", for instance, will require a provider to demonstrate that their whole broadband service meets the criteria above.

A claim relating to a specific element (i.e. a defined activity or protocol) of a service, for instance, "unlimited web browsing", would only require the provider to show that element of service meets the criteria listed above. Broadband consumers are likely to assume that a claim related to "unlimited web browsing" will allow them unlimited use of the services such as You Tube, BBC iPlayer or another based streaming service. If an online activity like streaming is excluded from the "unlimited" aspect of the service this should be stated prominently.

Other plans afoot so all good.

[jb66]

Great now we'll get crap liken"all you can eat data"

[Rob]

Unfortunately I think your optimism that VM will drop it's unlimited broadband claim, or it's traffic management policies is unfounded.

You bold the term "suspension of service", yet do not highlight the equally key "legitimate user". I suspect VM would argue they don't just suspend a service. They've warned the user before hand that their use is detrimental and thus would rendered the user as "not legitimate". Regrettably the VM AUP can probably stay within this new Code of Practice

STM (speed throttling) might however be a little less clear cut. I suspect the lawyers will have to argue over what level of speed restriction is "moderate".

Personally I have always thought the use of the term "unlimited" to describe broadband services was misplaced and incorrect ever since way back in the days of ntl they first introduced their "cap" and yet somehow, because broadband was an always on service compared to the dial up prevalanet back then the industry has been able to argue unlimited simply meant "always available in some form". This new Code of Practice is a missed opportunity to provide proper laymans easily understood English classifications to broadband services and advertising.

[vmfriend]

Mmmm seem to be a few words in the policy open to interpretation.

For example : 'Provider-imposed limitations that affect the speed or usage of the service are moderate only and are clearly explained'

Who defines what moderate is ?

One persons moderate is anothers severe.

[Ignitionnet]

The ASA define what moderate is.

I get you Rob but there's no real avoidance here - if a customer is 'illegitimate' they shouldn't be on the service to begin with and should be summarily disconnected so difficult to weasel out that way

[thenry]

this is going to be on watchdog (13/10/2011 8pm).

[Sirius]

Just set my tivo for this, should be interesting which direction they take it to sensationalise it to there best effect.


I wonder if the outcome of this will be to force VM to say what level its detrimental user policy kicks in at, If it does then i would feel you cannot then say your unlimited .

[tizmeinnit]

Originally Posted by Rob

Unfortunately I think your optimism that VM will drop it's unlimited broadband claim, or it's traffic management policies is unfounded.

You bold the term "suspension of service", yet do not highlight the equally key "legitimate user". I suspect VM would argue they don't just suspend a service. They've warned the user before hand that their use is detrimental and thus would rendered the user as "not legitimate". Regrettably the VM AUP can probably stay within this new Code of Practice

STM (speed throttling) might however be a little less clear cut. I suspect the lawyers will have to argue over what level of speed restriction is "moderate".

Personally I have always thought the use of the term "unlimited" to describe broadband services was misplaced and incorrect ever since way back in the days of ntl they first introduced their "cap" and yet somehow, because broadband was an always on service compared to the dial up prevalanet back then the industry has been able to argue unlimited simply meant "always available in some form". This new Code of Practice is a missed opportunity to provide proper laymans easily understood English classifications to broadband services and advertising.

Surely STM is suspension of service. If you pay for 30 meg and you get your speed dropped to 6 meg then your 30 meg service is suspended until the STM is lifted

[Rob]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

Surely STM is suspension of service. If you pay for 30 meg and you get your speed dropped to 6 meg then your 30 meg service is suspended until the STM is lifted

I would agree, but the people at VM so far haven't otherwise they'd have had to drop "unlimited" from advertising years ago.

[XxAmazingStarxX]

Originally Posted by Rob

I would agree, but the people at VM so far haven't otherwise they'd have had to drop "unlimited" from advertising years ago.

So do I. Vomit lay spun!! Virginmedias play a pun!!!

[kwikbreaks]

VM are certainly not the worst in the "unlimited" scandal. I vaguely recall seeing somebody complaining on a forum that their "unlimited" deal turned out to have a 40GB cap - I don't recall which ISP or what the penalty was for exceeding it though.

I can't see VM altering either the STM or the contractual right to tell heavy users to sling their hook because it would either lead to higher cost or more widespread abysmal performance so I guess it will be the unlimited that goes but no doubt replaced with virtually unlimited or whatever better BS the marketing twonks come up with.

[thedelboy]

in the Brighton area we have very slow and intermittant service !apparently it wont be fixed until 18th November, so Virgin are still advertising fast speeds but not supplying them ; numerous calls but what a waste of time it is only cancelation team that takes any notice!!!

[thenry]

Watchdog

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by thenry

Watchdog

Care to explain for those that have not watched. .

[jb66]

Nothing, few folk complained about trivial things