NTL Cable modems

[old.Cornholio]

If anyone has actually read the t+c for the cable service they will find that you will be liable for at least 12 months at £40 + the instalation, even if you write and cancel the service with them!!!
Also if you default any payment they will charge you interset at 4% ABOVE the lending rate set down by NatWest bank!!!!

Scared you should be....

check the full nightmare at... http://www.ntl.com/cablemodems/agreement.asp

Is the other cable modem services t+c as harsh as ntl's????

[This message has been edited by Cornholio (edited 18 May 2000).]

 

[Durzel]

12-month contracts are commonplace with telecoms service provision. The company providing the service will often (depending on the installation cost) sell equipment at a loss to themselves, in the knowledge that this outlay will be recouperated through the 12-month rental contract.

If there were no fixed period contracts, you would end up having to spend a fortune on installation - not good.

 

[old.Necro]

Its pretty routine. Personally i'm more worried about NTL holding users liable for *links* to illegal material (on-site is one thing, but LINKS)..

 

[old.Cornholio]

i aggree being accountable to links is outragous....


i am still waiting for my cd to surf for free!!

ntl are scumbags!

corn

 

[old.Monyet]

it depends on where the links pointed to. if you were to link to a pr0n page then that is classed as you publishing pr0n

same goes for warez/other illegal material...

 

[old.Necro]

I'm not well informed on the relevent section of the law (copyright is the area i do know), but pointing at something and publishing it are two very different things.

Either way, it made me decide to get ADSL instead.

 

[old.Cornholio]

Check this..
http://www.dna.uklinux.net/bti/letter/

dunno about adsl either...!!!!

 

[old.Necro]

hmm..

That case looks like it has more to it then is shown, but at a glance at least there it is a case of BTi acting illigally rather than having an oppressive T&C.

 

[stu]

That's really interesting actually.

When I signed up for Telewest Active Digital a couple of months ago, the bloke on the phone said to me "This will reset your original Telewest 12 month contract you had with your analogue service, so it's 12 months again starting from now". I was a little taken aback, and highlighted to him that 1) I wasn't told that it was a 12 month contract in the first place (as I wouldn't have taken it out, thinking I would only be in my flat for 6 months) and 2) I would *definitely* not be in this flat for 12 months.

His reply was that, if you move to a non-Telewest franchise area, you are not bound by the terms of the contract: in his words, "it's not your fault if you move to an area we don't provide". The contract (at least in Telewest's case) is to stop you either 1) reverting to an alternative service provider at your current location or 2) moving to a TW franchise area and not using TW services. You do NOT have to pay for the service if you are unable to receive it (ie if you move out of the area to an otherwise serviced area).

Which to me, sounds fair enough. After all, if I'm in a TW area, I'll want cable off them. If I'm in an NTL area, no problem, I'm not bound by the contract.

Not sure if it's the same with TW Cable Modems, but I'd assume so. Ring up NTL and ask them what happens if you move out of an NTL franchise, they'll probably tell you the same thing.

Re: defaulting payments. So, what's wrong with that? You get a service, you pay for it. Think yourself lucky they don't CCJ you.