Does this sound right to anyone?

[Stouffer]

I've been on a reduced tariff for a while due to numerous problems with the service over a few years. Stable net, but horrendous billing issues which ended messily thanks to a few mistakes on virgins behalf.

Anyway, I've just been told that despite being on the highest connection available in my area, I'm no longer allowed discounts due to high usage? I can understand if I was uploading mass amounts via bit torrent, but 135 gig one month and 230 another downloaded is excessive according to the lady on the phone? Considering I'm an avid online gamer and use a lot of online services like steam, download from psn and live, and buy a lot of films from iTunes and psn, is that too much? Is it really excessive?

And the woman on the phone was not only hugely arrogant, she also lied. I said I watch lovefilm and do download, and she claimed that online gaming (which is probably 10 hours a week) was to blame, not to mention she also said bt has its highest bb package set at a 40gig cap.

So am I wrong for thinking that it really isn't excessive since I'm not really caning my upload all day, nor hammering it at peak as the majority of my use has always been 9pm onwards.

Something doesn't sit right with what she said, so I'm thinking of changing ISP now.

[Sephiroth]

Seems that they've decided that your rebate should come to an end because, as your usage shows, problems have gone away.

If that's the case, and on the information provided by you above, it seems reasonable to me.

There may be more to it than that, but not apparent to me at this time.

[Stouffer]

Seems that they've decided that your rebate should come to an end because, as your usage shows, problems have gone away.

If that's the case, and on the information provided by you above, it seems reasonable to me.

There may be more to it than that, but not apparent to me at this time.

As I said, connections never been an issue, it's always been the billing. I'm still trying to reclaim money I'm owed for duplicate bills they've denied, despite me sending proof it happened.

But as I said, is 230 a month down excessive? If it is considered to be, on the highest package, I'm leaving anyway so just wondering really.

[boroboi]

I wouldn't say 230 was too excessive, but in my opinion it is a lot in comparison to the "average" user. I wouldn't think that would be a problem though as there are probably people who download a lot more than that.

Perhaps it's time to threaten them with ofcom and small claims court.

[7031]

As I said, connections never been an issue, it's always been the billing. I'm still trying to reclaim money I'm owed for duplicate bills they've denied, despite me sending proof it happened.

But as I said, is 230 a month down excessive? If it is considered to be, on the highest package, I'm leaving anyway so just wondering really.
The customer service you've received is appauling so I don't blame you for leaving at all. BT Infinity I presume?

230GB isn't excessive in my opinion. Higher than average, but not excessive. In January for example I downloaded 623GB and uploaded 87GB. In February I downloaded 366GB and uploaded 78GB. I consider myself to be a pretty heavy user in fariness but that said seeing some threads from people complaining about getting letters after downloading say, 2TB in a week make me feel a bit better about myself haha. That said I've been cutting down on my usage in general lately mainly as there's not much reason to need to download over 500GB.

[General Maximus]

same, on a scale of 1 - 10 I think of myslelf around 7 for usage. In the last week I have downloaded 200gb and uploaded 44. I am very good though and try to do it all at night. When they start being anal about usage you just need to ask them why they bother with 100mbit connections if you cant use them? They might do some stats and say the average is 5gb per customer per week or something but in numbers, the average tier speed is also probably something like 5 - 10mbits and there will obviously be people below and above that. If they want everyone to download peanuts then everyone should also be on the pansy tiers and then they wouldnt get an money.

[DABhand]

You can easily do 200GB in one day if there was no Traffic Management on 30mb.

So they have no idea what they are talking about these days when they start calling people heavy users, I always tell them off when they say my 170GB last month was heavy usage... Until I described how quickly I can get that and what it was on (legit games bought over Steam etc, most avg out at 7-8GB these days), movies on netflix 1-2GB each.

It always makes them rethink..

And I will always tell them "When it is in Terrabytes come talk to me about heavy usage" :P

[Sephiroth]

Incidentally, and possibly following my long campaign (LOL double LOL), VM have now removed references to such clains as "perfect for gaming". In fact their headline now makes no claim whatsoever as to fitness for any purpose other than up to 100 meg or whatever.

But the unsuspecting prospect is still duped into thinking he/she'll get 92% of the headlne speed. So some way to go still.

[Nopanic]

http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/broadband/gaming-broadband

[qasdfdsaq]

Yeah, and the unsuspecting also will be duped into thinking more megabits = better.

[General Maximus]

that is the thing though, I know they are all supposedly trained to the same standard but you will have some people who work in the call centres and are set in their ways and think that if they only use a few gb per month sending emails and browsing then why would anyone else want more. Despite our opinions on peformance and whatever else, VM are moving with the times and as we use the internet more and more for so many different things the speed needs to increase proportionally with usage. We are sort of hitting a double whammy atm where not only do we have more and more devices using the internet and more things having a QR code and stuff like that, technology progresses and most peeps have HD tv's and want more on demand content and HD stuff is super chunky. It isnt just one thing like the advent of online gaming that causes spikes in usage anymore, it is everything.

If they wouldn't to plan properly and factor this is they would do well to assume every customer downloads 500gb/month and plan their upgrades accordingly.

[Sephiroth]

http://www.broadbandgenie.co.uk/broadband/gaming-broadband

That article you referenced in no way extols or in any other way endorses VM's service as suitable for gaming other than the possible usefulness of fast downloading.

Anyway, I'm not complaining. It's about time VM lived up to its own (discredited) "Broadband Con" campaign. Just thought it worth pointing out.

[General Maximus]

Incidentally, and possibly following my long campaign (LOL double LOL), VM have now removed references to such clains as "perfect for gaming". In fact their headline now makes no claim whatsoever as to fitness for any purpose other than up to 100 meg or whatever.

But the unsuspecting prospect is still duped into thinking he/she'll get 92% of the headlne speed. So some way to go still.

well done Seph, that it is something which has been niggling at me for ages because I am a massive fps gamer.

Power to the people (take note Nopanic) :clap:

[Sephiroth]

Mon General, I prolly give myself false credit. But I've been banging on about this in both forums; NoPanic hasn't liked it; one or two of the mods here call that sort of thing "VM bashing".

The real reason, I think for VM changing its tune is the current OFCOM report which recognises poor latency as a problem that VM faces in relation to gaming.

I'm still angry that despite VM always knowing that they have gaming problems in lots of places, they still then put out that "perfect for gaming" tripe at the same time as they were criticising others for broadband dishonesty.

We game on BT Infiity now. Whan BT give me FTTP next year, I won't need a VM broadband service; not even for backup.

[qasdfdsaq]

The real reason, I think for VM changing its tune is the current OFCOM report which recognises poor latency as a problem that VM faces in relation to gaming.
Yes, that was highly intriguing. I'm excited for the next report, and then the one after, as that'll pretty much start and end on the date BT hikes Infinity up to 80mb.

[General Maximus]

I completely agree with you dude. I have been playing first person shooters for years and despite how much I have always loved my connection for downloading, it sucks for gaming. Anyone who cant deal with stats and the truth has got their head in the clouds. Advocating VM to advertise something which we all know isnt true is just as bad as putting countries like Syria and Iran on the UN Human Rights Council. It is an absolute joke and complete hypocracy.

[craigj2k12]

Sorry to shoot you down Seph but the "Perfect for gaming" advert was pulled thanks to Chrysalis' complaint to the ASA. Dont want to get a ban or anything for linking to 'banned sites' but if you google the exact phrase "VM get knuckles rapped by ASA!" then follow the top link you should find what im talking about :D

[General Maximus]

why is the other forum banned?

Anyways, I wasn't aware the issue had been resolved and I am glad it is. Here is the link to the ASA site if anyone wants to read on the ruling.

http://www.asa.org.uk/ASA-action/Adjudications/2011/10/Virgin-Media-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_162278.aspx

All i want to say is thank god for Ofcom. I can't stand it when people lie, deceive and manipulate and despite VM's assertions they knew how their ads would be interpreted and they continued to defend them even when challenged. It is a shame they cant be fined £500,000 everytime they do something like this so they might finally learn a lesson. Who do they think is going to believe "had been created by the magazine’s editorial team and was not cleared under their usual procedure" and if it had been, it would have been removed. It is funny how when something goes in their favour it gets conveniently over looked. I wonder how long it would have lasted if it advertised 1 years free BB for everyone taking a phone line?

[boroboi]

Mon General, I prolly give myself false credit. But I've been banging on about this in both forums; NoPanic hasn't liked it; one or two of the mods here call that sort of thing "VM bashing".

The real reason, I think for VM changing its tune is the current OFCOM report which recognises poor latency as a problem that VM faces in relation to gaming.

I'm still angry that despite VM always knowing that they have gaming problems in lots of places, they still then put out that "perfect for gaming" tripe at the same time as they were criticising others for broadband dishonesty.

We game on BT Infiity now. Whan BT give me FTTP next year, I won't need a VM broadband service; not even for backup.

I told the VM Head of Broadband Jon James a couple of weeks ago that his product being labeled as perfect for gaming is a complete farce and completely untrue, provided evidence of their network jitter and basically accused them of false advertising.

[qasdfdsaq]

And?

[General Maximus]

that is the problem, you know it is going to fall on deaf ears. It says a lot about them when they come out with rubbish and excuses like they did in the ASA ruling, you know they are going to try and get away with it for as long as they can until someone forces them to stop.

[boroboi]

And?

Are you this much of a Bell in person or do you reserve that side of your personality to the Internet only?

[General Maximus]

i think he implied that you only made half a statement and wanted the second half of it i.e the response from VM regarding your challenge. I want to know what their response was as well.

[qasdfdsaq]

i think he implied that you only made half a statement and wanted the second half of it i.e the response from VM regarding your challenge. I want to know what their response was as well.
Yeah, what he said.

Thanks General.

[Skie]

I told the VM Head of Broadband Jon James a couple of weeks ago that his product being labeled as perfect for gaming is a complete farce and completely untrue, provided evidence of their network jitter and basically accused them of false advertising.

I bet his response would have been to highlight the one package they have that managed to barely beat another ADSL package on a single jitter measure while ignoring the 90% of other tests that showed VM as having higher jitter. And because Infinity is still not available Nationally they dont consider it a competing product yet so wont compare themselves against it.

[thenry]

i thought they wanted to stay ahead of the game.. 'pardon the pun'

[boroboi]

I received a lovely response which consisted of Ofcom statistics regarding latency and jitter (downstream only no doubt) which painted them in gold of course, and he then went on to describe how my TBB graph and problems with jitter were a small minority. (I wonder if this guy actually games on a DOCSIS 3 tier?) Also i got the usual "We will look to see if you are in a congested area and check your power levels" at which point it was clear that he only replied for the sake of replying. It was as personal as he could make a generic reply sound.

Lets just say as Skie implied, until BT Infinity become a level terms competitor, i doubt we'll see any major upstream improvements network wide or acknowledgement on the issue. It's being very efficiently swept under the rug.

[thenry]

a bit like all cloneables being booted when the heat is put on the company?

me thinks a refresh is needed at VM, new faces!!

[Chrysalis]

I agree legislation on advertising is far too soft and fines are a more fitting punishment. VM will have had many months (if not years) of falsely advertising perfect gaming which will have netted them sales so simply telling them to remove the ads is a big let off as those sales are kept in the bag. I did feel a small bit of satisfaction but ultimately I achieved very little with the complaint.

There will never be improvements to the network to fix jitter as long as they can get away with such advertising. There is already new gaming related adverts for VM cropping up but they are worded differently and I think will be much harder to get the new ones taken down.

[qasdfdsaq]

I bet his response would have been to highlight the one package they have that managed to barely beat another ADSL package on a single jitter measure while ignoring the 90% of other tests that showed VM as having higher jitter. And because Infinity is still not available Nationally they dont consider it a competing product yet so wont compare themselves against it.
VM isn't available anywhere near nationally either - only to 51% of UK homes. BT plan on hitting 40% by this summer and 66% by the end of next year, so they will hit equal availability and even overtake by early next year.

In any case like any business they'll probably chance it to see how much they can get away with, seeing as most people wouldn't notice the average ~8ms of jitter (most people usually don't even notice 10-20ms of interleaving according to the OR engineer I had round today) since in average use it makes little difference.

[Skie]

If I was in BT's PR department I would be readying some adverts to show how much more stable/consistent their Infinity product is versus VM's. They have a chance to utterly nail them if they do it right.

[General Maximus]

absolutely, they need to come up with a clever way of explaining how amazing the connection is to people who dont really understand. They basically need to say that our speeds are the fastest in the UK and match VMs, but are also the best quality if you love gaming. They could do a special advert just for gamers and put it in a couple of magasines.

I have moaned by ass off over the weekend about how I hate VM advertising stuff they know not to be true but I would be all for BT running some tests so they have got the evidence to back it up and advertise themselves as the best isp for gaming in the UK. I'll keep my VM connection for the next or so because I do do a lot of downloading and the speed but as soon as I can get fttp I am off.