Not sure who is angry. I might have been dissed but that doesn't mean I'm angry. But on social media inferences are regularly turned into fact. I deal short shrift with loads of businesses who try to diss me. I have my scripts well prepared for most scenarios. Speaking out about a terrible waste of consumers time is not about being angry (in case anybody thought so). There is nothing wrong with being angry, so long as anger is expressed in an appropriate way. But maybe consumers need to get angry - it's just about how that is expressed. I prefer 'angry' consumers speaking up about the nonsense that some companies do, in preference to lethargy.

I know of no rule saying that I have to ask a question or have any answered. I've shared my accurate experience in the seeding post of this thread and my honest opinions about things general and specific. If it my honesty and plainspeak are not appreciated remove the post. End off. Just be clear. I have not be rude to you. I have used no foul or offensive language to you. Once I see site team members turn up I know what's up, from long experience on many forums. Shall we leave it there - please. If you opt to delete my post and the thread, that's fine - I have screenshots and will post the same report elsewhere. Bye.

Yaawwwwnnn.. are you trolling?

As I thought I said, I require no lecture or advice on contract law. I thought I said "Just to be clear, as I am legally qualified, I require no lessons on when is a sale confirmed, when it is an offer and the issues about acceptance in contract law." I might as well not have said that. I'm not here to prove that anybody tried to deceive anybody. On the issue of deception in pricing (in general online sales organisations would be stupid to create a trail of evidence that leads to them being caught out. My suspicion is that some of them play a numbers game. It goes like this: they know that the average British consumer will fall for the trap paying up on an increased price post-offer. I'm in probably in the 1% of British consumers who will raise some sort of protest and take action. That's fine for British sales organisations because small percentages of people like me don't dent sales. It's all about money mates. It's a great game to snake in loads of people with attractive offers, then up the price on them. Online sales then become an auction of sorts. Did I say 'everywhere'? I did not. The average British consumer is their own best enemy for being lethargic on consumer issues and poor customer service. That has been my opinion for the last 15 years and it ain't changing. "If you were the person who pulled out in front of me on the A22 last week the you should know I have a right to report you to the police and use my dashcam footage to show you were driving without due care and attention. on the other hand blowing my horn to wake you up and make you aware I was there seemed to do the job so no need to go to all the extra effort." Seriously? Are you for real? I fail to see what any of that has to do with this thread or this forum.

Before I start this post I wish to say that I accept full liability for this post. Numerous companies have been named on this site, so naming is not a problem. I give all members my 100% genuine and verifiable with hard evidence report of what has happened with Partshop Direct. I have noted 3.12 What is “potentially libelous” as per rules 3.5(i) of the terms and conditions. I'm happy to and I indemnify the owners of this forum. Why? Because I know what I say is 100% the truth backed by hard unequivocal evidence. Speaking the truth in proper context , as I do, is not defamatory or libelous. By way of Order Number: …. I received an email confirming the order at 17:18PM 25th May 2019 for £42.98 delivered. I then received a phone-call at 16:26PM 27th May 2019, which I recorded automatically (which is not illegal) from somebody claiming to be DeWalt (another parts selling company). The sales person is telling me that that the price I received was wrong on the website and that the product sells for much more. I'm offered to pay £10 more or request a refund. I sternly refuse to do either. I do what I like. I said to this person that I'm doing neither, and that I'm leaving them to take whatever action they see fit. However, I also make it clear that my call is being recorded. No objection voiced. I said "For the sake of £10 you'd prefer to damage your reputation by me posting this online? Do what you want". Then the usual happens. What's that? Sales people think that by repeating themselves they'll get somewhere. I interrupt the bloke and says, "Do you understand what I said?" He confirms that he did. I said, were done here.. (click). I then take notice of an invoice at 18:50PM 27th May 2019 of an email time stamped 16:31PM 27th May 2019 - that's four minutes after the phone call above (yeah.. OCD is my middle name when it comes to my money and service I receive). What's the point of this post? In case some did not get it, this nonsense about mistakes with prices on websites has been going on since the famous Kodak camera case many years ago. Companies have failed to learn a lesson. What's that? Treat customers with respect. The cost of the respect in the captioned instance above is £10 . The manager of the bloke who called me and his/her line manager are not thinking far enough. Just to be clear, as I am legally qualified, I require no lessons on when is a sale confirmed, when it is an offer and the issues about acceptance in contract law. I have not alleged that Partshop Direct has done anything illegal. What they've done has dissed me! Why? Because my time has been wasted. My time is valuable to me - and I spend my time on forums like these as I please. The other point of this post is that the British consumer needs to get active and name companies that play the stupid game of, 'Oh our website had the wrong price' - before the contract of sale is completed. This is sort of thing is slipshod. The person who should pay any difference, is the line manager in charge of putting prices on the website. I don't play these games. 5 years ago I completed a purchase for a package holiday (and got confirmation of payment received). Then they call me up and tried the same nonsense i.e. telling me the price was actually meant to be £300 more. On that occasion (which is nothing to do with Partshop Direct), I said, "Sorry mate - I'm not paying more. Shall I see you in court?" To which I get, "This is nothing about court". To which I said, "For me it is shall I meet you or your bosses in court?" To which the bloke goes, let me consult with my line manager. Of course they dared not cancel my holiday with a refund. I got it at the price I paid - end off. And finally, I don't know that DeWalt is Partshop Direct. My business was with a business called Partshop Direct. The only reason I mention DeWalt is because it is a matter of fact. My business is with the seller as seen on a website. I intend no disrespect to DeWalt if they happen to be a separate business entity.

"What about the millions of others that haven't?" Nothing. They're all happy - and we leave you to support them. The inference is that a significant minority does not matter. Is that what consumer rights is about. Take your principle that millions are treated good - same with the NHS - and that's their argument for allowing poor care and standards in for a minority of patients.

Destructiveness is easy. The issue will remain: that over 700 posts objectively speak of lies, deception and gross mismanagement - it is of such nature and degree that it matters not 'the company' that does this. That it happens at all is the issue. For the record, I have sent all to Watchdog three months ago. Has anyone seen a response from Watchdog on Amazon or Amazon Logistics?

Right! Here's what's happening: THE PUBLIC will be treated to a LIVE VIDEO BROADCAST via the internet of the front of my home from 11:15 AM TODAY!! You can text or email this link to anybody: http://ustre.am/16Ume OR the longer link is Enterprise Video Streaming [Please note that there may be an introductory advertisement for about a minute from Ustream, as the video broadcast starts] You should test these links now (and leave discussion comments). Obviously at 10:25 AM when I post this there is only a blank screen, as the BROADCAST STARTS at 11:15 AM. I don't expect delivery of Amazon package to be before 13:00PM, but I'm taking no chances. Ustream also records the footage which will be uploaded to YouTube if AL insists that they tried and failed to deliver (and no delivery person i.e. the ghost turned up). Doing all this is at no additional cost for equipment or services - as I already have an Android phone, and my internet package is unlimited (paid for every month anyway). Lucas, ignore the shill - the obvious agenda from the Amazon spy is to provoke someone to make a nasty remark, then the thread gets CAG-ed (i.e. pulled). It's a common strategy on forums - which we see into - no tin foil hat required, at all, to see that!

Ooooh.. blimey.. as if we couldn't appreciate the complexity of operational management. That's the sort of management speak that promotes acceptism of poor service in this country. You sound like an Amazon employee - and you would deny it of course. Or perhaps Amazon would employ people with that sort of attitude I have to wonder? Well, it's strangely good for business - keeping cost down and knowing that the UK customer would simply accept that 'responsiveness in relation to operational and contractual difficulties in multi-billion pound companies will be slow'. I'm coming to a conclusion that it is the attitude of acceptance of 'management speak' by customers that has RoB as it is. Well, I don't accept dressed up management excuses. It wouldn't happen in any organisation I run. I and I think Amazon et al should put their money where their mouth is - give people back their money lovingly when they don't perform. All Prime customers who have been messed around should be give 'cash back'. Now that's what I call real responsiveness.

Change is an overnight thing when I'm in charge - especially on an issue like that. They could contract me to fix their problems. But at the moment I don't know the insides of Amazon operational issues. So it would be improper for me or anyone else to start making suggestions. I'm not here to give you or Amazon a lecture on consumer satisfaction and quality indicators (Google is your friend - not me).

There are 306 posts in an Amazon Discussion thread most of it about woes experienced with Amazon Logistics deliveries to customers. See: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/forum/rss/thread/Tx21J8C0QW4MWV8/ref=cm_cd_tp_mdb_feed Amazon seems to be aware of the problem - but putting matters right is taking some time. In the mean time customers are fuming! Please publicise this issue so we can gather more evidence about what's happening, and apply the right stimulus for change.

It might seem a reasonable suggestion and it's elementary. I can do that easily online. But I'm not on about £66, £29 or £5. I am so rich I can afford to lose that easily on a yearly basis - and many may respond half-cynically, 'Well that's great for you..not need to boast about it'. My point is about how many companies play a numbers game on people having difficulty to making ends meet - and for those like me who can afford to lose the money but not their principles, we too must take a stand and shout about it. I'm also not into a debate on whether people in financial difficulty should take out such insurances. It's not even about insurance policies at all. It's the game playing that gets to me. ROB i.e. Rip off Britian needs to be cured! Change starts with me. I'm not having it!!

About two weeks ago I received notice of from Domestic and General about need to renew an insurance policy on my Freezer (a proline UFZ180P6). I notice that the cost was £66/yr and that it would renew automatically if I did nothing. The freezer is now over 4 years old so I thought spending that much is not good value. I'd prefer to get a new one if it broke down, or get a refurbished one at near to same cost of £66 (yes British Heart Foundation are doing some good deals). But I notice that to cancel the insurance means I'd have to call an 08444 number which costs me 5p/min. I don't like that- even though I could afford to spend 100 times that in a day because I'm rich. It's just the principle that offends (can go into that another time). So I get onto their website where I spend 15 min cancelling (or so I thought) their insurance. But the email confirmations I get next day don't reflect cancellation. So two nights later I decide to try again and this time it seems to be cancelled. Yes - I have loads of time and my principles tell me that for the greater good of all I spend my time like this. So that's say 30 min total. Which is not great but I'd rather spend that time than give them 5p I thought, if it's worth cancelling. But no. Read on. This morning I receive two pieces of correspondence both undated - and it seems that this is now standard practice in this country of late. So you can't really work out when correspondence is generated - advantage to 'big business' methinks. [ATTACH=CONFIG]44694[/ATTACH]1st opened correspondence says "Ensure continued protection of your Freezer" - renewal date 27th June 2013. Annual fee "£66.00" - as it was on correspondence about two weeks ago. So methinks fine that's just them plugging that which I refused. [ATTACH=CONFIG]44693[/ATTACH]2nd correspondence opened tells me that "Your freezer is now Protected by Domestic and General". So I'm like wut! (and holding back from telling you the expletives that were running in my mind. Don't want to breach forum rules ). My time has clearly been wasted going online. I'm not happy. But I note that it's the same policy and same freezer but now the price I've been billed was £29.00!! The date of issue was 15th June 2013 (but that's not the date on the correspondence - which is as I said undated). I call D&G on their 08444 number spending my 5p/min now. They introduce the call as being recorded for quality and monitoring purposes, so I decide to record the call too - and I let them know this later on. The phone takes 5 min to answer. So you bet - I was firm but in no shape or form abusive. After giving all the relevant details they go "That's cancelled... on our system". And I go (WTTE) 'well you say that now, but I could have no knowledge of that and your conflicting correspondence'. I outline that I've wasted my time online and now the cost of my call and my personal time chasing an issue that is their fault. So I've spent in total about 40 mins and paid for the 'pleasure' - if you see what I mean. It's not fair!! At this point - and it's the usual - with most call centre people - I start getting cut up in mid-sentence. So I say "I notice at this point that your cutting up what I'm saying and that predicts that you're about to label me as a hostile customer and put down the phone, but as I am recording this call and your company is too, I must let you know that I have not been hostile to you and have used no abusive language. I expect you to listen to what my dissatisfaction is". So I explain that it is about the confusion and the waste of my time. I then say that I expect to be compensated £5 for the waste of my time and the cost of my call. The woman then goes (WTTE) 'I don't know what you mean'. I respond, 'you know exactly what I mean' and I repeat myself and state that I expect a check for £5 within 10 working days. I then put the phone down with 2 seconds notice. I'm not about to explain the meaning of words to a person on the other end who is fully fluent in English. I stated my case. Some who read this may think this is about £5. I'll let you know now it isn't. I don't care much about £5, it is the principle of how large companies waste our time. If I spend 30 min on line I expect to get it right. I don't expect to have to be followed up by conflicting correspondence, then have to make a phone call that costs me 50p. It's pure rubbish. Just to let all know I spent similar amount of time with Tesco for £1 mismatch on their price, and on that occasion they offered me £5 for my time - which I did not in the end accept (simply because it was sufficient that they offered as a recognition of getting it wrong). This is about how big companies play a numbers game. Game you wonder. Yes - did you notice that the price at D&G was £66/yr - and that following my attempts to cancel the evidence leads me to conclude they quickly renewed before 27th June at £29. My second online attempt to cancel must have gotten home and that's why at 24th June (today), it appears on the system as cancelled. This is a numbers game, cuz I reckon that of 1000 customers companies treated in this way, probably at least 10% get hooked. Something is wrong with business in this country - and something is also wrong about consumer vigilance. That's why businesses know that with a certain percentage they will 'get away with it'.

I think we as consumers need to change the culture among ourselves, so that has an impact on business. There is so much talk in this country about changing cultures.. well? Why don't people just do it! They want bankers to change their culture - so what about consumers? It is because consumers (in general) are lazy that big business is confident that they can get away with ripping off people. I'm telling you, I hear so many people moaning about how they've been ripped off - yet they never venture onto google to find out what are their rights and what they can do. So whilst on one hand we groan about big business, we must also groan about the culture of consumers in general in ROB!! This is not a matter to be joking about or taking the mick. I hope all of you out there reading this are on the same side of putting things right. We may all have to adopt a position of 'militant consumer activism' for a while, just to get the message across to big business. I'm also leading the way. I've been helping people with small purchase disputes for nothing. Telephone advice and letters here and there. A friend of mine is doing the same. No - stop - I'm not here to advertise anything. I'm telling you that this is what we need to do. Those who know help those who don't know. And those who benefit from that experience become consumer rights activists in themselves. If we push that sort of cultural change among ourselves that can have a big impact faster than we might imagine.

I'm not intested in whether it is silly that they make a charge (fee or whatever). That is covered by contract and they are entitled to bleed me. I thought I made that clear. The extent to which they bleed me is what I am concerned about. And as this matter is about what is effectively (legally in my opinion) a penalty charge, I think I am entitled to seek and find out how they decide how much 'blood' they draw. I hope that is sufficiently clear now. ADR? ADR???.. I go for the jugular!! I'll not be messing about with ADR.. BT stooges please pass the message on.

I hardly ever use my BT landline because I'm paying Three.co.uk £30.00 for 2000 minutes and endless texts etc. So - today I get my online BT bill and for the first time I've discovered that I'm charged a total of £3.70 for not using my phone twice in one month and not calling their 1571 answer service twice in one month. I have contacted BT about this on the phone. Are you surprised that the response was not "yes, we will provide you with a full justification of the size of the cost"? They've been given 14 working days to provide what I request. Else? I draw my sword. Some will recall that I won a punch up with British Gas for some £800, and since then have won against certain large foodstores on other consumer issues. Yes - I'm confident. A sizeable proportion will - as BT did - jump to the contractual clauses that allow them to bleed me and which it will be said allow me to be bled. Well - like me or not - I'm not interested in the clauses, I'm interested in finding out how BT arrive at £3.70 as a reasonable penalty charge, because this is what it is. Why not £5, or £10, or £200!! Sure enough £200 would appear to be ridiculous, compared to £3.70. For any level of penalty charge, customers should be provided with a full costing of penalty charges on request [not a defensive response which hides behind contractual clauses]. Yes - I could dream up reasons for penalty charges. I'm not interested. I want to know how they care calculated. The issue is related to a similar one where certain airlines are bleeding people up to a tenner to use a credit card online, whilst my local cinema may charge a mere 75p. How are we (in general) as conusmers to be shielded from big muscle businesses, driven by greed and profiteering? Something is fundamentally wrong with the way business works in this country.

I've been a happy customer of Three.co.uk for over three years until 36 hours ago - when I suddenly was unable to access certain websites via an internet connection shared via my handset. All the difficulties that follow are specific to shared connections. The websites were: anything related to email, or file sharing or upload e.g. googlemail, hotmail, gmx.com mail, carbonite.com, mediafire.com and doctors.net.uk (yeah I'm a doctor). Only yahoo.com mobile-format email is spared. Google Talk is also banned, but Skype remains live. However, I can surf on IE8, Firefox 3.6 and Opera 10.50 all other sites like normal - and at quite satisfactory speeds. I get about 120kb/s connection. Yep I know that may sound crazy or amazing but that is the whole truth. None of this problem was seen 36 hours ago. Three other colleagues who use the Three network have experienced the same problem with shared connections. Googlemail and hotmail are accessible via direct handset connection, but not on any desktop or laptop sharing the handset connection. Firewall issues have been completely ruled out by using a computer without a firewall. The problem was clearly identified and it took just over an hour for two Three support personnel to understand all the above - which is frankly shocking. I felt I was speaking a foreign language. In the end this was Three's response (a very close approximation): The Internet Max connection was designed specific for handsets only. We don't have a "trouble-shooter" for anything but handsets on Internet Max. Maybe you were accessing some sites and those were a bonus, however we can't do anything about that because you're getting the service on your handset and that is what we cover. Perhaps you may want to purchase a dongle and that may improve the situation. My response: When I purchased the internet max (and had it running for nearly 3 years) I was quite satisfied it's only in the last 36 hours, so something has changed. I don't see why I need to invest in a dongle to now get email via by laptop or desktop browser when all that was working well up to 36 hours ago. I think three ought to look into the matter and find out why these sites (listed above have been blocked) via shared connections. I think that this is possibly a deliberate plan by Three to squeeze customers to purchase dongles. I'm not having this kind of coercion. I intend to complain in writing and go to a regulator if necessary. Actually I intend to go all the way to Europe on this if I unearth some kind of unconscionable under the table kicking of customers in a certain direction to spend more money. I really got the impression that Three's technical support staff were 'constrained' by what they were given to finding a solution to this problem. Well I'm not constrained from applying pressure to Three change it's act. Europe has been the only force that seems to be able to dictate to these big companies - so if necessary I'll go there; write to my MEP with the evidence. All Three customers need to check on this situation. No it's not about shared connections - its about Three possibly squeezing customers to spend more by possibly willfully blocking sites and claiming that they know nothing and can do nothing.

My dishwasher broke down for the second time in a year. It's covered by Mastercare Coverplan. On the top right corner of the document is a 'Mastercare' logo in green that looks like a house. The date on it is 8/09/2007. The following words appear "In the event of your product breaking down, please consult your Coverplan Agreement first and carry out the necessary checks. If you need to arrange a repair, or would like any further information relating to your Agreement, simply call Customer Services on 0870-600-1550 where one of our team will be happy to help". Did all the checks and did the reset button thing, according to spec etc etc. So I call 0870-600-1550 and I realise that option 1 is the correct one for repair. I get taken through several voice prompts, and I'm thinking "This is great...excellent speech recognition technology". After about 3 minutes on hold I get through to a very polite lady who takes some details and confirms the product and the problem etc. [The following is a approximation of the verbatim of what was said because I did not make an audio recording of the conversation] Then she asks "Do you have a repair authorisation number?" And I go, "I wouldn't because I followed the menu system and came through to you...". Me: "Have I not come through to the right place?" She: "You've come throught to Bosch. You need to call Mastercare and get a repair authorisation number" Me: " I did call Mastercare...I'm looking at the document here and it says... (I read out the relevant paragraph and phone number) so I dialled the correct number". She: "Yes, but you've come through to Bosch...we cannot do anything without the repair authorisation number. Me: "What should I do now?" She: "Call 0844 561 4000 and do option 4 and then option 2". Me: "Is it something I've done wrong or are other customers falling into the same thing." She: "Others are doing the same as you [i.e. calling in without the repair authorisation number] Me: "Don't you all tell MasterCare that there is a problem...because it wastes your time and the customers time?" She: "No. I don't work at MasterCare". Me: "So when I get this repair number, what's next?" She: "You call me back on that number - and the options I gave." Me: "And do I have to go through the whole thing again?" She: "No...here is a reference number for the next time you call. (She gives me their reference number)" Okay - so I do as she says. And guess what? I get into the same call menue system as on 0870-600-1550. Option 3 is to complain to 'Customer Services', so instead of going to option 4 I do option 3. I get through to some chap. He confirms my details and the Agreement number etc. I give him the sequence of the above. I try to explain that it is ridiculous for customers 1. to be told that they will be helped but then they have to call another number (which connects to the same call menu) then 2. connect back to Bosch via a MasterCare 0870-600-1550. 3. for the problem to be affecting customers regularly as reported to me by Bosch. Of course I'm cut up several times by this chap telling me that I do have a reference number, "it's the one you just gave me". Me: "Just let me tell you what the reference number is..It is a repair authorisation number, not your policy reference number. " He then goes silent for a bit. At this time I know I'm branded as a hostile customer because my tone of voice is now one of total frustration. But I assure any one reading this that I used no abusive language. Oh when they go silent - you know that means they've put the phone to one side. It's standard instructions. So: Me: "Are you listening to this". He: [coming alive] "Yes" Me: "Are you recording this stuff I'm telling you, so you can do something to help your company?" He: "No. We cannot record these calls...we're not allowed to". Me: "Look I don't mean tape record the conversation. I mean record the details of what I'm telling you....Look, I'm taking the time, effort and expense to call you with a genuine problem. I'm speaking proper english and I'm a person with three post graduate qualifications...so I know that there is a genuine problem." He: "Why do you feel you need to say that?" Me: "Because I want to impress upon you that I am an intelligent person, that I have properly assessed the problem and I am reporting it to you with a certain degree of reliability, so you can do something about it." Finally he gets the point. Him: "So what do you want us to do?" [Me thinking to myself: "What the heck, should I request an all expenses paid trip to Las Vegas".] Me: "I want you to tell your company, having spent my time and money calling you to improve your service, that there is a problem. Tell them what the problem is as I have outlined it to you so that something can be done." Him: "I can't do that, you'd have to write in with a complaint". Me: "Sorry mate...take a hike". CLICK. So what next? I call the 0870-600-1550 (not the 0844 number) do option 4 then 2. BTW option 4 is for any other enquiries. A person of average intellect and mental fortitude would have pressed option 1 (as I did the first time round). I get through to some chap sounding as if he's from the Asian subcontinent (from the accent), speaking good quality of English. He takes my details, the problem, and then gives me the repair authorisation number. Then he kindly asks me if he should put me through to Bosch. So I get back to Bosch now (from the Mastercare number 0870-600-1550). I then give my Bosch repair reference number and the repair authorisation number from Mastercare. Then (now some 25 min later) I've got a date and time next week for a technician to vist. Right. Questions: 1Q: Why did I tell a Mastercare person to take a hike? 1A: I lost it. I'm human. I have limitations don't you? Imagine I spend a few min and probably more than the cost of postage stamp - me thinking that this person is gonna do something - then I'm told 'you have to write in'. Well why the hell have a cusomer service complaints line at all? The customer service complaints line should simply say "You're gonna spend probably as much calling this number as to write to us, so don't even bother to call - just write, because we won't take up your problem over the phone!" 2Q: What's my gripe? 2A: Customer service in this country - this RIP OFF BRITAIN - needs to be shot dead! Yup it's broadbrush but it's true. It is rare to get good customer service. The best I've ever had was at Wal-Mart stores i.e. ASDA. 3Q: But this is a one off - why are you so heated? 3A: It isn't a once off at all. I meet this kind of rubbish nearly every time I call a helpline of some sort. Today I got fired up enough to write about this one. As I was giving the repair authorisation number, I recalled that I had similar problems with them about 11 months ago when the same dishwasher broke down. I had expressed my dissatisfaction then - and left it like that. You hardly can be expected to recall after so long that you're meant to do option 4 and then option 2. 4Q: Have you not anything better to do? 4A: Yup. But I decide how I use my time. So today I decided to do all this. There's no benefit in it for me. I could find other equally good ways of blowing off else where. The thread could be removed it the mods wish to take it down. I've kept a copy to distribute to friends for their benefit. 5Q: What do you think should be done to improve customer service in this country? 5A: Customers/Consumers need to be given real bite - or they have to find it some how or the other. It's culturally ingrained in our socieity that we ought to grin and bear it. No! No! No!. There has to be more free expression of experience and more sharing of the nonsense that is going on among big business in this country. The reason why the likes of the DSG group do as they do is because we as consumers are collectively too passive in our approach. In other words big business know what they can get away with it. And you know what that means? Cutting corners to deliver profits to share holders.

I haven't studied VM's contract is it applies to the person in question, so it is difficult to make an informed comment about how s/he might contemplate severing the contract. I don't expect VM will give in without a fight - and they have paid-for legal muscle to unleash on customers. The individual should, I imagine protest any injustice orally and in writing - and seek proportionate refunds for poor service. If it is safe and legal, record all telephone conversations. There's more than one way to skin a cat - as they say. With large utility companies my advice is to be a thorn in the side - a pain that does not go away and one that worsens with time. By that I mean - giving them reasonable deadlines for responses to complaints, exhausting the complaints process, moving to the industry regulator and finally getting it out in the media. When for example BG tried to screw me - the above strategy worked well. They wrote off £600. So the strategy is worth the effort. But the main thing is never to become stressed out when taking on a utility company. Simply be a dripping tap - that drips louder and more persistently. Always get support from friends, let them read your letters, re-draft them and re-word them etc.

The original post stated - and I repeat - "Hence, fed up with the crap service and response from VM and want to find someone to replace them but with an equally fast down/up speed. I hear too many bad reports of how so many isp's are limiting downloads and throttling p2p connections (yes I use them) that I am nervous of who to consider though. Any advise/ recommendations please?" Those who need equally fast down/up speed need to consider how voip will perform in selecting a provider. I happened upon Skype because it is one of the most common voip. In addition I considered the OP's post in the totality of what BB might be used for - taking into consideration that there was concern about limiting of downloads and throttling of p2p connections (of which many voip systems operate). I also considered VM's packages which are arranged in a particular way to make it difficult for customers to leave. I compared VM against BeThere. For the poster's benefit and the benefit of others in similar positions. I have declared that I have no interest whatsoever in any particular service or feature - something that no other respondents thus far has been able to do. I am not insistent on bringing back this forum to voip - in the slightest. I am writing for the benefit of the OP's post and those who may have similar interests. The use of BB bandwith is and inseparable issue and the OP post made no mention or restiction on what the concern was about. I was therefore free to consider all uses of BB that might impact on BB bandwidth. I considered voip purely as a method of avoiding the trap of having to purchase landline telephone services as part of a package - be it VM, BT or any other service provider. I also rightly considered alternatives to fixed-line BB - by making mention of mobile BB. It is clear that some choose to keep an usual focus on voip by some where I intend none. There is an evident plot to have my posts appear belligerent to the moderator and to effect removal. What remains is that my posts are objectively informative to anyone who needs good BB services and it adds balance, consideration and options for the uses of BB, and strategies to avoid discounting traps created by some providers. I'm aware of the risk that the moderator(s) will find against me or bring the forum thread to a close - and my posts will be removed - thereby effecting the patent ulterior motive of the rather loud illogical and narrow-focused majority. Whilst traditional telephony services (via landlines) have until about 10 years ago been largely limited to carrying mainly voice, BB is about total data, media and information transfer. A BB service is not merely about download speed - it is also about integrity of service and good customer service.

"As for your response, you mentioned to think more broadly about it... and yet only mentioned Skype, so.." This must mean that Vonage is Skype - surely. You seem to have a gripe mate. Just call in the mods and have my posts removed. I'm used to it. This one especially will be removed - and I'll probably be banned. Do I care. Score your point. You need it. The forum is for all who read it and wish to be informed. The likes of you seem obsessed with putting things into boxes. Good for you and Rip-off Britain. Your strategy will work - you seek to effect removal of these posts by goading me to respond so as to attract the mods. It's a well known trick. Printout of thread kept - just in case.

Broadband is about the use he might put to Broadband. He said "Hence, fed up with the crap service and response from VM and want to find someone to replace them but with an equally fast down/up speed. I hear too many bad reports of how so many isp's are limiting downloads and throttling p2p connections (yes I use them) that I am nervous of who to consider though. Any advise/ recommendations please?" The limiting of downloads is an issue relevant to the uses he might put broadband to. In reality 'downloads' means bandwidth limitiations. You may have noticed that at now point did crem notify any of us what use he might put his BB to i.e. things that might contribute to 'download' limit. I responded in a way that might make him and others think more broadly about the issue. BB is no longer separate from telephony, video, TV, music etc etc. What's happened at VM from my personal experience is that they do some kind of amazing discounting that locks the customer into a package. The discounts are tied into the various services and the customer is 'trapped' for the next year of the discounts (only to get out by paying a 'surcharge' of some kind). My 'advice' asked for by the original post was to assist in disentangling not just him but others from this very sneaky (but legal) manouevre that VM does. In total know what you use your BB bandwith for, what eats up the most bandwidth - and don't think of telephony or TV as distinct from BB. You can have it all through good quality BB. Think outside the box and beware of those who try to fit you back into the box. There are many out here who have undisclosed or covert allegiances to various companies. I have no allegiance to any one or anything other than a good deal and good customer service.

Yes I do - I thought I said so. I probably wasn't clear enough. I've also used regularly MSN Messenger, Yahoo Messenger and Gizmo. Recently my wife is in Europe and we've found skype to be the best. We're saving tons on calls over what we might spend if we had to call each other. Because we all have Skypephones she can contact the three of us for 'free' over here. Yesterday for example we were on the way down from Sheffield - my daughter is in the car chatting to mom in Amsterdam on skype for 'free' - with no care in the world about cost or time. How cool is that? Very! That's some of the stuff you can do as well with mobile BB. All I can say is that Skype started out as a voice/video telephony service and they have evolved amazingly. Our family finds that it is the best for carrying voice and video of the other messengers. We couldn't live without good BB service and Skype. We're regularly in contact with people in Africa, New Zealand and Japan for example by voice and video. I could use 0844calls.co.uk for some cheap calls to NZ however, I've found that using skype via BB gives really excellent voice quality. My mate from Japan said that he thought I was in the room with him. So what ever customers do, ensure that your BB provider is literally up to 'speed'. I would also say that it is worth going for true unlimited packages if you're going to do a lot of voice and video anything via BB. Also look at the Vonage option (I have no experience with them) but they can give you landline simulation via your BB - at a rate roughly similar capped landline rates charged by UVTC.

"The problem with skype is that you still need a home phone as a lot of people don't have skype yet." The amazing point is of course that I have skype and it's working - as I explained - on that which is not on a home phone. But I do emphasise - ad nauseum - that my mention of skype was only as a tool to be used on BB services to cut past the monopoly of landline providers. In all of this BB plus Vonage is also a reasonable alternative for some.

The importance of skype will not be realised by those who cannot think outside the box. BB is simply a conduit for voice, video and other communication technologies. Most people who know anything about technology will know that traditional landlines are on their way out. And feel free to debate that - because traditional Brits love their landlines. What really matters is the integrity of your BB connection, which for good service providers, is currently capable of carrying voice and video with great efficiency - in many cases better than landlines. So for those who require telephony services those can be carried via broadband using Skype services. Eventually much TV programming will come via the internet. We saw that with JumpTV and there are other similar services out there. BB services are not just about 'da intanet' (aka 'the internet'). In other words start thinking to the future. Start moving voice services onto BB and skype is simply a tool that will help with all this. It does underline the issue really, that the integrity of your BB provider will become extremely important. I'm afraid I cannot explain this further. Those who think I've simply veered off-topic are sadly the people who will continue to prop up poor service providers and the culture of 'Rip-off Britian'. Oh and Skype via 3g can come as a home service too. In a few months we'll be getting 7.2 Mbps which can be totally portable between home and office i.e. BB that moves between home, office, the trains, the road. I declare absolutely that I have no affiliation to Skype, any mobile provider or service or any bb service. I do not work in the IT industry. I'm simply amused by the degree of techno-illiteracy that allows British industry to continue ripping-off people. The original poster asked for "any advice/ recommedations please" - so was happy to give mine. I therefore thought about the uses of BB rather than BB in itself, in providing my opinions.