Thread: Data allowances - mobile internet

Have been looking at getting a new mobile and therefore at network pricing for internet.

I wanted to know price and data allowance. Easy, you'd think. Not so...

o2

"Unlimited access"
Except it isn't unlimited. There's a FUP. But doesn't say what the limit for the unlimited package is (you couldn't make this up)

Tesco mobile

Identical. Says the limit for the FUP is clearly posted on their website. I can't find it.

Three

150MB per top up - this is the only provider to be honest and upfront.

When and why did the word "unlimited" cease to mean what it says in the dictionary - it can't be unlimited yet subject to a FUP limit, these are mutually exclusive. Did consumer law and the OFT vanish a while back?

Does anyone know what the costs and limits are per network for PAYG internet?

A Fair Use Policy basically means that the providers can literally pluck a number from thin air and declare that as your 'limit' for usage, rather than having to outline an exact limit. It allows them to change the limits at a whim without changing the terms of the contracts that people have signed up to.

Clever isn't it?

Can anyone cite any cases where this has been taken to court and the supplier won?

It ceased to become an issue when the non-regulatory organisation called the Advertising Standards Authority sided with the advertisers (surprise, surprise) that in the context of promotional offers, 'unlimited' was a genuine marketing tool, whereby the amount of data provided to meet or exceed the anticipated 'reasonable' amount of usage. The networks showed only 1% of their customer base using the offer ever came close to reaching those limites (this was in 2005-6 remember). As such, the 'Far Use' caveat arrived, and the ASA required that any unlimited claims must have a link to an explanation if a FUP applied.

As the ASA agreed this was acceptable, this is used as 'evidence' in court (and accepted by judges) that the term is a reasonable one. So far I'm unaware of any successful cases against a network for non-compliance, but even if there were, it would be non-binding on other customers.

Given how many more people are approaching limits these days it would be interesting to see another study to see if the figure has gone above 1% from 4 or 5 years ago.

If you ask me, a FUP is just a usage limit under another name, and allows them to just pick a number out of thin air rather than sticking to a fixed limit. Most ISP's have one or the other now, though Sky don't advertise a FUP anywhere that I can see on their Unlimited package, so they might be taking the first steps to do away with it....we'll have to see.

It is, but it is MARKETING. Because the support of the status quo relies on two statements; (1) Our networks are not designed to provide 100% users access at all times - there are bandwidth issues irrespective of whether this is paid for (inclusive) or chargeable, it is in our own interests to provide as much bandwidth as we possible can to service these requests. (2) Certain elements of the customer base use inordinate amounts of data and have unrealistic expectations of the data they require moved. To prevent a complete disregard of this, we charge a higher rate for such data, to ensure the resource that is available can be used fairly.

What you are asking for is a reversal of this, and it isn't going to happen!

This is why I always avoid any company which makes "unlimited" claims.

In the context of web hosting and for the same reason, I always avoid companies such as Fasthosts which claim "unlimited bandwidth" or "unlimited data transfer" because there is no such thing. One single customer could bring the company down. Such companies are overtly dishonest and best avoided.

In the context of mobile networks and mobile broadband, they all appear to be overtly dishonest except Three.

Perhaps so, but they all use the 'up to' when describing the potential (rather than actual) data transfer rates. Now, we all know this is reliant on cellside loading, backhaul bandwidth and a variety of incidental factors - as such, these claims are aspirations, nothing more.

I think the consumer being told you get what we'll give you isn't the message they wish to promote, even if it does reflect the actuality.

Looking at vodafone:

Simply Call Charges - Pay As You Go Price Plans - Vodafone

50p per day up to 25Mb. Sounds OK - I wouldn't use if often (would use our wireless home network most of the time). There's a link for "more information". Except it goes nowhere.

It's like a conspiracy of silence.