cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
john46
Distinguished Sage
125 Views
Message 11 of 13

Re: Infinity 2 mis-selling

They also did not address the fact that the unordered service was called “Unlimited” suggesting that the speed was unlimited. The speed was actually limited to the same or just below the service we already had.

The unlimited refers to the amount of data you can transfer not your speed

speeds are sold as UP TO speeds


This is a customer to customer self help forum posts made here do not go to BT although the forum is moderated by BT not every post is read
0 Ratings
Ken_Simons
Aspiring Contributor
99 Views
Message 12 of 13

Re: Infinity 2 mis-selling

Hi, it may very well be other customers that I need in order to progress this as we are looking at putting together a joint effort with others that have had similar problems. To do that we need to publicize the problem.

 

I have 3 MPs and 2 journalists involved, one from Reuters and the other from the BBC so we shall see what we can do about this so-called ombudsman and see what OfCom has to say. I don't want to employ legal people until much later in the process but they will be on board when it is time.

 

Selling a product that cannot be delivered is bound to end up not just inconveniencing people but costing real money when people make decisions that have financial implications based on the ordered product.

 

It is reasonable to assume that a company will sell a product it can actually deliver and it is reasonable to assume it will not allocate an inferior product without the positive consent of the customer.

 

The “ombudsman” did not address the above points (and others) and they will have only themselves to blame if they are held to account very publicly.

 

BT was very keen to delegate the problem to the ombudsman and I can see why!

0 Ratings
Ken_Simons
Aspiring Contributor
80 Views
Message 13 of 13

Re: Infinity 2 mis-selling

All the pieces coming into place now.

 

The so-called ombudsman based much of their report on a recording of the contract that was made with BT but it turns out the recording is cut off before the end so it does not provide any useful evidence without hearing the conclusion (and therefore the agreement).

 

How could they make such a basic error?

 

Should be on the home straight now. We are building a dossier and need the ombudsman’s reaction to a complaint to them and comments from someone at OfCom and then we can hopefully get this out.

0 Ratings