In reply to a post by Bam16:

I think 24 month contracts are generally not user friendly

Now there's an understatement!

Of course, the providers have to recoup their one-time setup costs (Openreach activation charge; supplying you with a router; paying their salespeople commission). In theory, a longer contract means a lower monthly price as these costs are amortized over a longer period.

However, if that were the *real* reason for the long contracts, then the price would drop at the end, whereas in practice for most providers it jumps up hugely: they want to force you to sign a new contract. Of course for a continuing customer they have no activation charge to cover, and often don't send out a new router, so it's all cream. Plus, you can't take advantage of a competitor's offer while you're locked in.

There was a similar issue with mobile phone contracts, where the cost of the handset is recovered during the contract period, but mobile providers were not dropping the monthly fee at the end of the term.

Eventually OFCOM forced the providers to drop rates automatically once the handset is paid off. People were always free to change provider at the end of their contract, but OFCOM decided that market forces weren't working properly here, and customers were being exploited. I think a very similar case can be made for broadband.

Oh Sorry - I didn't believe 'Which?' would be that bad (how naive of me) - perhaps we should raise a petition in parliament as well for people who would rather sign that instead? At least it would get more attention on the subject and perhaps bring more pressure on OFCOM.

Yes - an understatement about 24 month contracts! I was perfectly happy with 12 months being a good balance of commitment and risk, always worries me that it's hard to see 2 years in advance and you can't tell what might bring you to need to leave the contract early with big early termination fees. But there are very few ISPs offering less than 2 years

In reply to a post by Kr1s69:

The industry move from 12 to 24 months seems to have been done for zero real benefit to the consumer.

If you want me to sign for 24 months then give me a price that will last for that period.

Signed.

Nothing is done for the benefit of the consumer unless it makes money

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

If this petition had been on the UK Parliament website like a lot of other campaigns I would have signed it in a flash but as its on the 'Which?' website where they love to harvest your data I won't be signing it although I 100% agree with it.

I think a lot of other people won't sign for the same reason.

First name, email and what broadband and mobile phone number you are using. Not really much data for them to harvest, you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.
Hopefully if they get enough they can take it to the government or ofcom, they are bigger than us and while I am not a fan of Which, it may get noticed.

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.

You are welcome to do that but its not for me.

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

In reply to a post by zyborg47:

you can always call yourself Bob. Email, use something you don't care about.

You are welcome to do that but its not for me.

Fair enough

signed, and will try and get others to as well.

I share your concern but all Which? ask is your email and first name. You have to tick a very noticeable box if you want them to keep your details for marketing etc. I signed but did not tick the box.