New Mid cap + Sky Talk = unlawful coersion?

Got my letter this morning telling me Sky would kindly be reducing my monthly cap by 75% on the mid broadband package. At the start of the year I switched from BT to Sky Talk *solely* because they were going to increase the price of my broadband but would keep it the same if I switched.

Now, having got me onto the Sky Talk package, they are, effectively, increasing the price of my broadband anyway since a 75% reduction in monthly data cap makes the mid service completely useless for me.

Anyone any thoughts on whether this would be a breach of contract or some form of illegal bait & switch maneuver?

Is it likely a little whine to CS would get me anywhere?

They should, by law, give you an option to opt out of the change, or opt out of the contractual obligation, one or the other.

Point that out to them and see what they say

_____________________________________________
Be*Value
Downstream: 7653K 48.5dB Loss 4.0dB SNR
Upstream:1291K 27.5dB Loss 3.0dB SNR
TechBroadband
Speed Test

I think I'd be happy if they offered me the max at the same price for the rest of the first year of Sky Talk and then moved me to the Max at the old price (since that's what I would have had under the terms of taking out Sky Talk.

That, or free HD for a year

I believe a major change in T&C's allow the user to cancel the contract as it is detrimental to the user. Any borrowed/hired equipment would need to be sent back.

As this IS a major change, not unlawful but a pain, then Sky might get a flood of cancellations.

Was Eclipse Home Option 1 & VM 2Mb
Now O2 standard

your legal option is to walk away without being held to a minimum term. As a core term of the contract it won't be covered by the unfair terms legislation but changing the core terms gives you the option to opt out.

Phil

MaxDSL - goes as fast as it can and doesn't read the line checker first.

MaxDSL diagnostics
Are your kids pirates ? Limewire, Bearshare, Kazaa, BitTorrent, eMule are all tools of the trade.

The letter states that this change releases you from your contract if you cancel by 1st August. So you are free to go elsewhere because of this reduction in download allowance. If you don't cancel by this date then you are deemed to have accepted the change and continue with your contract.

Personally i think its extremely harsh and a ploy to get everyone to cough up another fiver, but there's very little we can do.

I'll stay on Mid until sky complain about my usage and i have to go up to max.

Kris

Sky Broadband
Ashington (Northumberland) Exchange
Netgear DG834GT

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I believe a major change in T&C's allow the user to cancel the contract as it is detrimental to the user. Any borrowed/hired equipment would need to be sent back.

As this IS a major change, not unlawful but a pain, then Sky might get a flood of cancellations.

Might - but I doubt if they will, because there's nothing else out there that good for the price, even for an extra fiver.

Home ADSL: Sky Max LLU
Business ADSL: ZeN Office 8000

I just had a small thought about this.

In a normal commercial situation eg. if 2 businesses have a contract with each other, if one side wanted to cancel a contract the other has to agree.

Yet it seems in the isp market (and I guess some other markets that are consumer based) only one side of the contract the seller is able to initiate cancellation of contract without penalty.

This is what I mean. If you sign up to a 18 month broadband contract and no longer wish to keep your obligations to it then you have to buy your way out of it or face been chased for unpaid fees. Yet if the broadband provider decides "hmm I no longer wish to honour this 18 month contract" I will just change some conditions and the consumer can either move on or just automatically agree to the new contract.

There seems something very wrong with this. This I would have thought would be impossible ie. the isp been forced to honour old price and old cap to customers within contract for the duration of that contract unless customer agrees to cancel it.

I wonder what would happen if a customer actually said no I dont want to pay £5 more, no I dont want to leave but I do want you to honour my sky mid package until the end of the contract we agreed on.

Edited by Chrysalis (Sun 05-Jul-09 13:18:55)

In a normal commercial situation eg. if 2 businesses have a contract with each other, if one side wanted to cancel a contract the other has to agree.

Yet it seems in the isp market (and I guess some other markets that are consumer based) only one side of the contract the seller is able to initiate cancellation of contract without penalty.

Their right to change terms is written into the contract you agree to when you sign up. You could try to renegotiate those terms before you sign up, but I think they'd probably rather not do business with you than negotiate.

Business to business contracts usually involve lawyers and a lot of money, and they will still usually have exit clauses on both sides.

John.

Its very clear by the changes Sky are making to the mid package that Sky believe they have market saturation and are now turning there intentions towards maximizing profit/income per customer .
I believe we will see something similar from O2 when they also hit market saturation as we have seen from other business and business model over the years .

Also TalkTalk are doing something similar with there packages to try and get more money per customer and its a normal thing to see once the market is saturated companies will turn there attentions to getting maximum revenue per customer rather than trying to get maximum new customers sign ups .

Growth in the broadband market is slowing so trying to squeeze more from the customers you already have is the only way to increase turnover/profit .

But all the same its a very brazen move by Sky and could get them a very nasty backlash from customers .

Edit: if not happy throw your toys out of the pram and find your self on a very good retention deal is how it worked for me as a Sky customer all those years ago

UKonline... Premier LLU

Edited by woweebert (Sun 05-Jul-09 15:54:53)