Basic consumer rights apply - 'fit for purpose' and all that.
No, they don't. 'Fit for the purpose' only applies to goods. Telecoms provision is a service and there is no requirement for a service to be 'fit for the purpose'.
That doesn't mean you don't have a case but services are only provided on a 'best efforts' basis. There have been some changes proposed that would tighten things up a bit but basically the very nature of services often means that the provider has to be given some leeway. If that were not the case a lot of services would either be more expensive or simply wouldn't be offered.
One example is a solicitor. If you engage their services to defend you in court and you lose you have no legal right to demand your money back unless you can demonstrate incompetence. If you pay me to move a grand piano to the summit of Mt Everest and I only get to the bottom of the Hillary Step it's unlikely you would be able to claim a refund. Most courts would consider getting it that far to be 'reasonable skill and effort'.
You absolutely should complain and try and pursue this but I think you'd be wise to be more aware of your rights and legal position. Charging in with all guns blazing is not the best approach.
Edited by Andrue (Sat 12-Dec-15 13:32:44)