I wasn't going mad then....In that case I think it actually means PN are offering more than legally required since BBYW customers in this instance haven't had a change of T&C's to their detriment by this. It is just PN enforcing the T&Cs the customer originally agreed to.

James said;

In reply to:

---

It was a clause in the Broadband Your Way terms and conditions from last April.

---

So what about those who signed up before last April Vince?.

They were all emailed last month.

Vince was just referring to customers who had signed up on resi products over the last 18 months.

They would only be on a monthly contract, hence would not have any deferred fees - I think. The longest contract PN offered was 1 year and BBYW has been around since April 2007 when the term was added to the T&Cs.

In reply to:

---

They were all emailed last month.

---

OK, but if some wished to reject the new T&C's, would Plusnet persue the payment of deferred fees?.

Thats the point I was trying to make though. Those customers on contract that didn't have the cancellation charge clause in their T&Cs from the start are now out of the first 12 months and should not therefore have deferred fees left. Anyone who has joined or upgraded to BBYW and possibly started a deferred fees based contract has been on BBYW for over 18 months now.

I must be missing something here James says the new clause was introduced in April.

In reply to:

---

It was a clause in the Broadband Your Way terms and conditions from last April.

---

That's April 2008. So it is possible some people who signed up to BBYW with deferred charges prior to April 2008 would still be within a 12 month period.

Or have I lost the plot?

I was taking last April last to mean April 2007 - perhaps James can confirm that as it would potentially make a lot of difference. My reason for thinking this is I thought the change to the T&Cs was introduced when I was still a customer, and I have been with Sky/UKO for 15 months now.

Edit to correct a quoting error

Edited by ScaryMonkey (Tue 04-Nov-08 18:48:32)

In reply to:

---

from last April.

---

Seems pretty clear, but only James can clarify.

To me last April would be April in the previous year, this April would be April in the current year and next April to be April in the next year, hence my interpretation. We both agree though, only PN (and hopefully James when he reads this) can clarify whose interpretation of the comment is correct.

Aint the English language good lol... possible to interpret a comment in a number of ways.