Is Plusnet really an honest company?

I have a serious worry about PN and have had for a long time. PN have always claimed to be an honest company but everything they do suggests strongly to me they are not.

For instance, PN initially didn't offer an opt-out from LLU starting in April and it wasn't until June 06 and due to no small part of this forum and others PN agreed to offer this facility and offered to send out two emails - one telling the customer of the possibility of LLU "upgrade" and then another one when confirming that the customer will be upgraded - both would have links to an opt-out. I don't know of anyone (I could be wrong) that received the second email as promised. In June Mand Beckett assured the PN forum that from 14 June the error had been fixed and people were being sent an email that clearly gave notice the customer's line was due to be LLU'd (upgraded) to allow them the option to opt-out and time and again it has been shown to be untrue.

No customers that I am aware of have ever received the second email and most have only found out that they had been switched when the migration had already taken place.

At the end of June the opt-out option was completely removed and James Bailey posted confirmation that this was indeed the case into a thread that was on a slightly different topic and again without giving anyone any notice of this fact, including the PUG(AFAIK). From end of June till the end of July there was no opt-out facility or none that was available in the LLU FAQ because PN had deliberately removed it. From August onwards the new LLU came into effect and then a revision was also posted but again people were never sent the email prior to being migrated and giving them the chance to opt-out.

The only people who were therefore made aware of this option were those who visit and read AG, PUG or PN's own forum and we are in the minority as even PN accept. Even those who did opt-out were "accidentally" migrated across so that hasn't worked either.

Even today, when signing up as a new customer, PN have a tick box allowing the customer to opt-out but against the tick box next to the opt-out it states "It is not recommended". There are no pop-up boxes, no explanation or any further information.

My question is this - has PN deliberately circumvented it's stated policy to allow opt-out through underhanded methods?

Their contract at the beginning stated 20,000 customers were to be migrated and exactly 20,000 have indeed been migrated since. Therefore it seems that due to consumer pressure, PN, having introduced an option of an opt-out, proceeded in a way to deny people the actually ability to use the very option. That also suggests to me a dishonest promise in order to proceed with the original plan and only to appease the vocal criticisms for the short term.

It is clear from reading posts and PM that PN are still not honouring the promises, moving people back, paying for a new activation to a new ISP as promised or conforming to the FAQ requirements for people to be moved back even when it has been shown what a shambles this has been. Am I being cynical/harsh?

PN have a history of being untruthful but examples of this are:
Overcharging customers and backtracking on agreements to email everyone
Stating that higher allowances were always available to all higher premium paying customers
VMBU that in unreliable and incorrect even though it is the only service that monitors usage
LLU u-turns and broken promises
No notice as required under the Ts&Cs when they reduced the limits and increased their peak-time hours
Not honouring the que-jump customer promises even though they had been paying between

rsharma

Much as I agree with you re Plusnet, are there any genuinely honest ISP's left out there?

I can think of Zen but not many others. Most have tried to bend the rules at one point or another to suit themselves, which is hardly surprising given the lack of firm regulation.

I have no input. Nothing new to debate in there. Just repetition of previously debated issues.

They are either dishonest or amazingly and systematically forgetful and inept.

When Alastair Wyse said recently that any customer who hadn't received their automatic LLU downtime refund should chase CS for it, I posted to ask how customers who don't visit the forums might know that they are entitled to a refund, and whether PlusNet was about to email all customers to tell them about their LLU policy.

There has been a resounding silence - and certainly no communication with the 95% of punters who stay at home. Worse, until this week, any of those stay-at-home LLU punters who managed to contact CS to complain about their downtime would have been given false information - presumably because Carol Axe or Alistair Wyse took it upon themselves to instruct their agents to give out incorrect information and/or to omit details of refunds. And even though we have now been assured that CSC will toe the line, we await evidence of it.

I guess it's debatable whether PlusNet's actions have been just immoral rather than dishonest but there is no doubt in my mind that the 95% of customers who don't visit the forums or trawl through the portal pages have been systematically exploited because of their lack of information - including developments which directly affect their account and should properly have been notified to them.

The irony is that PlusNet's determination to keep the majority of its customers in the dark has contributed to the heavy load on the CSC as more and more customers emerge from the woodwork to try to find out what is wrong with their service. PlusNet could have kept the CS workload manageable by communicating proactively with its whole userbase thereby pre-empting many of the calls and queries that they are now having to deal with.

If and when the company ever realsies that it is digging its own grave by keeping 95% of its customers in the dark for the sake of short-term exploitation, they will have turned their biggest corner.

But the present top management isn't capable of doing it right.

Simon

...and cue the usual folk...

rsharma
buggerlugz
pr100

Next we might get wingco1

In reply to:

---

Next we might get wingco1

---

OK then if you insist My answer is NO!.

Edited by wingco1 (Fri 08-Sep-06 15:11:45)

I could make a fortune on Blackpool Pier with a crystal ball.

I used to keep on having "serious worries" about things that were hypothetical or didn't affect me.

I went to the doctor.

It's all sorted now.

T.

The Doctor got rid of the symptoms then

I find your posts nothing but obstructive and seeking confrontation. If you have nothing to contribute to this thread you are welcome to ignore it.

I do wonder why it is you who are so hellbent on criticising those who want to question in an open manner and especially considering that what I have asked is very relevant. Perhaps it doesn't bother you how your fellow consumers are being treated but then I have to find excuses for your behaviour. This is a discussion forum to discuss issues, problems and seek advice open to all and I am not sure you grasp that fact.

If you disagree with my conclusions or question then be brave enough to post a counterargument backed by some facts and we can discuss them but these silly posts help no one.