PN + PUG + LLU. Your rights.

Hi all,

It seems that we all know the problems with the u-turns from PN and there are a number of people who have been moved without being informed, being moved even they had opted out and others without a connection or problems.

We also know the story of how this unfolded and the promises PN made and then slowly and disingenuously withdrew over time. I will list the changes as they stand for others to read them.

PN promised that people would receive two emails - the first would be when there was a possibility to move them to LLU and a second when it was confirmed they would be moved and an option to opt-out from this move would be provided.

James Bailey, 10 April 2006

They promised that if anyone was moved to LLU and they wished to leave PN they would not be out of pocket and PN would pay for this after much pressure both here and on the PN forum.

Mand Beckett, 25 April 2006

Mand Beckett, 26 April 2006

James Bailey, 26 April 2006

Ian Wild, 26 April 2006 In reply to this post

Mand Beckett, 12 May 2006

Ian Wild, 21 June 2006

Ian Wild, 27 June 2006

Pug's position on LLU April 2006

In the usual and predicted PN style most of these have not occurred. Many people were never sent the second email and therefore denied people the option to opt-out while others received only an email once they were transferred across. PN apologised for this and informed everyone that this had been resolved on 14 June but again this was incorrect.

The PUG don't think these issues are worth their front page nor do I know what they have been working on and if they have managed to get a resolution for the customers they represent (I'll provide more links at the bottom to prove that these issues are anything but affecting a minority). PUG's response

The LLU FAQ doesn't mention anything about opting out either: Link

What can be done?

PN are putting people out of pocket if they want to migrate away to another ISP by refusing to pay for a cease and re-provide in most cases, those who never opted-out will not be paid and those who didn't receive the email. Their claim is that it is too expensive and that too much paperwork is involved but they forget the lovely T&C they keep quoting to customers.

"Agreement" means these Conditions and Annexes hereto, the Customer Order, and any other document that the parties agree in writing will form part of the Agreement.

The Agreement is a defined term of the T&C, when you transferred to PN or paid PN for an activation they provided a BT connection that you paid for. It will be listed in your order details so don't let PN tell you that you paid them and not BT for broadband activation. It is not true. They have to abide by the product and service you have paid for and as such you have every right to be refunded this amount should you choose to migrate to another ISP and they don't accept LLU MAC codes.

If the above is not understood by PN then remind them of their T&C:

23.1.3 you giving us immediate notice within the 14 day notice period if, under clause 24, we inform you that we are increasing our charges or changing the conditions of this Agreement to your detriment.

Since PN have not given you notice you can initiate a notice to them instead. The detriment, if it applies to you, lies in the fact that you will have to pay

Edited by rsharma (Tue 25-Jul-06 14:06:14)

Hi rsharma,

You quote the PlusNet T&Cs

In reply to:

---

"Agreement" means these Conditions and Annexes hereto, the Customer Order, and any other document that the parties agree in writing will form part of the Agreement.

---

You then go on to explain your interpretation with the following:

In reply to:

---

The Agreement is a defined term of the T&C, when you transferred to PN or paid PN for an activation they provided a BT connection that you paid for.

---

As far as I can see the T&Cs don't state any such reliance on a BT product - in fact, their definition of Broadband is:

"telecommunication in which a wide band of frequencies is available to transmit information."

Not BT specific at all!

Could you clarify where in the T&Cs (Conditions, annexes or order) that it states that the product will be BT-provided?

Thanks

Sure thing. If you look under your order details it will state something along the lines of BT IPStream or BT ADSL activated. This now forms part of the Agreement and therefore the T&C.

Hmm - the only pages I can find are the account summary:
https://portal.plus.net/my.html?s=0&action=account_summary

and the "order status" page:
http://portal.plus.net/my.html?action=adsl_status

Neither of these appear to mention anything about wholesale suppliers?

I can't see what else on the website could be construed as "order details" [Even tenuously - never mind precisely as would be required to make your argument stand up in court ...]

Am I missing something?

PS. In fact the T&Cs specifically define "Customer Order" as being the signup process (http://www.plus.net/info2/legal/index.html - point 1.1)

You are not looking for the email that was sent to you when you activated your ADSL. Do you have this? If you don't then have a look under the ticket system and the first ever posted ticket with details as to what was activated and when. This is now part of your Agreement. I can't get into the links you have provided as they are only visible to you with your user-name and password.

Thanks for all the research rsharma. Must have taken ages.

Your post should be a sticky. Any customer with an LLU grievance - in fact any customer within an LLU exchange area who may be about to be moved, knowing or unknowingly, to LLU should bookmark it.

Perhaps the PUG will on reflection feel that the PlusNet assurances you link to should be pointed out to their forum visitors too. And why not go for the hat-trick - maybe a PN customer would post them on the portal forum too...

Simon

In reply to:

---

You are not looking for the email that was sent to you when you activated your ADSL. Do you have this? If you don't then have a look under the ticket system and the first ever posted ticket with details as to what was activated and when.

---

To clarify it depends on when the customer signed up, the product descriptions havent allways included a reference to BT. For example when I signed up in July 2004 the product was

In reply to:

---

PlusNet Broadband Home Premier 1Mb (Annual Contract, No Modem)

---

there was no mention of BT in any of the e-mails or tickets.

While I would agree for those where there is a mention of BT it may form part of the contract, it would be wise to point out that each case is unique and that the customer needs to be sure of their own circumstances before pursuing this avenue.

The usual IANAL applies.

In reply to:

---

You are not looking for the email that was sent to you when you activated your ADSL. Do you have this? If you don't then have a look under the ticket system and the first ever posted ticket with details as to what was activated and when. This is now part of your Agreement.

---

Hmm - I don't think so - as I said in my "PS" - the T&Cs specifically define "Customer Order" as being the signup process (http://www.plus.net/info2/legal/index.html - point 1.1) so I don't think you could argue any information emailed or logged after the process constituted part of the "order" and therefore part of the "contract"

Thoughts?

In reply to:

---

the T&Cs specifically define "Customer Order" as being the signup process (http://www.plus.net/info2/legal/index.html - point 1.1)

---

I am pretty sure that would be unenforceable. (corrections please if I am wrong) It is commonly accepted that an order turns into a contract at the point when confirmation is given, both parties have to indicate their agreement to the contract. Even if it was accepted that the contract was agreed at the sign up process you would still have signed up for the product that the confirmation e-mail laid out.

IANAL