dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
10
share rss forum feed
« Never understood this+1 »
This is a sub-selection from News?

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to 25139889

Re: News?

How dare those evil consumers use the internet connection they purchased!

Look, I get if they want to impose limits on their connections. When they openly advertise those limits, then they'll have a point.

Do you see Mediacom openly telling you that you get 250GB of web usage per month on their web site? Does Comcast tell you that? None of them do. It's a subversive thing because they want people going over. If they told them beforehand, they'd get scared, not use services, have their service be less important to them, and maybe they'd question whether it was even worth paying for.

They hide the usage limits away on a special page or better yet, put it in the contracts that the average consumer doesn't read.

They're all subversive about it because they don't want people to know what they're really doing. The FCC who seems to be on the UBB train could at least force them to fully disclose those limits openly on every web package they sell.

If the network really couldn't handle the traffic, then tell them upfront you'll pay this month for "overusage" and you get this much built in your plan. The cell phone companies can do it, why can't the telcos and cablecos? They want you to use your connection freely, not realize it's really limited, then shock you with a ripoff bill or a disconnect.

Considering all the double your data commercials Verizon Wireless ran, idiots probably think 4GB is really something. It would be awful if they tried it, but the cablecos and telcos could probably get away with it. Or better yet, 250 just sounds like a big number. Half the country can't even count that high.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
said by Os:

How dare those evil consumers use the internet connection they purchased!

And when they purchased that internet they AGREED to the TOS which included a cap. How dare a company hold customers to a TOS agreement they agreed too!

It's funny if a customer thinks the company is violating the TOS they don't hesitate to whine on the internet or the media or the BBB and state how companies should stand by their TOS. But the customers themselves are asked to do the same then they are somehow getting screwed over.

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
And how many customers explicitly know the TOS. They hide it in the fine print.

Any capped provider should openly have it on there you get X amount of usage and it's this much for any overages. It's not hard to make this straightforward, they just don't have any interest in that.

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
reply to Os
Read your TOS/AUP PRIOR to turning on and using that modem. TOS/AUPs are available to be read online. Don't like it, don't sign up.

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
reply to Os
They have the Find feature available for that online. And regardless of fine print or not- its there. I can actually tell you that more than 50% of any of their customers; FAIL to read that TOS/AUP. Butt they're here to bitch about the camp.

jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA
reply to 25139889
So, you need to get online in order to decide whether or not to get online?

GOTCHA! That sounds right to me!

Os

join:2011-01-26
US
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to 25139889
Because corporations can never do any wrong. They're perfect.

Look, I'm not complaining about them enforcing their TOS/AUP, I'm saying that if these numbers are so important, then they should be letting every single person know outside of some fine print tucked away that nobody ever reads.

They've tried to hide the caps ever since they imposed them for the reasons I outlined earlier. That shouldn't be permitted.


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to 25139889
Still using the tired argument of "READ THE TOS, READ THE TOS"?

I've read the TOS, do you realize that lawyers wrote the TOS? I'm sure you do since you have claimed to have read yours. Do you know how long it takes to actually work through the TOS, and understand EVERYTHING in the TOS? A long time.

Have you actually worked through EVERY PIECE of language in the TOS? Methinks, I highly doubt it, otherwise you wouldn't be using this as a counter. I think if you are going to sit there and berate people for not reading the TOS, why not read it yourself? Work through every piece of language, EVERY IOTA, EVERY dot and cross of a T, and then come back and tell me how fair that TOS is to the average consumer. And then tell me that consumer will understand it.

Yes, I realize the consumer accepts without reading, but at the same time you need to be realistic here. TOS is TOS, and is enforced how a company sees fit, you should know this. This story is a perfect example of selectively enforcing said TOS.

All I am asking of you is to look through the average consumer's eyes. That's all I'm asking.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


rudnicke
Premium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:4
reply to 25139889
Troll. Ignore.

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
reply to The Limit
And yes I read my TOS it is printed on the back of the HSI work order from the cable company that you must read and sign before the modem is even plugged in. Sorry. Yes I did read it, I read my TOS/AUP with Clear, TWC NEO/WPA and WOW. When I had them. Including ATT's IP DSL TOS/AUP when I had them for a short time. I read what I agree to, just like everyone else. And you claiming that I don't you don't know what I do.

But these people flat out do NOT read it. It is NOT the company's fault they did NOT read it. And if they did they would know that they can enforce the cap when they wish. And they wish. If they do not agree then they are free to leave Mediacom or any other ISP and change to another provider.

And the average consumer it is still their fault for not reading. I don't have to look through their eyes. It's time to stop babying them, and hold them accountable for what they chose not to do. It's like getting a credit card, maxing it out, and then telling Capital One that you're not paying the interest because you didn't read the TOS/AUP/Contract. And the card holder should be left off the hook. I call BS. Make them accountable for what they did and this country would be better off and wouldn't have some of the stupid laws it has now.

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
reply to jjeffeory
You can use the Internet at number of locations, Starbucks, Internet Cafe's, Libraries. So yes it is possible.

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
reply to rudnicke
Troll? LMAO! You're just one of those people that don't feel that they should be held to what they agreed to.

don't like it, take your business else where.


rudnicke
Premium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:4
You do seem to like stirring the pot on these forums.

As for taking my business elsewhere, well, there is no where else where I live. I'm beholden to MediaCom for my only means of internet access.

While I agree they have every right to impose a cap, I do think it should be made 'clear' to each customer that the cap exists. Burying it in fine print is just sneaky.

Honestly, have you every read EVERY TOS or License Agreement you have encountered?
--
One Big Ass Mistake America

25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
YES. Why? Because I'm suppose to. If i do NOT agree I don't sign and don't take what i'm suppose to get. Common sense tells you to sign it.

And I can give you a shit load of other providers you could use. you choose NOT to go there. So, yes, just complaining about it.

And it's not their fault that customers don't read. again see my post about the credit cards.


rudnicke
Premium
join:2004-10-23
Rantoul, IL
kudos:4
And who are these providers? I've done a lot of research in this area, and MC is really the only provider in this small town.
--
One Big Ass Mistake America


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to 25139889
If you have claimed to read it, then how can you agree with half of the statements in there?! There's no way some of that stuff even holds up in court!

It has nothing to do with babying the customer, it has to do with TRANSPARENCY. And I can't even believe that you aren't for this!
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to 25139889
And besides, the interest rate on a credit card is completely null and void here, that is advertised out front where everyone can see. These caps AREN'T.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to 25139889
And why can't companies be liable for selectively enforcing their own TOS? We should be walked on, by them? Is that what you are saying we should do? Lie down? When we have no other option? Most of us don't have another option. Let me guess, we should move instead, when in reality some of us can't even afford to do this.

But wait a second, when we actually want to do something about this, what happens. Here come the providers, wanting to block any attempt to make things better. I know from experience from where I am from. And I've seen enough stories here to confirm it.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)


CAIOWA

@ecatel.net
reply to 25139889
You seem to be arguing toward those who, apparently, signed up for the service with the bandwidth cap outlined in the ToU. That's just one aspect.

I signed up before Mediacom had the bandwidth cap in their ToU. There are years worth of customers, like myself, that Mediacom had before they silently updated their ToU to include that bandwidth restriction.

Guess what? I found out through the Mediacom forums on this website when it was posted in the forums. Even Mediacom's official representatives on this website couldn't provide an exact date as to when the ToU was updated to include that bandwidth cap.

You argue that customers should know the ToU, but the company can't even officially state when they updated that ToU to slide in that bandwidth cap.

So, you could argue that every time you use a service, you need to read the ToU for any silent changes. How often do I need to read Mediacom's ToU for changes? Every day, every hour? Practical?

Aside from all this, if Mediacom wants to enforce their bandwidth cap that they silently installed in their ToU, Mediacom needs to provide some reasonable ways for customers to monitor their usage. If Comcast can do it, Mediacom can as well. If Verizon wireless can do it, Mediacom can as well.

If you were a Mediacom customer, you'd know that Mediacom is behind in the times and this inability for customers to monitor their own usage, like Comcast customers can, is par for the course for this MSO.

said by 25139889:

And yes I read my TOS it is printed on the back of the HSI work order from the cable company that you must read and sign before the modem is even plugged in. Sorry. Yes I did read it, I read my TOS/AUP with Clear, TWC NEO/WPA and WOW. When I had them. Including ATT's IP DSL TOS/AUP when I had them for a short time. I read what I agree to, just like everyone else. And you claiming that I don't you don't know what I do.

But these people flat out do NOT read it. It is NOT the company's fault they did NOT read it. And if they did they would know that they can enforce the cap when they wish. And they wish. If they do not agree then they are free to leave Mediacom or any other ISP and change to another provider.

And the average consumer it is still their fault for not reading. I don't have to look through their eyes. It's time to stop babying them, and hold them accountable for what they chose not to do. It's like getting a credit card, maxing it out, and then telling Capital One that you're not paying the interest because you didn't read the TOS/AUP/Contract. And the card holder should be left off the hook. I call BS. Make them accountable for what they did and this country would be better off and wouldn't have some of the stupid laws it has now.



DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
reply to 25139889
said by 25139889:

Read your TOS/AUP PRIOR to turning on and using that modem. TOS/AUPs are available to be read online. Don't like it, don't sign up.

Hiding behind fine print "gotchas" is just scummy.
Expand your moderator at work

TheRogueX

join:2003-03-26
Springfield, MO
reply to 25139889

Re: News?

This would be completely acceptable, if there was adequate competition in the marketplace. Most areas have 2 service providers. If they both contain language in their TOS/AUP that you find unacceptable, where do you go then?


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to The Limit
said by The Limit:

Still using the tired argument of "READ THE TOS, READ THE TOS"?

I've read the TOS, do you realize that lawyers wrote the TOS? I'm sure you do since you have claimed to have read yours. Do you know how long it takes to actually work through the TOS, and understand EVERYTHING in the TOS? A long time.

So as long as you can claim that you didn't read the TOS because it's too long you can violate it? If you don't want to read the TOS then don't sign it. And so what if it was written by lawyers. I would hope if you ever had contract written up between you and another person you would use a lawyer to write it. If not that would be pretty dumb.


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
I believe that you are putting words in my mouth. I never said it was ok to break the TOS, neither did I imply it. I'm saying that it's not exactly easy for the average consumer to sit down, read the entire TOS and understand every bit of language in said TOS. What I'm trying to highlight here is that many TOS agreements are written the same way, and aren't exactly consumer friendly. But if you only have two service providers, I guess it's all fair and good for the TOS to be selectively enforced as seen fit by the company, and in no way should that company be responsible for honoring the agreement. When you have no choice, then what are consumers supposed to do? Go without Internet? Move? Some suggestion that seems highly unrealistic? All I'm asking for is transparency. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)