how-to block ads
|
|
Uniqs:
8302 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
|
Eug
join:2007-04-14
Toronto, ON | reply to Eug
A 600 GB per month user on a 300 GB tier? 
That's 95.24 GB in 5 days, but I've only used 33.64 of peak time usage. Using that as a basis for extrapolation, that works out to 571.44 GB (nearly twice the cap) and 201.84 GB (only 2/3rds the cap) for total vs. peak usage over the course of 30 days.
So I don't really care about the unlimited tier anymore. This first 5 days of experimentation is already way more than I usually use in two weeks, and I still will be way under the cap, even if I keep up this unusually high rate of usage going for the entire month.
--
Everything Apple | |
DavesnothereNo-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
join:2009-06-15
START&Cogeco
kudos:6
4 edits | reply to JonyBelGeul
Re: Automatic rollover to unlimited plan. How does this work? said by JonyBelGeul: {to Eug}
No, the terms are clear enough about that. They measure every two months amd send a notice on the third month. If they measure every month, then month #2 gets counted twice, and that's like double dipping. Since month #3 is combined with month #4 in the next measurement, and since month #4 is unlimited, the total is equal to unlimited, therefore it doesn't trigger a rollover. Month #5 is rolled back to 300GB, and the cycle starts again.
Even if month #2 gets counted twice, month #3-#4-#5 don't trigger a rollover which would otherwise occur at month #6. Instead, month #6 is rolled back to 300GB, and the cycle starts again.
Remember, you don't just pay a fixed surcharge, you're actually given a full unlimited service for the month you pay the surcharge. It's not technically a surcharge, it's an actual rollover to a full unlimited tier for one month. In other words, you get what you pay for.
I would LIKE to agree with the interpretation generated by your sharp legal syntaxially-specific mind.
Unfortunately, I cannot.
What you have done here is taken some of TSI's words in their self-admitted (TSI Martin) flawed (and now pulled for repairs) FAQ, and intepreted them in the manner which yields the most lenient result to your/our budgets.
There is nothing wrong with wishful thinking, but please Please PLEASE do not feel offended if some of us do not see those words in the same light as you do.
That's exactly why I began the thread named after the FAQ.
I wanted to raise more questions where THEY could not miss them, and ask them in it for clarifications on this and a couple of other points.
BTW, no formally posted answers so far. 
There are at least TWO other plausible interpretations of the two interactive clauses 1.1 and 1.3 floating around out here for consideration, and until TSI formally and publicly states that THEIR thoughts are YOUR thoughts (think Spock Mind Meld  ), and cleans up their wording so that there is NO room to misinterpret it for ANY of us, then I respectfully ask you to back off a bit, at least until then.  | | |
|
| My mind is logic-driven, not legal-driven. I'm not a lawyer.
I did not interpret the terms for the most lenient result for my budget. I interpreted them according to QC laws which state that when there's a contradiction in prices, the lowest prices prevails. If I'm not mistaken, of course. There is a contradiction in the measuring method, and this contradiction results in two different prices, and the lowest of these prices prevails, therefore the "every two months" measuring method is the one that's valid.
If TSI did pull the price FAQ for modification, I'll interpret them again as I see fit. But until then, that FAQ is the only official word from TSI thus is valid and so is my interpretation so with all due respect, no I won't back off.
If it makes you and I feel any better, I'm pretty sure that TSI pulled the FAQ as a direct result of your arguments and mine, amongst others, posted right here in this forum. I did point out a loophole after all. | |
DavesnothereNo-BHELL-ity DOES have its Advantages
join:2009-06-15
START&Cogeco
kudos:6
1 edit |
There are several logics/interpretations at play here, and even if you are completely correct in yours, it will not matter one bit if TSI meant something else and decides to stick by that.
We are not looking to fight them, and the rules would be different per province even if that WAS our eventuality.
But yes, we got them thinking, and about multiple loopholes/interpretations..
Keep checking their site....
I know that I will. | |
Eug
join:2007-04-14
Toronto, ON | reply to JonyBelGeul
said by JonyBelGeul:My mind is logic-driven, not legal-driven. I'm not a lawyer.
I did not interpret the terms for the most lenient result for my budget. I interpreted them according to QC laws which state that when there's a contradiction in prices, the lowest prices prevails. If I'm not mistaken, of course. There is a contradiction in the measuring method, and this contradiction results in two different prices, and the lowest of these prices prevails, therefore the "every two months" measuring method is the one that's valid.
If TSI did pull the price FAQ for modification, I'll interpret them again as I see fit. But until then, that FAQ is the only official word from TSI thus is valid and so is my interpretation so with all due respect, no I won't back off.
If it makes you and I feel any better, I'm pretty sure that TSI pulled the FAQ as a direct result of your arguments and mine, amongst others, posted right here in this forum. I did point out a loophole after all.
I don't see that as being a contradiction in prices. In fact I interpreted that as possibly being that the monthly billing for overages would be delayed a few months. If you went over in Feb., you wouldn't be billed for it until April.
I don't think there was necessarily a "loophole" to plug, but that they needed to clarify things so people wouldn't misinterpret things, which is OK esp. since the FAQ wasn't intended as a final contract anyway.
--
Everything Apple | |
1 edit | The way I see it if I'm over in Feb, the earliest I'll be rolled over to unlimited is May, not April. That's because Feb is combined with March, and the earliest the notice can be sent is April, and the earliest the rollover can occur is 30 days later in May.
The only way rollover is in April is if they ignored the 30 days notice and gave an "immediate effect" notice instead, or anticipated going over with March combined and gave notice in March. Somehow I don't think an anticipated "just in case" notice is legal. Though maybe an immediate effect notice (effectively an automatic rollover without notice the month immediately following the two months' combined total) is legal if they outline the conditions upfront in the contract. In this case, the full cycle is 3 months, yet still cheaper than if we switched to a full-fledged unlimited service permanently.
Even if the terms are interpreted this way, the loophole still exists. The terms are unambiguous on that point. TSI will not compel a customer to switch to a permanent unlimited service even if the customer goes over by a zillion GB for several consecutive months. TSI will only "strongly recommend" a customer does so.
(edit) Or, if you use 601GB in Feb, then they can send the notice in March because it doesn't matter how much you use by then, and rollover in April. | |
|
