Bandwidth throttling controlled through D-Link router?

[TMDoll]

Hi, I am new to virgin and after a few weeks of brilliant speed all of a sudden it appears as through I am one of the 5% of users who take the michael and need to be restricted.

When I connect directly to the modem I get the full speed. Through the router it then cuts the speed by a certain fraction at certain times of the day and seems to be inline with what should happen in the "traffic management policy".

I have ruled out a dodgy router as we had a replacement and also tried another router altogether with no improvements.

Has anyone else experienced this and does this mean that all bandwidth throttling is controlled through the router, not the modem?

[Casbar]

I would say No, throttling should be through the Modem, if it was through the router, all everyone would do, is connect direct to the Modem.

So I would say something else is going on.

[Kellargh]

Throttling is done through the modem, not the router, so there is something else causing the problem. Have you tried changing the channel in the router?

[TMDoll]

I've tried a lot of things including a totally different router with exactly the same results. I'll look into using a different channel and try that.

Basically I'm certain I'm getting throttled as it all seems to fall in line with VM's "traffic management policy". I will also connect directly to the modem all night and download like crazy and see what happens.

I work in telecomms and to my knowledge a fibre optic service should handle absolutely masses of data. They clearly haven't got the capacity required to provide each user with the promised line if they have to limit users.

[Peter_]

I've tried a lot of things including a totally different router with exactly the same results. I'll look into using a different channel and try that.

Basically I'm certain I'm getting throttled as it all seems to fall in line with VM's "traffic management policy". I will also connect directly to the modem all night and download like crazy and see what happens.

I work in telecomms and to my knowledge a fibre optic service should handle absolutely masses of data. They clearly haven't got the capacity required to provide each user with the promised line if they have to limit users.
As the others have said above Virginmedia do not selectively throttle people connected to certain equipment, if you go over the specified limits your connection as a whole will be restricted regardless of being connected to a router or direct to the modem.

You can find out how the Traffic Management is enforced and the limits for each tier by clicking HERE (http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/internet/traffic.html)

[TMDoll]

I know how they choose to throttle people as I have already seen VM's ridiculous traffic management policy restricting me to 750MB between 4pm and 9pm before limiting the speed. 750MB is nothing is todays world. An hour long BBC iplayer program is around 800MB. So if I watch one thats it, I'm throttled. Is that really being unfair to other users? No, in my opinion that is unfair on me.

You can all keep telling me otherwise, but I get 9.7-9.8mbps directly through the modem.

I have just been downloading two TV programs via the router, 2.1GB total. It was flying then all of a sudden cuts off to around 40-60kBps. Limit reached and throttled surely.

[Peter_]

I know how they choose to throttle people as I have already seen VM's ridiculous traffic management policy restricting me to 750MB between 4pm and 9pm before limiting the speed. 750MB is nothing is todays world. An hour long BBC iplayer program is around 800MB. So if I watch one thats it, I'm throttled. Is that really being unfair to other users? No, in my opinion that is unfair on me.

You can all keep telling me otherwise, but I get 9.7-9.8mbps directly through the modem.

I have just been downloading two TV programs via the router, 2.1GB total. It was flying then all of a sudden cuts off to around 40-60kBps. Limit reached and throttled surely.
You said that if you reconnect direct to the modem the speed goes back to normal so that must be the router as we do not selectively restrict your speed it is done electronically.

I take it you have noticed that I am actually a Virginmedia staff member and I work in Technical Support.;)

[TMDoll]

You said that if you reconnect direct to the modem the speed goes back to normal so that must be the router as we do not selectively restrict your speed it is done electronically.

I take it you have noticed that I am actually a Virginmedia staff member and I work in Technical Support.;)

Yes I have noticed. I have also noticed that technical support from virgin media can be unbelievably poor and unhelpful, hence the fact that I have had to resort to a forum for advice.

As we're on the subject you might as well take note that I work for Ericsson managed services and understand the concept of network fault finding. We provide working networks as well :)

So if it must be the router, then why do the call centre peeps fail to acknowledge this and go through silly solutions on my laptop config when it's every PC in the house with same issue!

Also, if it is the router, why do 2 different routers fail to solve the issue? I would have thought that as a member of the technical support staff you would agree that this almost certainly rules out a router problem?

Off the subject - do you agree that the traffic management policy is too harsh and the quote that it only affects the top 5% of users is a lie?

[BomberAF]

The point is whether you agree with the traffic management policy or not the point is it's there. VM have to pay for the bandwidth that you use so if your using more than everyone else then you should either get a larger bandwdith, i.e. 20MB only costs £5 more and they have a larger download limit until your throtled or you can go with the 50MB service where you wont get throttled at all.

You can't have your cake and eat it, like it or not VM are a business and they are there to make money.

[TMDoll]

Fair point, but surely if you pay for 10mbps you should get it. If I need 20 or 50 I would get it.

10mbps is a pretty fast connection and shouldn't have a limit of 750MB in a period of 5 hours. You could hit that limit in 600 seconds on that speed.

I simply disagree with the policy. It's my own fault for not reading deep enough into the smallprint before I signed.

Perhaps they should sell it as: 10mbps fibre optic UNLIMITED broadband - unless you watch a standard 800MB BBC iPlayer video then you get your speed cut by 75%.

It's their way off trying to get customers to pay more, and you shouldn't accept that as it's dishonest and shows little respect for the customer.

---------- Post added at 17:54 ---------- Previous post was at 17:53 ----------

PLus, VM don't pay for my bandwidth. I do!

[BomberAF]

Surely though even if your connection is throttled then you still wont suffer from the program being disrupted while you watch it? Do you download first then watch, cause you should just try watching it as it streams.

Failing that you should download during the early hours of the morning, the dowload limits are greatly increased at that hour.

You will also find that VM's download limits far exceed any other broadband provider out there.

[TMDoll]

Basically a decent quality typical iPlayer stream is 300KBps +. If they throttle my bandwidth, I then can't stream and watch. I would have to wait however long it takes to download. hours sometimes. I ideally stream and can't most evenings because the connection is too slow.

The point is that in this day and age where youtube and TVon demand services are extremely popular, VM are throttling users for 750MB which is not a lot at all when you think about it. The user then has to deal with a slow connection for 5 hours or whatever it is.

I may have a different issue, but I can guarantee I go over that limit most days and my connection is slow for certain periods.

And why would I wait for the early hours to use the web. I sleep then.

I had orange broadband (through a BT line) for 2 years and never had restricted bandwidth or certainly not to the same level as I never noticed!

[alferret]

Obviously you seem to be missing the point that people have been trying to explain to you.

If you are being shaped (STM) then it wouldnt matter if you plugged the PC into the modem or router your bandwidth will be restricted. If as you say you get full speed through the modem but a slower service through your router then the problem lies with your router and not VM, maybe there is an issue with your PC that for whatever reason doesnt like talking to the router.

Also if you have a problem with the limitations of VM's traffic management then I am sure there are other provider that are willing to take your money and give you a lesser service.

[BomberAF]

Don't mean you should stay awake while you do it but you may want to leave your machine on while it downloads. Do agree though it aint alot these days with all the HD vids doing the rounds, and you do know the reason they do it is so you get a larger broadband deal. For the record if you do increase you broadband package by increasing the speed then they will put you on a new 12 month broadband contract.

[unknown1234]

I have the exact same problem. I do not think your bandwidth is being throttled but I do believe as with all services you will get contention either with Virgin services or the service you are connecting too. I have identified the problem to be consumer home products being supplied by Virgin are not capable of the throughput from wan to lan or wan to wireless with the 50meg connection. [mod edit: We do not allow the discussion of techniques which are in effective stealing services that you have not paid for]

Thanks
C

[TMDoll]

Obviously you seem to be missing the point that people have been trying to explain to you.

If you are being shaped (STM) then it wouldnt matter if you plugged the PC into the modem or router your bandwidth will be restricted. If as you say you get full speed through the modem but a slower service through your router then the problem lies with your router and not VM, maybe there is an issue with your PC that for whatever reason doesnt like talking to the router.

Also if you have a problem with the limitations of VM's traffic management then I am sure there are other provider that are willing to take your money and give you a lesser service.

I haven't missed the point, I have taken note.

You must have missed the point that I have tried 2 other routers. Another identical router, and another belkin router. We have 3 laptops, a ps3, xbox 360 and and iphone that all experience apparent "shaping". So therefore it must be all of those devices or all 3 routers? I don't think so.

We plug directly into the MODEM and get a throughput of 9+mbps. Thats it, thats what happens.

I appreciate that everyone disagree's and thinks I am talking rubbish, but I wouldn't go to all this effort for nothing! I am obviously experiencing another problem, not STM, that none of you know the solution to.

Thank you

I don't dispute that the service isn't good, or excellent in fact when at full speed, I disagree the policy on traffic management.

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:34 ----------

I have the exact same problem. I do not think your bandwidth is being throttled but I do believe as with all services you will get contention either with Virgin services or the service you are connecting too. I have identified the problem to be consumer home products being supplied by Virgin are not capable of the throughput from wan to lan or wan to wireless with the 50meg connection.
Thanks
C

Thanks it's good to know I'm not the only one. Everyone else just tells me i'm wrong or have missed the point, rather than admitting they are unsure on why it's happening. Others just seem to back Virgin as if it's VMs right to s**t on their customers

[Peter_]

Thanks it's good to know I'm not the only one. Everyone else just tells me i'm wrong or have missed the point, rather than admitting they are unsure on why it's happening. Others just seem to back Virgin as if it's VMs right to s**t on their customers
You have a speed issue that only occurs when you use 3rd party equipment because when connected directly to the modem you achieve normal speeds.

So any issue can only be with your equipment and therefore as far as Virginmedia is concerned the is no issue with the connection and the problem is out of their Support Scope.

[Bman]

So Virgin have a secret deal with Belkin (and possibly other router manufacturers) to hide their traffic management software inside the hardware which can be remotely activated in the off-chance a customer decides to try a third party router? Nice try Virgin but you can't get anything past us cableforum.co.uk users!

[Peter_]

So Virgin have a secret deal with Belkin (and possibly other router manufacturers) to hide their traffic management software inside the hardware which can be remotely activated in the off-chance a customer decides to try a third party router? Nice try Virgin but you can't get anything past us cableforum.co.uk users!
Most routers have no issues with Virginmedia connections, I personally use an Edimax BR650N router and achieve 20Mb most of the time.;)

It is dependant more on the equipment that connects through the router.;)

[on in an hour!]

I haven't missed the point, I have taken note.

You must have missed the point that I have tried 2 other routers. Another identical router, and another belkin router. We have 3 laptops, a ps3, xbox 360 and and iphone that all experience apparent "shaping". So therefore it must be all of those devices or all 3 routers? I don't think so.

We plug directly into the MODEM and get a throughput of 9+mbps. Thats it, thats what happens.

I appreciate that everyone disagree's and thinks I am talking rubbish, but I wouldn't go to all this effort for nothing! I am obviously experiencing another problem, not STM, that none of you know the solution to.

Thank you



I don't dispute that the service isn't good, or excellent in fact when at full speed, I disagree the policy on traffic management.

---------- Post added at 18:42 ---------- Previous post was at 18:34 ----------



Thanks it's good to know I'm not the only one. Everyone else just tells me i'm wrong or have missed the point, rather than admitting they are unsure on why it's happening. Others just seem to back Virgin as if it's VMs right to s**t on their customers

you have 6 pieces of equipment using the bandwith and you think VM are being unfair..sheesh,no wonder your aggrieved!!! :shocked:

[Andrewcrawford23]

Yes I have noticed. I have also noticed that technical support from virgin media can be unbelievably poor and unhelpful, hence the fact that I have had to resort to a forum for advice.

As we're on the subject you might as well take note that I work for Ericsson managed services and understand the concept of network fault finding. We provide working networks as well :)

So if it must be the router, then why do the call centre peeps fail to acknowledge this and go through silly solutions on my laptop config when it's every PC in the house with same issue!

Also, if it is the router, why do 2 different routers fail to solve the issue? I would have thought that as a member of the technical support staff you would agree that this almost certainly rules out a router problem?

Off the subject - do you agree that the traffic management policy is too harsh and the quote that it only affects the top 5% of users is a lie?
the reason it so poor is because your have admit you get full speed on the modem and that prove enoguht the connection is fine, the rotuer belogns to you and it your responabilty to configure it to not throotle you, i can acutally guess why yoru throttle as oyu put it with only the rotuer and not the modem but oyu wont like the answer no custoemr ever does

---------- Post added at 23:11 ---------- Previous post was at 23:08 ----------

I have the exact same problem. I do not think your bandwidth is being throttled but I do believe as with all services you will get contention either with Virgin services or the service you are connecting too. I have identified the problem to be consumer home products being supplied by Virgin are not capable of the throughput from wan to lan or wan to wireless with the 50meg connection.
Thanks
C
teh default settings on the dlink router are niot capable of full upload speed and have to be changed, but the router is capable of full download speed in default settings

[TMDoll]

You have a speed issue that only occurs when you use 3rd party equipment because when connected directly to the modem you achieve normal speeds.

So any issue can only be with your equipment and therefore as far as Virginmedia is concerned the is no issue with the connection and the problem is out of their Support Scope.

They supplied me with the router. Therefore I expect it to work.

Once again 1.85mbps through the router, 9.77mbps through the modem! At midnight exactly. Only 1 device connected.

You can't lease equipment that doesn't work properly and pass the responsibililty on to the customer.

[alferret]

If all the routers supplied to you are from virgin then it is possible that its a batch fault (although unlikely)

You have another option, rather than use a supplied router dip your hand in your pocket and buy one yourself. They dont cost much and would then give a definitive answer. If money is an issue then borrow one and then see what happens.

---------- Post added at 07:38 ---------- Previous post was at 07:34 ----------

They supplied me with the router. Therefore I expect it to work.

Once again 1.85mbps through the router, 9.77mbps through the modem! At midnight exactly. Only 1 device connected.

You can't lease equipment that doesn't work properly and pass the responsibililty on to the customer.

1.85 isnt a shapped speed even if you include overheads I get 2.13 to 2.18 when throttled.

[Peter_]

They supplied me with the router. Therefore I expect it to work.


If we supplied the router you ring up and we confirm it is at fault then we replace it under warranty at no cost to yourself.

[Andrewcrawford23]

They supplied me with the router. Therefore I expect it to work.

Once again 1.85mbps through the router, 9.77mbps through the modem! At midnight exactly. Only 1 device connected.

You can't lease equipment that doesn't work properly and pass the responsibililty on to the customer.
you own the equipment virign are jsut suppoying the router jsut liek you buy it from argos and provide the warrenty if ti faulty but speed issues isnt a fault

[Welshchris]

i beg ones pardon?

[Peter_]

i beg ones pardon?
Read his signature Chris, he has been on here long enough for you to have noticed.

That post is perfectly legible.

You should have said in the post above.;)

[Welshchris]

Read his signature Chris, he has been on here long enough for you to have noticed.

That post is perfectly legible.

i didnt mean that, what i mean the part where he is saying about Warrenty doesnt make any sence as Moldova has u have already explained.

[Andrewcrawford23]

i didnt mean that, what i mean the part where he is saying about Warrenty doesnt make any sence as Moldova has u have already explained.
Virgin provide the warrenty replacemnt so if it borke they replace it as long s it in warrenty, which is 5 years for the dlink. unlike argos or curry etc if oyu buy one from them there more likely not replace it after a few month virign contunie to replace it in warrenty nad youg et teh fact you have agents who can test ti adn find otu fi ti is broke for oyu and hhlep fix it it if jsut ocnfiguration issue.

i stress again the only problem with speed ont eh dlink router is to do witht eh upload which you cant get full upload until you change a defualt setting but it aint that hard and you hardly notice the difference

[Welshchris]

its 2 years not 5 with Virgin.

which setting do u change for full upload?

[Peter_]

Virgin provide the warrenty replacemnt so if it borke they replace it as long s it in warrenty, which is 5 years for the dlink.
Andrew we only give a 2 year warranty on all routers click HERE (http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/broadband/wireless.html)

The wireless router has been designed for use with Virgin Media's Broadband service and includes a 2-year service warranty (for wireless router, wireless USB adapter and wireless laptop card) but this is dependent on you remaining a Virgin Media Broadband customer and using the Broadband and wireless equipment that we provide to you and recommend you use during that 2-year period.

[Andrewcrawford23]

Andrew we only give a 2 year warranty on all routers click HERE (http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/broadband/wireless.html)
Someone best inform some supervisor and managers of mine then ;) as they that is sometihng they are saying ot use for sellign routers

---------- Post added at 21:55 ---------- Previous post was at 21:50 ----------

its 2 years not 5 with Virgin.

which setting do u change for full upload?
Ill double check on monday for you :)

but i know it is sometihng to do with uplink and oyu need to change ti from automatic to manual and set it pretty high at least 2048

[Peter_]

Someone best inform some supervisor and managers of mine then ;) as they that is sometihng they are saying ot use for sellign routers


They should go by the website as to say otherwise is deliberate mis selling and illegal if found out.

[Andrewcrawford23]

They should go by the website as to say otherwise is deliberate mis selling and illegal if found out.
hay trust me techincally i am seeing a lot of stuff that borderline, i get someone phone up who been passed dpa previously but i cant work out for the life me how whent he customer cant answer similar questiosn wiht me

i dnt sell them on that i give teh cusotmer information ont eh rotuers and the featuera advangates and disadvangate of both and tell them form there needs what best.

[vaishali1997]

er....i've actually been throttled before cause i used to do so much peer to peer file sharing

u know all the user accounts on the computer....log onto someone else's account.......that's wat i do.........it gets your broadband speed to normal

it worked for me............good luck!

or disguise ur ip when peer to peer

[Peter_]

hay trust me techincally i am seeing a lot of stuff that borderline, i get someone phone up who been passed dpa previously but i cant work out for the life me how whent he customer cant answer similar questiosn wiht me

i dnt sell them on that i give teh cusotmer information ont eh rotuers and the featuera advangates and disadvangate of both and tell them form there needs what best.
That is by far the best way to handle those calls, I am technical support so no selling for me.;)

[Welshchris]

er....i've actually been throttled before cause i used to do so much peer to peer file sharing

u know all the user accounts on the computer....log onto someone else's account.......that's wat i do.........it gets your broadband speed to normal

it worked for me............good luck!

or disguise ur ip when peer to peer

LOL!

[Andrewcrawford23]

er....i've actually been throttled before cause i used to do so much peer to peer file sharing

u know all the user accounts on the computer....log onto someone else's account.......that's wat i do.........it gets your broadband speed to normal

it worked for me............good luck!

or disguise ur ip when peer to peer
you thin disguising your ip will stop you getting throttled? mmm no virign identify you form your modem and hte modem determines how much oyu have downloaded

[Welshchris]

Well i bought a Netgear WNR2000 today from Argos to replace the DLink...

Wired and Wireless i get 47 - 49mb...

I do get consistantly better speeds on downloads tho which are a lot more steady also.

On the Dlink it would peak at 6.2mb and fling around between around 2.7 and 4.5mb most of the time.

On the Netgear it get almost a constant 5.8mb steady from sites which barly fluctuates ive tested on so far such as Microsoft, Corel, and Gamefiles and these r same sites i tested D Link.

I am also using the Same PCI Ethernet card with Netgear as with Dlink its a Edimax 7728IN.

Details here....
http://www.edimax.co.uk/en/support_detail.php?pl1_idSelect=support.php%3Fpl1_ id%3D1%26mwsp%3D1&pl1_id=1&pd_id=225&button=Go

[arcamalpha2004]

The point is whether you agree with the traffic management policy or not the point is it's there. VM have to pay for the bandwidth that you use so if your using more than everyone else then you should either get a larger bandwdith, i.e. 20MB only costs £5 more and they have a larger download limit until your throtled or you can go with the 50MB service where you wont get throttled at all.

You can't have your cake and eat it, like it or not VM are a business and they are there to make money.


So, why make matters worse than they are by adding more customers to an already over subscribed service?
They should invest more money on capacity then add customers.
Makes more sense.
Thing is, if I ask and pay for a cake that will serve atleast eight people I dont want one that will serve less then be faced with the daft argument from the provider " Well we have to make money "

[BomberAF]

So, why make matters worse than they are by adding more customers to an already over subscribed service?
They should invest more money on capacity then add customers.
Makes more sense.
Thing is, if I ask and pay for a cake that will serve atleast eight people I dont want one that will serve less then be faced with the daft argument from the provider " Well we have to make money "


I had 10Mb BB and got 9Mb down load speeds, I then went onto 20Mb bb and got 17Mb+ download speeds, I now have 50Mb bb and get 50 Mb download speeds. The point is not that people are having slow internet connections because the network can't handle the data, the point what people are complaining about is the fact that once you reach a download limit in a certain amount of time they get throttled. VM could if they wanted just allow people to download at 10Mb all the time, but then they would not have any incentive for people to go on 20Mb or 50Mb bb would they? That would then in turn mean that the people who pay an extra either £5 or £13 for the larger packages are paying more money for the privaledge of larger bandwidth while the people who are on 10Mb get 10Mb all the time for paying no extra, (should also point out that the same could be said of the 20Mb). The point I make about having your cake and eating it is all about, is VM dont say you can always download at 10Mb all the time, so what are you complaining about. You pay for the service if you don't like it either get a bigger package or go elsewhere. Your analagy of the cake is just like saying, I bought a plain sponge cake, but I want the double choc with chocolate chips that people are paying more for, but I don't think I should have to pay for it.

[Welshchris]

I had 10Mb BB and got 9Mb down load speeds, I then went onto 20Mb bb and got 17Mb+ download speeds, I now have 50Mb bb and get 50 Mb download speeds. The point is not that people are having slow internet connections because the network can't handle the data, the point what people are complaining about is the fact that once you reach a download limit in a certain amount of time they get throttled. VM could if they wanted just allow people to download at 10Mb all the time, but then they would not have any incentive for people to go on 20Mb or 50Mb bb would they? That would then in turn mean that the people who pay an extra either £5 or £13 for the larger packages are paying more money for the privaledge of larger bandwidth while the people who are on 10Mb get 10Mb all the time for paying no extra, (should also point out that the same could be said of the 20Mb). The point I make about having your cake and eating it is all about, is VM dont say you can always download at 10Mb all the time, so what are you complaining about. You pay for the service if you don't like it either get a bigger package or go elsewhere. Your analagy of the cake is just like saying, I bought a plain sponge cake, but I want the double choc with chocolate chips that people are paying more for, but I don't think I should have to pay for it.

Rubbish VM cant just allow people to download at a given speed all the time as they simply dont have the bandwith hence why they introduced the traffic shaping measures in the first place!

[Andrewcrawford23]

So, why make matters worse than they are by adding more customers to an already over subscribed service?
They should invest more money on capacity then add customers.
Makes more sense.
Thing is, if I ask and pay for a cake that will serve atleast eight people I dont want one that will serve less then be faced with the daft argument from the provider " Well we have to make money "
virign have ot pay for the bandwidht that leaves there network so you willign to pay more for oyur conenction? it a fair price for what you get. and there onyl capcity problems on upload in ew areas which will eb sorted before th ewn uplaod speeds come into play later this year

[arcamalpha2004]

I had 10Mb BB and got 9Mb down load speeds, I then went onto 20Mb bb and got 17Mb+ download speeds, I now have 50Mb bb and get 50 Mb download speeds. The point is not that people are having slow internet connections because the network can't handle the data, the point what people are complaining about is the fact that once you reach a download limit in a certain amount of time they get throttled. VM could if they wanted just allow people to download at 10Mb all the time, but then they would not have any incentive for people to go on 20Mb or 50Mb bb would they? That would then in turn mean that the people who pay an extra either £5 or £13 for the larger packages are paying more money for the privaledge of larger bandwidth while the people who are on 10Mb get 10Mb all the time for paying no extra, (should also point out that the same could be said of the 20Mb). The point I make about having your cake and eating it is all about, is VM dont say you can always download at 10Mb all the time, so what are you complaining about. You pay for the service if you don't like it either get a bigger package or go elsewhere. Your analagy of the cake is just like saying, I bought a plain sponge cake, but I want the double choc with chocolate chips that people are paying more for, but I don't think I should have to pay for it.

Sorry Bomber, with respect, I do not see your logic.
I pay for 20mb speed, that is what I want, I do not need 50mb speed at the moment.
So it is not fair on people on 50mb that I only pay less for less?
Hmmm ;)
Your cake analogy is no better than mine in respect of what you are suggesting.
If I pay for a plain sponge cake I do not expect that it will have chocolate chips in it, and I certainly would not be expecting chocolate chips included for the same price!
You seem to be inferring that Variable media are capable of giving me the full 20mb I pay for, but decide not to in the hope that I upgrade to 50mb.
Oddly enough, people report that they get the full 50mb speed they pay for, so you could be right on one aspect, that they are trying to drum up more money from people.
But as I say, 20mb is all I need, it should not be too much trouble to give me what I pay for, no more no less.

---------- Post added at 07:00 ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 ----------

virign have ot pay for the bandwidht that leaves there network so you willign to pay more for oyur conenction? it a fair price for what you get. and there onyl capcity problems on upload in ew areas which will eb sorted before th ewn uplaod speeds come into play later this year


Andrew, as I said to Bomber, I pay for 20mb speed, I do not need 50mb speed, a fair price is about getting what you pay for, can you atleast agree with that?
Another analogy could be this.
I see a nice leather jacket for £100, I try it on, fits perfect ;)
On taking it to the cashier they rip one arm from the jacket.
" What are you playing at? " I ask bewildered.
" Well sir, there are people paying £500 for leather jackets, you do not expect two sleeves do you? come on sir, how are we ever going to clear that rack of £500 jackets? "

[Kymmy]

Andrew, as I said to Bomber, I pay for 20mb speed, I do not need 50mb speed, a fair price is about getting what you pay for, can you atleast agree with that?
Another analogy could be this.
I see a nice leather jacket for £100, I try it on, fits perfect ;)
On taking it to the cashier they rip one arm from the jacket.
" What are you playing at? " I ask bewildered.
" Well sir, there are people paying £500 for leather jackets, you do not expect two sleeves do you? come on sir, how are we ever going to clear that rack of £500 jackets? "

Here we go again, people using inaccurate analogies to explain away why STM is wrong :rolleyes:

Before anyone else posts any other analogies please read the contract you signed up for and you'll find out that you agreed to the traffic management (or at very least on an old contract the fact that they can throttle)..

You've bought a limited service with a contention ratio and as such there will be times that demand will outstrip the capability :rolleyes:

[arcamalpha2004]

Here we go again, people using inaccurate analogies to explain away why STM is wrong :rolleyes:

Before anyone else posts any other analogies please read the contract you signed up for and you'll find out that you agreed to the traffic management (or at very least on an old contract the fact that they can throttle)..

You've bought a limited service with a contention ratio and as such there will be times that demand will outstrip the capability :rolleyes:

Sorry Kymmy, my contract is from NTL days.
I certainly did not agree to traffic management, and as far as I know there are plenty of others who did not.
Do not do variable medias dirty work for them, you are here as an unbiassed mod remember.
Thankyou.

[Kymmy]

When STM was introduced you had an oppurtunity to leave or accept the changes in the new contract so even though you originally signed an old contract the new contract is still agreed to by yourself as and others in the same situation who stayed..

If anyone has a problem with contention/limits then there's lots of 1:1 no limit suppliers out there who'll give you a line for probably many thousands a year

[BomberAF]

Sorry Kymmy, my contract is from NTL days.
I certainly did not agree to traffic management, and as far as I know there are plenty of others who did not.
Do not do variable medias dirty work for them, you are here as an unbiassed mod remember.
Thankyou.

If you actually read the small print of the contract then you will find out that you did agree to the contract. Don't get me wrong I do beleive that the allowance before you get throttled isn't high enough, but like I said you get what you pay for. Without sticking up for VM as I do understand where you are comming from, but I don't believe there is any other bb provider that will give you so high a bandwidth, and I think VM know this. If there was a better deal out there people would be leaving VM for them, and I am sure VM would react, but as there isn't a better deal then VM can get away with what they do. The only thing that will change things is when BT roll out fibre in VM cabled areas, then there will be a price war, but as things stand VM have a monopoly on fast BB, which isn't good for consumers.

[Peter_]

Sorry Kymmy, my contract is from NTL days.
I certainly did not agree to traffic management, and as far as I know there are plenty of others who did not.
Do not do variable medias dirty work for them, you are here as an unbiassed mod remember.
Thankyou.
By virtue of continuing to pay for your services you therefore agree by to any changes in your contract which is standard practice within the industry.

You may have signed a contract with NTL but everything was transferred to the Virginmedia brand and you are now contracted to them, if you are not happy with traffic management then you are quite within your rights to take your business elsewhere.

But I would read the Terms and Conditions first. (http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/legal/oncable/terms.html#h)

[FlimsyBob]

By virtue of continuing to pay for your services you therefore agree by to any changes in your contract which is standard practice within the industry.

Sorry but that's utter rubbish, you cannot legally hold someone to contract they have not agree to, agreement is not automatically assumed by taking no action. If Virgin wishes to impose new terms of contract the customer must sign and agree to those terms (in order to hold someone to terms of contract, the person must have explicitly agreed and signed to "those" terms).

Virgin did NOT send out any such agreement or letter to be signed, as we to are ex-ntl customers. No letter or new agreement was sent out for us to sign, we therefore are not bound by any new conditions Virgin decided to add to their own contract (one which we never signed).

As far as we are concerned we are bound to the terms of service set out by NTL when we registered for service, of which contained no such capping or throttling clauses (or in any case, not those set out by Virgin). We have not signed any new agreements (i'd love to see you find a contract that has our signature on it that is not NTL, i really would).

Furthermore, when Virgin first introduced 20mb broadband, the service was advertised as the "Unlimited" or "Unrestricted" service, and was recommended as a service that heavy users should register for, now 50mb has appeared customers that originally moved to 20mb to avoid capping are now forced to either accept the capping or "again" move onto a larger package.

Next year it'll be capping 50mb connections, and you'll be required to buy the 100mb if you want uncapped service, and so on... and so on...

If i pay for 20mb broadband, and i do not get 20mb broadband 24 hours a day, then i'm not getting what i paid for (if that's not how the service works, then MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN YOU ADVERTISE THE SERVICE - this has never been clearly indicated in the selling of the services). I'm actually starting to monitor my speeds now, as it does nothing but aggrevate me to be receiving a sub-par service, a service which NTL actually never failed to deliver, accept when the service failed (as in it was offline all together, a fault).

If my speed is not 20mb all of the time, then i'll be noting what speed it is, and how often and working out the difference in cost, i then expect my bill to reflect the cost of the connection received (if i'm capped to 5mb for the equivalent of 5 days out of the month, i expect the cost to reflect that), not some warped/spun version of 20mb (that's only 20mb at non-peak times - what good is 20mb if i can only use it at that speed when i'm sleeping).

Clearly Virgin believes the majority of customers just want to sit and look at google all day, or only watch the occasional online stream. We're not in the stone age anymore, High Definition content is ripe on the internet, and using 100's of mb of bandwidth in a few hours is considered normal for alot of users.

Sorry my first post is somewhat of a rant, but couldn't remember my old login.

I don't mind being wrong, so go ahead, challenge me, inform me, debate... whatever, i'm not going anywhere.

[Kymmy]

Sorry but that's utter rubbish, you cannot legally hold someone to contract they have not agree to, agreement is not automatically assumed by taking no action. If Virgin wishes to impose new terms of contract the customer must sign and agree to those terms (in order to hold someone to terms of contract, the person must have explicitly agreed and signed to "those" terms)..

Which is why if you don't agree with the changes you can leave, by not leaving you accept the changes.. Customers these days very rarely sign a contract as acceptance is normally signified by payment

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:06 ----------

Here's the latest terms of service with the changes of agreement section

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/legal/oncable/terms.html#h

[FlimsyBob]

Seriously?..

Legally speaking, to hold a person to terms of contract, they must sign and agree to those terms, continued payment cannot be considered as acceptance of terms, that's just naive.

[Ed2020]

Sorry but that's utter rubbish, you cannot legally hold someone to contract they have not agree to.

True. A contract is an agreement to exchange goods or services, therefore without agreement it does not exist.

agreement is not automatically assumed by taking no action.

The customer is deemed to have accepted the variation of the contract's terms by continuing to take the service in exchange for payment. That is the action by which they confirm their acceptance.

If Virgin wishes to impose new terms of contract the customer must sign and agree to those terms (in order to hold someone to terms of contract, the person must have explicitly agreed and signed to "those" terms).

They must agree (and they have, as per my previous paragraph) but they do not have to sign anything to confirm their agreement. A contract does not have to be written down to exist, and it certainly does not have to be signed. Signed documents merely make the contract and its terms easier to prove if there is a dispute.

If i pay for 20mb broadband, and i do not get 20mb broadband 24 hours a day, then i'm not getting what i paid for (if that's not how the service works, then MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN YOU ADVERTISE THE SERVICE - this has never been clearly indicated in the selling of the services).

I agree, but you're not paying for 20mb broadband. You're paying for up to 20mb broadband on a residential and contended line.

Ed.

[arcamalpha2004]

Which is why if you don't agree with the changes you can leave, by not leaving you accept the changes.. Customers these days very rarely sign a contract as acceptance is normally signified by payment

---------- Post added at 14:09 ---------- Previous post was at 14:06 ----------

Here's the latest terms of service with the changes of agreement section

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/legal/oncable/terms.html#h


Sorry Kymmy, your logic really astounds me.
There can never be an " Unfair Contract " then? :erm:

[FlimsyBob]

They must agree (and they have, as per my previous paragraph) but they do not have to sign anything to confirm their agreement. A contract does not have to be written down to exist, and it certainly does not have to be signed. Signed documents merely make the contract and its terms easier to prove if there is a dispute.

This was not made clear in any of the correspondance sent out by Virgin, if they want to hold us to any new terms, this was not made clear in the information that has been sent out, if this had been made clear we'd have likely switched to another provider many years ago (this simply is not an option now since we rely on the phone and TV service, it would work out more costly to have an additional ADSL line - BT install etc..).

Are you saying i'm paying for 20mb some of the time, and whatever Virgin deems appropriate the rest of the time? (i purposely moved to this package because a member of staff told me it would be appropriate for high usage - this was before 50mb came along). As i said before, this was never set out by NTL as part of their terms, which as far as i'm concerned still apply.

I'm fortunate enough to hit speeds of 2.2 - 2.3mbps (20mb+) down at good times, but that's rarely for long, due to traffic management.

So it's not a question of what speed i can get, but what i'm being given (or allowed to use).

Quite frankly i don't really care how you word it, Virgin is not clearly outlining what they are providing to their customers, and in my opinion are mis-selling, and perhaps even over-selling their services. No amount of investment in infrastructure is going to matter if they're connecting too many people onto the service to begin with..

[Ed2020]

Sorry Kymmy, your logic really astounds me.
There can never be an " Unfair Contract " then? :erm:

Covered on page 52 of this document:

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/reports/unfair_contract_terms/oft311.pdf

Ed.

---------- Post added at 14:45 ---------- Previous post was at 14:34 ----------

This was not made clear in any of the correspondance sent out by Virgin, if they want to hold us to any new terms, this was not made clear in the information that has been sent out, if this had been made clear we'd have likely switched to another provider many years ago (this simply is not an option now since we rely on the phone and TV service, it would work out more costly to have an additional ADSL line - BT install etc..).

Actually I wholeheartedly agree - Virgin Media do not always make it clear when they have varied the terms of our contract. It's published on their website, but how often are we supposed to check to see if terms have been changed? Once a week ... once a day? Unfortunately, as this is common practice in the industry, I suspect a court of law wouldn't agree with us.

Are you saying i'm paying for 20mb some of the time, and whatever Virgin deems appropriate the rest of the time? (i purposely moved to this package because a member of staff told me it would be appropriate for high usage - this was before 50mb came along). As i said before, this was never set out by NTL as part of their terms, which as far as i'm concerned still apply.

Nope I'm not saying it. It's what you have agreed with Virgin Media when you accepted the variation of the contract.

As i said before, this was never set out by NTL as part of their terms, which as far as i'm concerned still apply.

The terms that have not subsequently been varied do still apply, but that is not all of them.

Quite frankly i don't really care how you word it, Virgin is not clearly outlining what they are providing to their customers, and in my opinion are mis-selling, and perhaps even over-selling their services. No amount of investment in infrastructure is going to matter if they're connecting too many people onto the service to begin with..

I don't have a copy of an NTL contract, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there are terms in there that specifically allow them to introduce measures to manage network usage. In fact I'd be more surprised if these terms didn't exist.

I'm inclined to agree, they are cramming more users onto the network than the infrastructure can handle (although I don't know for sure - others here are in a better position to comment). They're not in breach of contract by varying these terms though. Of that I am absolutely certain.

For the record, I'm not happy with this situation either. The law seems to favour the company, not the end consumer.

[BomberAF]

This was not made clear in any of the correspondance sent out by Virgin, if they want to hold us to any new terms, this was not made clear in the information that has been sent out, if this had been made clear we'd have likely switched to another provider many years ago (this simply is not an option now since we rely on the phone and TV service, it would work out more costly to have an additional ADSL line - BT install etc..).

Are you saying i'm paying for 20mb some of the time, and whatever Virgin deems appropriate the rest of the time? (i purposely moved to this package because a member of staff told me it would be appropriate for high usage - this was before 50mb came along). As i said before, this was never set out by NTL as part of their terms, which as far as i'm concerned still apply.

I'm fortunate enough to hit speeds of 2.2 - 2.3mbps (20mb+) down at good times, but that's rarely for long, due to traffic management.

So it's not a question of what speed i can get, but what i'm being given (or allowed to use).

Quite frankly i don't really care how you word it, Virgin is not clearly outlining what they are providing to their customers, and in my opinion are mis-selling, and perhaps even over-selling their services. No amount of investment in infrastructure is going to matter if they're connecting too many people onto the service to begin with..

I think your missing the point, when you originally sign a contract you and Virgin or NTL are both bound by the terms of the contract. After the contract expires then youboth become free of the contract so therefore VM or whoever can change you service with regards to throttling etc. While your under contract then you and VM or NTL are not allowed to breach the terms of the contract.

I think you will find that you and VM are no longer under cantract and just the way they are free to increase the price of the service after the contract expires they are also free to alter the conditions of the contract.

I think that is the reason why you have now got a different service from your BB provider.

As for the not having to sign a new contract, this is true. When / if you enter into a new contract with VM by increasing your package you enter into a new contract. You are free to leave this contract within 30 days as long as you don't use the service (not sure about the exact wording) after that you are bound by the T&C's of the contract.

[Kymmy]

Sorry Kymmy, your logic really astounds me.
There can never be an " Unfair Contract " then? :erm:

How can it be unfair if you have the right to cancel if they change it??? You're not forced to continue the contract as it has changed but by continuing payment you are accepting the changes.. That's not logic it just facts..

---------- Post added at 15:07 ---------- Previous post was at 15:06 ----------

I think your missing the point, when you originally sign a contract you and Virgin or NTL are both bound by the terms of the contract. After the contract expires then youboth become free of the contract so therefore VM or whoever can change you service with regards to throttling etc. While your under contract then you and VM or NTL are not allowed to breach the terms of the contract.

The contract doesn't expire, but carries on, only the minimum term expires

[Ed2020]

I think your missing the point, when you originally sign a contract you and Virgin or NTL are both bound by the terms of the contract. After the contract expires then youboth become free of the contract so therefore VM or whoever can change you service with regards to throttling etc. While your under contract then you and VM or NTL are not allowed to breach the terms of the contract.

I think you will find that you and VM are no longer under cantract and just the way they are free to increase the price of the service after the contract expires they are also free to alter the conditions of the contract.

I think that is the reason why you have now got a different service from your BB provider.

As for the not having to sign a new contract, this is true. When / if you enter into a new contract with VM by increasing your package you enter into a new contract. You are free to leave this contract within 30 days as long as you don't use the service (not sure about the exact wording) after that you are bound by the T&C's of the contract.

There is still an exchange of services for payment, so there is still a contract. When you first sign up you do so for a minimum period of twelve months. Virgin Media can still vary the terms of the contract(with agreement from the other party) within that twelve month period, however the customer can refuse to accept them and terminate the contract with no penalty (a penalty would, in all likelihood, be considered unfair).

Ed.

[BomberAF]

There is a contract but you aren't bound by the contract, and you are free to terminate that contract at any time without any notice. If you say for instance want Sky Sports then you must keepit for 30 days, and as for them being able to alter the T&C's then it must state in the contract that you sign that certain parts of your servie arre subject to change with or without your notice.

[Ed2020]

There is a contract but you aren't bound by the contract

Eh? :confused:

...and as for them being able to alter the T&C's then it must state in the contract that you sign that certain parts of your servie arre subject to change with or without your notice.

It would be advisable for them to explicitly state it for reasons of clarity, but there is no legal reason why this cannot be an implied term.

Ed.

---------- Post added at 16:26 ---------- Previous post was at 16:13 ----------

How can it be unfair if you have the right to cancel if they change it???

The OFT disagrees. Section 11.7 of the document I linked to earlier states:
"A term which could allow the supplier to vary what is supplied at will –
rather than because of bona fide external circumstances – is unlikely to be
fair even if customers have a right of cancellation and refund. The
consumer should never have to choose between accepting a product that is
not what was agreed, or suffering the inconvenience of unexpectedly not
getting, for example, goods for which he or she may have an immediate
need, or a long-planned holiday, just because it suits the supplier not to
supply what was promised."

Ed.

[Kymmy]

VM doesn't change the terms at will but as the paragraph states for a bona fide external reason. That reason in this case was unexpected demand hence the STM was brought in...

I didn't see many people complain about varying the contract when 4Mb upgraded to 10Mb nearly 2 years ago :D:D:D

[Welshchris]

hasnt this thread kind of gotten a little off topic?

[Ed2020]

VM doesn't change the terms at will but as the paragraph states for a bona fide external reason. That reason in this case was unexpected demand hence the STM was brought in...

I understood your previous post to mean that, providing you have the right to cancel the contract if they vary the terms, then it cannot be unfair. Possibly I misunderstood.

If the increase in network utilisation was caused by an increase in the number of customers, or because of VM's uplifts to their headline broadband speeds, then it could be argued that they have reduced the quality of what we receive in order to increase company profits. I wouldn't call that an external reason; it is within Virgin Media's control.

I didn't see many people complain about varying the contract when 4Mb upgraded to 10Mb nearly 2 years ago :D:D:D

Nope, but I'd still rather have the 10mb connection sans STM I had before the last round of upgrades than my current 20mb with STM. :)

Ed.

---------- Post added at 18:48 ---------- Previous post was at 18:47 ----------

hasnt this thread kind of gotten a little off topic?

Not off-topic ... it's just evolved.

Oh okay, I can't actually remember what the original question was so maybe it has gone slightly OT. :)

[Peter_]

Anyone who thinks that they are have not actually agreed to a contract but are happily continuing to pay Virginmedia for services needs to realise that is acceptance in its own right and that the T&C's are available for everyone to read.

Try complaining to the Citizens Advice bureau or OFCOM or a solicitor and you will find that the is nothing wrong with this type of contract as all companies include clauses that state they can change them when required.

If you do not like it then leave rather than argue about it, but remember to read the T&C's of your new provider where you will find similar clauses in small print.;);)

[arcamalpha2004]

Anyone who thinks that they are have not actually agreed to a contract but are happily continuing to pay Virginmedia for services needs to realise that is acceptance in its own right and that the T&C's are available for everyone to read.

Try complaining to the Citizens Advice bureau or OFCOM or a solicitor and you will find that the is nothing wrong with this type of contract as all companies include clauses that state they can change them when required.

If you do not like it then leave rather than argue about it, but remember to read the T&C's of your new provider where you will find similar clauses in small print.;);)


Sorry Moldova, has anyone actually yet tested this in the small claims court?
So lets say a case ended up in court, the DJ asks for a copy of the agreement.
The wig from variable media says " I have the Direct Debit Mandate "
Do you seriously think that answer is going to wash?
Do not be telling people to leave the company you work for because they expect what they are paying for.
What I would suggest people do who are fed up with the way variable media work is to inundate their customer services with complaints.
Also complain to your local trading standards.
Dont take the proverbial from them.
Once there is other competition in the fibre optic broadband game variable media will be on the scrap heap where their arrogance belongs.

---------- Post added at 23:01 ---------- Previous post was at 22:59 ----------

VM doesn't change the terms at will but as the paragraph states for a bona fide external reason. That reason in this case was unexpected demand hence the STM was brought in...

I didn't see many people complain about varying the contract when 4Mb upgraded to 10Mb nearly 2 years ago :D:D:D


Kymmy, tell me what would have happened had they not rolled out 10mb from 4mb?

[Peter_]

Sorry Moldova, has anyone actually yet tested this in the small claims court?
So lets say a case ended up in court, the DJ asks for a copy of the agreement.
The wig from variable media says " I have the Direct Debit Mandate "
Do you seriously think that answer is going to wash?
Do not be telling people to leave the company you work for because they expect what they are paying for.
What I would suggest people do who are fed up with the way variable media work is to inundate their customer services with complaints.
Also complain to your local trading standards.
Dont take the proverbial from them.
Once there is other competition in the fibre optic broadband game variable media will be on the scrap heap where their arrogance belongs.
Go for it but as they are following the regulations and have a very good legal team as well I think that you will find that everything is completely above board with regards to changes in the contract.

I also think that you will find that BT and all the other ISP's operate a similar policy as will all of your Utility companies.

You are not the first to say otherwise but no one has proved it to be wrong because if they did you would expect it to be all over the news and on the forums, and as yet all I have seen is just tumble weed.

I have said it before and will say it again, if you think that it is wrong then make a legal challenge and let us know the results, this is aimed at anyone who thinks they may have a case.

---------- Post added at 23:08 ---------- Previous post was at 23:07 ----------





Kymmy, tell me what would have happened had they not rolled out 10mb from 4mb?
STM was already in place before that roll out.

[Kymmy]

Kymmy, tell me what would have happened had they not rolled out 10mb from 4mb?

Irrelvant as they did roll it out, the same with STM and all the other changes they've made since the company was formed/changed/merged and then renamed..

If changes to contracts meant the contract was null without taking payment as acceptance of new terms then most service companies would be up the creek without a paddle, where in actual fact (yes we are talking about facts here and not the dreams of a perfect ideal world that only exists in some peoples heads) they continue business quite happily without resorting to thier whole business stopping whilst without the need to chase 100% of thier customers to sign a new contract...

Now talking of dreaming I'll now do some, though I do prefer doing it in my bed and not on a forum... Goodnight

[Ed2020]

Sorry Moldova, has anyone actually yet tested this in the small claims court?
So lets say a case ended up in court, the DJ asks for a copy of the agreement.
The wig from variable media says " I have the Direct Debit Mandate "
Do you seriously think that answer is going to wash?


Virgin Media are perfectly (and legally) entitled to put a reasonable time limit on formally notifying them that you are not accepting a variation to your contract. The period is 30 days or the date on which you receive your next bill (whichever is the later). All of this is covered very clearly in the current Virgin Media contract and the BY/TW contract I originally signed. I have little doubt that very similar wording was included in the NTL contracts. None of these terms seem to be incompatible with any of the legislation, codes of practice or consumer advice I have ever seen.

If:

Virgin Media Ltd, Virgin Media Entertainment and/or Virgin Media Payments increase their respective charges under these agreements;
Virgin Media Ltd and/or Virgin Media Entertainment make significant changes to the services so the services you are entitled to receive in return for the charges you pay are significantly altered or reduced;
or Virgin Media Ltd, Virgin Media Entertainment and/or Virgin Media Payments make significant changes to the terms and conditions of these agreements (including the other legal stuff ),

you may cancel those services affected without penalty by giving Virgin Media Ltd and/or Virgin Media Entertainment (as applicable) at least 30 days' notice in writing. If you cancel any services in these circumstances, the increased charges will not apply to those services during the 30-day notice period and paragraph J3 will not apply if you cancel before the end of the minimum period . If you do not give such notice of cancellation within 30 days of any increase in charges or changes to the services or this agreement being notified to you or, if later, receipt of your first bill following such increase in charges, Virgin Media, Virgin Media Entertainment (if applicable) and Virgin Media Payments will assume that you have accepted the increase in charges and the changes to the services and these agreements and you will no longer be able to cancel your services under this paragraph.

To put it another way, if you went to the County Court over a change to a contract VM had introduced years ago (as some of the examples quoted earlier in the thread were), and you have continued to use and pay for the service with the new terms, do you seriously think you'd have a leg to stand on? Even without this express term in the contract VM would have little difficulty in arguing that it is an implied term.

Do not be telling people to leave the company you work for because they expect what they are paying for.
What I would suggest people do who are fed up with the way variable media work is to inundate their customer services with complaints.
Also complain to your local trading standards.
Dont take the proverbial from them.
Once there is other competition in the fibre optic broadband game variable media will be on the scrap heap where their arrogance belongs.

Failure to deliver what the customer is paying for is another matter. This isn't variation of contract, it's breach of contract. There are a number of remedies that the County Court may apply in such cases, however in a case such as this the only realistic one is award of damages. As it would be extremely difficult to prove an actual financial loss as a result of breach of contract relating to a domestic broadband connection I wouldn't expect damages to be much more than you've paid VM for the service.

None of the examples listed so far in this thread would amount to breach of contract.

Ed.

[Welshchris]

Back on Topic regarding the DLink Router.....

The D-Link router used to drop connection if i downloaded 3 or more files together.

The Netgear WNR2000 i bought from Argos i have been downloading 4 and 5 files together now for over 30 mins and all is well.

[TMDoll]

Back on Topic regarding the DLink Router.....

The D-Link router used to drop connection if i downloaded 3 or more files together.

The Netgear WNR2000 i bought from Argos i have been downloading 4 and 5 files together now for over 30 mins and all is well.

Thanks, I think I'll buy one and give it a go. The D-Link just isn't up to it, we got an exact replacement from Virgin and it's no different (the third one I've tried). Supplying a router which can't handle the service is pretty poor lets be fair... or will all you VM people start sticking up for them about this?

I want my 10mbps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Peter_]

Thanks, I think I'll buy one and give it a go. The D-Link just isn't up to it, we got an exact replacement from Virgin and it's no different (the third one I've tried). Supplying a router which can't handle the service is pretty poor lets be fair... or will all you VM people start sticking up for them about this?

I want my 10mbps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It works on all tiers of service including 50Mb and is now the main router we supply.

It is a free router and you can always use another make and model.

I personally use an Edimax BR650N router.

[mjpartyboy]

We're having the same problem as the OP since moving from TalkTalk ADSL broadband, which gave us a constant 5+ MB any time of the day, to Virgin Media's L package.

What's really frustrating is it was my idea to move from ADSL to VM's fibre optic broadband because of the stable performance at my parent's house, but we're getting worse speeds on a dedicated fibre optic cable service than we were on an ADSL 'depends how far from the exchange' service, and the Wii can no longer connect to the internet.

My parents are getting over 9 MB on the L package about five miles away with an old NTL Ambit modem and a Linksys WRT54GS router. We're lucky if we get half of that doing a speed test at the same time using the same website and server. We've got one of VM's black modems and D-Link DIR-615 router.

It was awful last night:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/03/4.png

Even when the speed got better it was still less than the constant 5+ MB we were getting with TalkTalk ADSL. This is something I didn't expect at all.

A 30 minute phone call was a waste of time. After doing various speed tests and pings I've been told to use the VM SpeedBooster and call them back, as per their script I imagine.

http://www.virginmedia.com/speedbooster/

All the years we've had NTL/VM broadband at my parents, we've always got pretty much the advertised speed without any additional software or tampering with computers. I'm quite useful with computers so don't see how this software will help being as all devices on the network suffer the rubbish speeds (laptops, 360, and PS3), even when only one is connected. Suffice it to say, I will not be installing this software.

[Welshchris]

Thanks, I think I'll buy one and give it a go. The D-Link just isn't up to it, we got an exact replacement from Virgin and it's no different (the third one I've tried). Supplying a router which can't handle the service is pretty poor lets be fair... or will all you VM people start sticking up for them about this?

I want my 10mbps!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When u get it download the latest firmware and flasg as apparently the firmware before the latest had some issues where it would drop connections.

[TMDoll]

We're having the same problem as the OP since moving from TalkTalk ADSL broadband, which gave us a constant 5+ MB any time of the day, to Virgin Media's L package.

What's really frustrating is it was my idea to move from ADSL to VM's fibre optic broadband because of the stable performance at my parent's house, but we're getting worse speeds on a dedicated fibre optic cable service than we were on an ADSL 'depends how far from the exchange' service, and the Wii can no longer connect to the internet.

My parents are getting over 9 MB on the L package about five miles away with an old NTL Ambit modem and a Linksys WRT54GS router. We're lucky if we get half of that doing a speed test at the same time using the same website and server. We've got one of VM's black modems and D-Link DIR-615 router.

It was awful last night:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/03/4.png

Even when the speed got better it was still less than the constant 5+ MB we were getting with TalkTalk ADSL. This is something I didn't expect at all.

A 30 minute phone call was a waste of time. After doing various speed tests and pings I've been told to use the VM SpeedBooster and call them back, as per their script I imagine.

http://www.virginmedia.com/speedbooster/

All the years we've had NTL/VM broadband at my parents, we've always got pretty much the advertised speed without any additional software or tampering with computers. I'm quite useful with computers so don't see how this software will help being as all devices on the network suffer the rubbish speeds (laptops, 360, and PS3), even when only one is connected. Suffice it to say, I will not be installing this software.

Firstly - a quick piece of advice:

NEVER phone VM unless you have to. I nearly had a nervous breakdown after trying to get help thorugh the phone service. This forum is so helpful it's untrue.

I get full speed directly through the modem at all times. It's the DIR-615 that is the problem. I had a replacement which performed as badly as the first. I will now buy my own and have opened a new thread to get advice on which to get

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33663391-which-router.html

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33663391-which-router.html

[psyfur]

I had a new installation after my lodger moved out and took the VM connection with her. The start kit arrived, I wired it up with the DIR-615 and boom sod all speed and packet loss. Play around with the router for a few days no joy so went back to my netgear ranger finder max and it's all groovy ^_^

Love VM, hate STM!

[BomberAF]

Can someone please tell me what STM is?

[Welshchris]

STM is basically traffic management.

In basic terms what it means is depending on what package ur on if u reach ur download\upload limit for that given time in the day your speed will get limited for a 5hr period....

here are VM STM details...
http://www.virginmedia.com/help/traffic-management.php

[FlimsyBob]

Out of curiousity, are all the people with problematic DLink 615's buying/receiving them from Virgin? I'd imagine most if not all of you are as it appears these are provided free with 50mb service.

Personally i'm on my second one, but i've purchased both of mine (nothing to do with Virgin) and both have been faultless on the service. Had two seperate LinkSys routers prior to the DLinks and spent no end of rebooting them (they both eventually stopped working all together, not died, just stopped working).

Wireless is more shaky on auto channel selection/negotation (there are alot of Wireless connections close by though, so it's to be expected) ... but all in all they have been very good quality routers, i'd not have bought a second if the first had been rubbish (if i had read the threads here prior to my purchases i'd probably have chosen another model simply due to what's being said of them here).

I'm using 4 wired connection and 1 wireless connection, so it's not like the router ever gets a break, i'm just surprised my experience has been so different. If you asked me to name any problems that have occured, i'd only point at times where there has been total loss of service (that's obvious because the modem lights start playing musical chairs), or when Virgin's DNS servers are playing up (in such a case there are other DNS servers available).

[Welshchris]

I think its down to the shoddy VM Firmware again like they had on the Netgear WGR614s

[mjpartyboy]

With the knowledge and experience of computers that I already have and the more I read about these poor VM speeds across various forums, I'm starting to believe it is their supplied router, so will investigate this further.

[Fenlock]

Just for the hell of it, i'll add my story here - might be something firmware related and dlinks.

Since Monday i have had a very odd issue with my 50MB. Since i had it installed, ive had it running through a draytek 2820vn router. Its been 100% stable and reliable, and every download i max my speed with ease - so no complaints there.

So on Monday, i have had this odd dropping out issue. There was another thread that seems to have died with a few people reporting they had dropouts at the start of the week - but seem ok now. For me, i was getting a dropout (i,e line would go dead, 4 lights on 50mb router i.e loss of sync) about every 20-30 minutes.

It got worse going in to Tuesday, where by it seemed to only last about 10 minutes before it died. I had virgin check all my power and snr levels and they said it was fine (helpful English bloke). He's booked an engineer for tomorrow. I noticed though that MOST times - i could get the connection back by restarting the draytek router. Sometimes, the lights on the Virgin modem would stay on and OK despite the dip in connectivity. So i started to suspect the Draytek - and swapped it for a D-Link 655.

Now the Dlink acts very different to what the Draytek's doing. It's still not right, and the lights on the modem occasionally drop out - so i think there is still a virgin problem there. But now on the D-Link, the speed i get is very up and down (although the connection is not dipping out as much). If i start a large download, it will shoot to max speed, then quickly stop and slow right down to about 1000-2000 kbps (normally 6130kbps). It can hover then anything between 1000 and 3000, but does not reach max speed.

Its very strange symptoms. Im hoping its a local power issue or something, and the engineer can shed some light on it tomorrow. So currently ive got a Draytek that drops connection, but downloads at MAX speed - and a Dlink that seems to stay up (mostly) but downloads speeds go up and down like a yoyo.

Oddness.

[Casbar]

I've got the 20mb service, but after trying all of virgins help options, including downloading their speed software, I only get around 11Mbits and have never achieved anymore. I'm using the supplied Netgear Router, but get the same speeds if connected direct to the modem, so assumed its not a router issue. I do have the DLink 615 as well, but haven't bothered to connect it yet, as I don't have any Wireless N connections.

The chap down the road works for Virgin, and told me, he never gets 20Mb either:confused:

[mjpartyboy]

This is what I got from a speed test at 17:58:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/03/1.png

This is what I got at 18:17:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2010/03/2.png

I see it's going to be another night of rubbish from Virgin Media.

[TMDoll]

Ok, back to the original problem I had on this thread. Internet was rubbish, I wasn't being throttled, instead the router was playing up. Got a replacement from Virgin, same problem. Ended up buying a new router after finding out many other customers had the same problem.

I brought a NETGEAR WNR2000 (£49.99 on offer from Argos) recommended by Welshchris.

Initally it didn't work :( but after playing around with the config (for a few hours!) I have all devices connected and I'm getting near perfect speedtest results wirelessly and wired throughout the house. Happy days....

p.s D-link sucks and VM to some extent for giving me the router that didn't work, twice, therefore wasting my time. Although many helpful staff on this forum, I shall come here first next time without doubt

[Welshchris]

TMDOLL glad u got it all working.

remember if u havnt already done so if u get any issues with wireless dropping upgrade to the newest firmware.

[mjpartyboy]

I tried connecting to the modem directly, but as soon as I unplugged the Ethernet cable connecting it to the router, the green traffic light went off <-->, and when I plugged my laptop's Ethernet cable into the modem the traffic light would not come on and ipconfig kept saying "media disconnected." I'll try again later because I really want to see if get better speeds through the modem than I do through the router. That would suggest my router is the weakness.

[BomberAF]

When you change whether you PC is either connected via a directly through the router or modem, you must power off both the PC and router / modem each time. That will reset everything, you will then get your internet connection.

[TMDoll]

I tried connecting to the modem directly, but as soon as I unplugged the Ethernet cable connecting it to the router, the green traffic light went off <-->, and when I plugged my laptop's Ethernet cable into the modem the traffic light would not come on and ipconfig kept saying "media disconnected." I'll try again later because I really want to see if get better speeds through the modem than I do through the router. That would suggest my router is the weakness.


Basically, you're using the DIR 615 which is rubbish. I believe it's a problem with "a" and "g" wireless devices. We could connect any "N" device with no issues, but the speed would be cut by approxiamtely 75% (but it wasn;t throttling).

Any older devices would regularly get cut off or not be able to connect at all, wired or wirelessly. The DIR 615 should be able to handle all types of devices but simply couldn't handle 2 VISTA machines, 1 XP machine and an XBOX360. We could only get 1 or 2 connected at any one time!

We changed the config messing with QoS and security etc but nothing works, and nobosy has an answer so I resorted to buying the NETGEAR WNR2000 which seems brilliant so far. Very slight lag on XBOX live last night but it was peak time so I'll let that go for now!

If you can get a good speed consistantly through the modem then just shell out the £50 for a new router. Virgin replaced our DIR-615 but it performed in the same way so I wouldn't waste any more of your time with this router.

[mjpartyboy]

I've finally connected direct to the modem and haven't had a speed test less than 8 MB, whereas through the router I'm getting the usual poor speeds. How can a router, a purpose built item, cause so many problems?!

I think I'll bring my Linksys one round here and take the DIR-615 to my parents and see how they compare in the different locations.

---------- Post added at 19:38 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------

I've noticed something I didn't expect since connecting the router again.

When I was directly connected to the modem, the IP address for VM was different and since I've connected it back to the router and power cycled the modem to get the connection back, the router is reporting a different IP, which is the one it was using before I bypassed the router. I expected the router to display the same IP I was using when I was hard wired to the modem. I disconnected the router and hard wired to the modem again and it has gone back to the other IP again and the speeds are great, I go back to the router, get the old router IP and poor speeds again.

Does this IP situation have any relation to the poor speeds?

[Hugh]

You really don't want to be posting your IP addresses on a open forum....

[TMDoll]

I've finally connected direct to the modem and haven't had a speed test less than 8 MB, whereas through the router I'm getting the usual poor speeds. How can a router, a purpose built item, cause so many problems?!

I think I'll bring my Linksys one round here and take the DIR-615 to my parents and see how they compare in the different locations.

---------- Post added at 19:38 ---------- Previous post was at 18:03 ----------

I've noticed something I didn't expect since connecting the router again.

When I was directly connected to the modem, the IP address for VM was different and since I've connected it back to the router and power cycled the modem to get the connection back, the router is reporting a different IP, which is the one it was using before I bypassed the router. I expected the router to display the same IP I was using when I was hard wired to the modem. I disconnected the router and hard wired to the modem again and it has gone back to the other IP again and the speeds are great, I go back to the router, get the old router IP and poor speeds again.

Does this IP situation have any relation to the poor speeds?

Does the router display it as the "modems" or "ISP"'s IP address? The router will have a different IP address than the modem so are you just looking at the routers IP address when connected to that and modem's IP address when connected to that?

I don't believe that is the problem. Try changing the channel in router config. If that doesn't work try another router before anything else

[mjpartyboy]

Does the router display it as the "modems" or "ISP"'s IP address? The router will have a different IP address than the modem so are you just looking at the routers IP address when connected to that and modem's IP address when connected to that?

I see what you're saying.

Please can you remove my quote, now that I've changed my other post to remove my IP addresses. :blush:

[Raistlin]

Quote edited, IP addresses removed.

[mjpartyboy]

Quote edited, IP addresses removed.

Thank you and sorry about that. My brain is scrambled from the amount of tests, diagnosis, and cable swaps I've done tonight. :doh:

[mjpartyboy]

I did some more tests today and already the speeds are low. I think I just need to accept that the router is causing the problem. I hard wire to the modem and get 8+ MB all the time, I go through the router and get barely half of that.

The VM gamefiles site they use to test speed showed some interesting results. Through the router the best I've seen is 600 KB per second and as low as 74 KB, but hard wired to the modem it was 900-1000 KB per second solid.

I really don't understand how the router could be causing the speed problems, but I'm going to connect my Linksys WRT54GS from my parents' place to our black VM modem and then connect the D-Link DIR-615 to their NTL Ambit modem and see how the speeds perform that way round. The connection at my parents' is always 8-9 MB with the Ambit and Linksys, whereas as ours is anything from 1-9 MB, usually less than 5 MB, with the black modem and D-Link.

I have yet to see the black modem's downstream SNR at 37 dB or higher, yet we still get slow speeds through the router.

[mjpartyboy]

After an exhaustive weekend of testing the D-Link at my parents' and the Linksys at the other place, I'm pretty confident that the router is the cause of the poor speeds. I don't know what it is, but it's doing something to the traffic passing through it and I think it's related to the way is handles DNS information.

I'm disappointed to have to go and buy a new router when the one supplied should be fit for purpose. I don't even know what router to try so as to avoid the same problem again. I like the look of the Netgear WNR2000 (http://www.netgear.co.uk/wnr2000.php) and Linksys WRT120N (http://www.linksysbycisco.com/UK/en/products/WRT120N) though.

[Kymmy]

The wnr2000 are what vm used to supply with the 50Mb and from previous posts were worse than the current d-links

[TMDoll]

After an exhaustive weekend of testing the D-Link at my parents' and the Linksys at the other place, I'm pretty confident that the router is the cause of the poor speeds. I don't know what it is, but it's doing something to the traffic passing through it and I think it's related to the way is handles DNS information.

I'm disappointed to have to go and buy a new router when the one supplied should be fit for purpose. I don't even know what router to try so as to avoid the same problem again. I like the look of the Netgear WNR2000 (http://www.netgear.co.uk/wnr2000.php) and Linksys WRT120N (http://www.linksysbycisco.com/UK/en/products/WRT120N) though.

Well I've suffered from exactly the same issue as you and brought a NETGEAR WNR2000. I had to mess around with a few settings to get it work, but now it is working well with full speeds consistantly through the router on all the devices I use.

It is annoying that they supply this router which performs poorly. It is also annoying that VM don't seem to have any solution to this at all other than to suggest buying your own router.

[Peter_]

Well I've suffered from exactly the same issue as you and brought a NETGEAR WNR2000. I had to mess around with a few settings to get it work, but now it is working well with full speeds consistantly through the router on all the devices I use.

It is annoying that they supply this router which performs poorly. It is also annoying that VM don't seem to have any solution to this at all other than to suggest buying your own router.
As I have said before I use no Virginmedia supplied router and my present router is an Edimax BR650N which I am more than happy with.

[Welshchris]

The wnr2000 are what vm used to supply with the 50Mb and from previous posts were worse than the current d-links

i got a WNR2000 with latest firmware and it beats the DLink 615 hands down on everything!

[mjpartyboy]

It's that time of the night again. Our 10 MB connection was fine up until late afternoon / early evening and now it's down to less than 2 MB. Poor, poor, poor. Meanwhile, as ever, my parent's 10 MB connection is fine.

[TMDoll]

It's that time of the night again. Our 10 MB connection was fine up until late afternoon / early evening and now it's down to less than 2 MB. Poor, poor, poor. Meanwhile, as ever, my parent's 10 MB connection is fine.

Throttled?

[mjpartyboy]

Throttled?

That's what it's like, except it happens without going anywhere near the evening cap. It's very strange.

[arcamalpha2004]

Here we go again, people using inaccurate analogies to explain away why STM is wrong :rolleyes:

Before anyone else posts any other analogies please read the contract you signed up for and you'll find out that you agreed to the traffic management (or at very least on an old contract the fact that they can throttle)..

You've bought a limited service with a contention ratio and as such there will be times that demand will outstrip the capability :rolleyes:

Nothing at all wrong with the anology, suggest you read it again.

---------- Post added at 10:32 ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 ----------

If you actually read the small print of the contract then you will find out that you did agree to the contract. Don't get me wrong I do beleive that the allowance before you get throttled isn't high enough, but like I said you get what you pay for. Without sticking up for VM as I do understand where you are comming from, but I don't believe there is any other bb provider that will give you so high a bandwidth, and I think VM know this. If there was a better deal out there people would be leaving VM for them, and I am sure VM would react, but as there isn't a better deal then VM can get away with what they do. The only thing that will change things is when BT roll out fibre in VM cabled areas, then there will be a price war, but as things stand VM have a monopoly on fast BB, which isn't good for consumers.

Sorry Bomber, my contract was with NTL.
So no, I did not agree with what you say I agreed with.
If I chose to, or someone else chose, the contract could be challenged in a court.
Once there is more competition in the market place I am quite sure people will leave VM, after all, the only strong thing they have is their Broadband, the other two services can be obtained under far better terms.
VM will either be taken over again or consigned to the place it deserves, imo anyway.

---------- Post added at 10:33 ---------- Previous post was at 10:32 ----------

That's what it's like, except it happens without going anywhere near the evening cap. It's very strange.

But you would have agreed with it so it is quite ok :erm:

---------- Post added at 10:35 ---------- Previous post was at 10:33 ----------

It's that time of the night again. Our 10 MB connection was fine up until late afternoon / early evening and now it's down to less than 2 MB. Poor, poor, poor. Meanwhile, as ever, my parent's 10 MB connection is fine.

If you are paying for 10mb speed and only achieving 2mb would you not be better with adsl?

[mjpartyboy]

If you are paying for 10mb speed and only achieving 2mb would you not be better with adsl?

2 MB, how about 1 MB and less this week. I'm amazed that in the year 2010 a 10 MB fibre optic broadband service can only deliver 1 MB if we're lucky. I would love to go back to the ADSL service we had before joining VM, at least we got a stable 5 MB no matter what time of the day it was, but sadly we're tied into VM's 12 month contract and we moved the phone over to them too.

[TMDoll]

Here we go again, people using inaccurate analogies to explain away why STM is wrong :rolleyes:

Before anyone else posts any other analogies please read the contract you signed up for and you'll find out that you agreed to the traffic management (or at very least on an old contract the fact that they can throttle)..

You've bought a limited service with a contention ratio and as such there will be times that demand will outstrip the capability :rolleyes:

I don't think the point is whether the contact is signed or not. Virgin deliberately hide it so that customers won't find the detail of the policy.

Also, for a 10mbps connection, 750mB in a 5 hour period is too small and out of date in my opinion when a single BBC iplayer vid can be 800mb +. Remember, 10mbps is pretty fast for this day and age so people don't think they need 20 or 50mbps which they shouldn't.

Virgin simply want to force their customers onto 20+50 packages to make money. Their "unlimited" broadband service as its sold is actually not unlimited is it?

It's probably seen a good business move to make money etc, but there's no way I'll accept the policy as it could also be described as "shafting the customer".

The details of the policy aren't even in the contract, you have to access the web then another link to find it. They hide it on purpose, therefore I think it is wrong.

[Peter_]

I don't think the point is whether the contact is signed or not. Virgin deliberately hide it so that customers won't find the detail of the policy.

Also, for a 10mbps connection, 750mB in a 5 hour period is too small and out of date in my opinion when a single BBC iplayer vid can be 800mb +. Remember, 10mbps is pretty fast for this day and age so people don't think they need 20 or 50mbps which they shouldn't.

Virgin simply want to force their customers onto 20+50 packages to make money. Their "unlimited" broadband service as its sold is actually not unlimited is it?

It's probably seen a good business move to make money etc, but there's no way I'll accept the policy as it could also be described as "shafting the customer".

The details of the policy aren't even in the contract, you have to access the web then another link to find it. They hide it on purpose, therefore I think it is wrong.
It is all here for you to see 6th item down and you would check their website first.
http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html/legal/index.html?buspart=Portal_HP_footer_6_1

[pip08456]

Virgin simply want to force their customers onto 20+50 packages to make money. Their "unlimited" broadband service as its sold is actually not unlimited is it?



It is not very often I come to the defence of VM (I do promote the use of BE if you are in the area for good speed from them)

With VM compared to the majority of other providers "unlimited" means that. You can download as much as you want their STM just allows others in your area to do what they want. If I remember correctly someone actually posted that your "unlimited" over 24hrs equated to 60GB per day, I haven't done the math buit that was on a 10Mb connection.

I left VM when STM came into effect and went to BE I've come back due to the length from the exchange having moved.

In the past 12mths I've had my speed throttled twice and both my own fault.
I have always downloaded what I wanted.

Would I go back to BE? Yes if and when BT's FTTC has been rolled out and BT wholesale sells it on to other providers. (and install costs etc have come down)

50Mb does not have any STM, 20Mb has generous allowances for most.

[mjpartyboy]

I would be happy if we received at least 5 MB on the L package, so that our broadband experience was no worse than the ADSL service we left for the supposedly superior fibre optic service, but lately we're lucky if it's running at 1 MB in the evening without being throttled, which is disgraceful.

[pip08456]

I would be happy if we received at least 5 MB on the L package, so that our broadband experience was no worse than the ADSL service we left for the supposedly superior fibre optic service, but lately we're lucky if it's running at 1 MB in the evening without being throttled, which is disgraceful.

I agree that people would be happy with that, however a lot seem to jump onto STM as the problem when it is most likely (not all the time ) to be oversubscription in the area they are in.

This does not excuse VM at all, in fact it has the opposite effect,

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

If they can see high utilisation then something needs doing there and then.

[TMDoll]

It is not very often I come to the defence of VM (I do promote the use of BE if you are in the area for good speed from them)

With VM compared to the majority of other providers "unlimited" means that. You can download as much as you want their STM just allows others in your area to do what they want. If I remember correctly someone actually posted that your "unlimited" over 24hrs equated to 60GB per day, I haven't done the math buit that was on a 10Mb connection.

I left VM when STM came into effect and went to BE I've come back due to the length from the exchange having moved.

In the past 12mths I've had my speed throttled twice and both my own fault.
I have always downloaded what I wanted.

Would I go back to BE? Yes if and when BT's FTTC has been rolled out and BT wholesale sells it on to other providers. (and install costs etc have come down)

50Mb does not have any STM, 20Mb has generous allowances for most.

I understand that 50Mb has no STM and 20Mb is ok I'll give you that, but again I must make the point that 750MB in a 5 hour period is not fair and out of date. Also, it is quite rare that I get throttled, but that is because I know of the policy and have to avoid downloading/streaming at certain times.

It takes 6 minutes on a 10mbps connection at full speed to hit 750MB.
A single BBC iplayer vid is anything from 400-1400MB.

In this day and age of telecomms I simply beleive this policy is out of date and unfair on users like myself.

If they want a fair system then they should introduce a week/month long limit whereby I won't get punished for 5 hours after watching a few vids in the evening when torrenters will be downloading GBs of data overnight.

Its all profiteering. I know VM are there to make money, but sacrificing a little for some happier customers would go a long way.

They sell their service as fibre optic and unlimited:
1. Have you noticed the fact that a copper coax cable runs into your house hence limiting everything down to that bandwidth.
2. Many customers are over congested which to me makes no sense given that 1 fibre cable can handle 10's of Gbs per second.

So they lie to some customers and then start talking about 100mbps before sorting out full speed for some 10mbps users.

Look I may be a bit of a hippie at heart, but I can't accept it when a company uses dirty tactics to make more money. Fair enough if people do, each to their own.

---------- Post added at 17:15 ---------- Previous post was at 17:12 ----------

I agree that people would be happy with that, however a lot seem to jump onto STM as the problem when it is most likely (not all the time ) to be oversubscription in the area they are in.

This does not excuse VM at all, in fact it has the opposite effect,

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

If they can see high utilisation then something needs doing there and then.

Great point, and the fact they are talking about rolling out 100mbps is ridiculous given they can't provide the service they offer at present.

Personally STM doesn't affect me too much, but only because I am aware of it. Most customers wont know the limits or understand them and VM know this. My point in the latter posts of this thread is that it is an unfair policy regardless of who it affects

[pip08456]

The copper coax can easily handle the speeds they advertise and most likely more, so that is not the problem. Oversubscription is the biggest factor affecting most people with connection problems and until VM upgrade their system where this happens it will continue to be the problem.

[mjpartyboy]

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

If they can see high utilisation then something needs doing there and then.

I wasn't happy with this response from them. How can it not already be "worse" at less than 1 MB on numerous occasions.

I understand that 50Mb has no STM and 20Mb is ok I'll give you that, but again I must make the point that 750MB in a 5 hour period is not fair and out of date. Also, it is quite rare that I get throttled, but that is because I know of the policy and have to avoid downloading/streaming at certain times.

It takes 6 minutes on a 10mbps connection at full speed to hit 750MB.
A single BBC iplayer vid is anything from 400-1400MB.

In this day and age of telecomms I simply beleive this policy is out of date and unfair on users like myself.

If they want a fair system then they should introduce a week/month long limit whereby I won't get punished for 5 hours after watching a few vids in the evening when torrenters will be downloading GBs of data overnight.

This is a very good point and you can add the 360 and PS3 online stores to this because some of the content on those can be more than 1.5 GB for one item, like a demo for example, so the one day you download something this big you're labelled a top 5% downloader and are then throttled.

Why should legitimate online content be subject to these over zealous throttling policies, whilst torrent traffic can happily go on all night long without any issues.

The thing is, I'm having major speed issues before any of this throttling is taking place.

[pip08456]

Why should legitimate online content be subject to these over zealous throttling policies, whilst torrent traffic can happily go on all night long without any issues.

The thing is, I'm having major speed issues before any of this throttling is taking place.

Torrent traffic is subject to exactly the same policy so get that out of your head as you seem to have an entirely different issue if your speed problems happen before the STM period.

BTW I should add that Bit Torrent is a legitimate protocol for downloading and there are many "legal" files etc that can be accessed.

[mjpartyboy]

Torrent traffic is subject to exactly the same policy so get that out of your head as you seem to have an entirely different issue if your speed problems happen before the STM period.

The point I was making was when you use your bandwidth during reasonable hours to download and watch legit content you can get throttled, but queue up the torrents before bed and they can download while you're sleeping without any consequence.

I'm just sick of the poor broadband and we've only had it since the start of March.

[pip08456]

The point I was making was when you use your bandwidth during reasonable hours to download and watch legit content you can get throttled, but queue up the torrents before bed and they can download while you're sleeping without any consequence.

I'm just sick of the poor broadband and we've only had it since the start of March.

I understand what you are trying to say and agree hence this comment earlier

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

And again to add-There are many "legit" torrents.

[TMDoll]

Torrent traffic is subject to exactly the same policy so get that out of your head as you seem to have an entirely different issue if your speed problems happen before the STM period.

BTW I should add that Bit Torrent is a legitimate protocol for downloading and there are many "legal" files etc that can be accessed.

There may be "many" legal files that can be accessed by torrents but I'd like to see what proportion that is. 1% maybe? You know that nearly all will be illegal.

Yes torrent traffic is subject the exactly the same policy but not at night as was mentioned before your comment. The point being you get throttled unfairly for what is now standard internet usage (a ps3 demo/iplayer vid) whilst people download torrents all night without being throttled.

I'll start a new thread asking peoples thoughts on the traffic management policy

[Andrewcrawford23]

There may be "many" legal files that can be accessed by torrents but I'd like to see what proportion that is. 1% maybe? You know that nearly all will be illegal.

Yes torrent traffic is subject the exactly the same policy but not at night as was mentioned before your comment. The point being you get throttled unfairly for what is now standard internet usage (a ps3 demo/iplayer vid) whilst people download torrents all night without being throttled.

I'll start a new thread asking peoples thoughts on the traffic management policy
YOu do realise the lieks of microsoft updates use p2p?? (not with users but otehr microsoft servers) and lots of linux and unix distro do as well that jsut few legal p2p so i say the perentage for legal is more like 20-30%

[pip08456]

I was not defending the use of Bit Torrent per se. The thrust of my post was and always will be what I stated in my previous posts and I can see I have to do it again to get my point across.

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

This is the issue that VM need to resolve - not what happens at night when people are in bed, but when they need to use their connection!

[Andrewcrawford23]

I was not defending the use of Bit Torrent per se. The thrust of my post was and always will be what I stated in my previous posts and I can see I have to do it again to get my point across.

Answers from 2nd line support like "I can see high utilisation at certain times and will escalate it if it increases* (or words to that effect) do not cut it. The times when it happens are the times when people want to use their connection.

This is the issue that VM need to resolve - not what happens at night when people are in bed, but when they need to use their connection!
apogolise then i thought you where jsut sayign that p2p traffic was 99% ilgeeal traffic only, i do apogolise i only read last few posts liek i normal do teach me for not folloiwng a htread

[pip08456]

That's OK Andy. Lesson learned?

[TMDoll]

YOu do realise the lieks of microsoft updates use p2p?? (not with users but otehr microsoft servers) and lots of linux and unix distro do as well that jsut few legal p2p so i say the perentage for legal is more like 20-30%

Yeah but they are not torrent files

[pip08456]

Yeah but they are not torrent files

I was going to point that out but decided not to bother. Microsoft update via P2P????

It is possible to get MS updates from elsewhere, in lumps basically for network admins to install on multiple PC's at the same time. But that is another story.

[Andrewcrawford23]

Yeah but they are not torrent files
no but torrent ar eonly one form of p2p sharing thre been many form kazaa to limewire to that msuci one that shutdown and reopend as legal service jsut because they dnt use torrent means nothing the way there backend servers work to give you file at full speed is using p2p sopftware

---------- Post added at 20:18 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

I was going to point that out but decided not to bother. Microsoft update via P2P????

It is possible to get MS updates from elsewhere, in lumps basically for network admins to install on multiple PC's at the same time. But that is another story.
you mean adminsitrative install point ;) yeah that for corpate place so they dnt downlaod the same file countless times they jsut deploy it fro AD or other means