Plusnet cease fee for migrations to MPF or SMPF

Plusnet's website states:

In reference to www.plus.net/support/customer_service/billing/cessation_charges.sht...:

4. When do cessation charges apply?

The charge can apply to any customer who has a broadband cease placed on their line.

Generally, the main reasons for broadband ceases are:

A broadband account is cancelled (without switching providers)
Switching to a service that is not supplied via the BT Wholesale network
The telephone line used to provide broadband is cut off

Does that mean Plusnet can charge a cease fee to customers leaving the BT Wholesale network for an MPF or SMPF provider (e.g. TalkTalk or Sky)?

Surely it ought to say "... by the Openreach network"?

So would apply if moving to VM but not to LLU or another GEA ISP.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Surely it ought to say "... by the Openreach network"?

So would apply if moving to VM but not to LLU or another GEA ISP.

I agree. If it said "Switching to a service that is not supplied via the Openreach network" then that would make perfect sense.

As it stands though, the wording does give them the right to charge for migrations to MPF or SMPF.

I can help bit http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1406...

The cease fee is related to the type of order the gaining provider places and is directly related to whether we get charged a wholesale cease fee or not. If the gaining provider places the orders and the cease code is W or P then they are the ones we charge for.

and this post explains where the cease fee comes from http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1406...

Edited by deleted (Tue 26-Jan-16 18:03:12)

Thats's so Jim, and I think has been for ages.

But given the new "seamless to the customer" migration rules it seems even odder these days that they could be possibly be charged depending on how the gaining provider carries out the move.

The normal punter could not be expected to know or understand that, and even those of us who do would be hard pushed to make our gaining ISP adopt the non-chargeable path.

Agreed and there have been a couple of cases where the cease fee was charged on a migration to Sky and they coughed up the cost

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

Agreed and there have been a couple of cases where the cease fee was charged on a migration to Sky and they coughed up the cost

I find it interesting that a third-party ISP is even able place a cease order on a line not currently under their control, I would have thought they should only be allowed to place a migration order.

So would I but it happened here http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1471...

Edited by deleted (Tue 26-Jan-16 18:51:45)

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

So would I but it happened here http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,1471...

We only have Plusnet's version of events there. I can't imagine any scenario where Sky would choose to migrate using a cease order instead of a migrate order.

If it happened to me I would take it to the Ombudsman who, I'm sure, would side with the customer and not let them pay for the (supposed) mistakes of the gaining provider.

Not really
The clue is in the opening post

and got a new phone number (wasn't given any choice).

This would not happen on a migration

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

Not really
The clue is in the opening post

and got a new phone number (wasn't given any choice).

This would not happen on a migration

In that case the Plusnet website should therefore be updated to state that the cease charge will not be incurred when using a recognised migration process.

They could use BT's wording:

In reference to www.productsandservices.bt.com/products/broadband-cease-charge/?s_c...:

This charge will be raised should you:

Switch to another Broadband provider without following the standard transfer process*

* This requires you to contact your new provider.

In fact their previous wording was equally bad:

In reference to web.archive.org/web/20140220020012/http://www.plus.net/support/cust...:

Generally, the main reasons for broadband ceases are:

Switching providers without a MAC key

It seems like they have reworded it to BT Wholesale to account for the gaining provider led process. But as it stands, and as it stood before, they have granted themselves the ability to charge a cease fee for any MPF or SMPF migration.

The cease & reprovide argument doesn't really explain it either, since a BT Wholesale based provider could do that too.

Edited by Oliver341 (Tue 26-Jan-16 19:57:05)

and in one case BT themselves did just that creating a cease charge

Edited by deleted (Tue 26-Jan-16 20:03:53)

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

and in one case BT themselves did just that creating a cease charge

Yup, so it would appear the wording is not there to cover cease & reprovide scenarios, since they can occur in BT Wholesale migrations anyway.

It extends to the official T&C too:

In reference to www.plus.net/info2/legal/index.html#broadbandTerms:

10.1. Where our agreement ends (even after the expiry of any minimum term) you may be charged a "cessation fee" as set out in the Price Guide where:

10.1.2. you transfer to a service where: (i) the provider uses their own network to provide the service, or (ii) the provider uses BT's network like us, but they have their own equipment in your local exchange (often called Local Loop Unbundling)

So their T&C specifically allows them to charge a cease fee for migrations to LLU providers irrespective of the migration mechanism used by the gaining provider. Just plain wrong.

No
They only charge it when they are charged it by BTw as I explained in the earlier link
Do you expect them to absorb a charge caused purely by the receiving ISP doing the transfer incorrectly

In reply to a post by Oldjim:

They only charge it when they are charged it by BTw as I explained in the earlier link

The T&C as they stand Plusnet permission to charge a cease fee for all LLU migrations. They don't need to justify anything on a wholesale level since the T&C don't require them to.

If staff have clarified that the fee is only levied in the case that the recognised migration process has not been followed, be it via LLU or BTw, then the T&C should reflect this. The T&C take precedence over forum chat.

I don't disagree and we have pointed this out many times without any success