O2 broadband Rip-off - €277 for 8 days

ecowarm

I'm really pissed off at O2, I am a business customer, two months ago I phoned my account manager and told him I needed broadband for my house (not fixed line) he recommended their "globesurfer" broadband, It had a 15gb allowance (not that I knew what that means) up to now I always had normal home broadband with no download limit, He told me 15gb was all I'd ever need and it was €16.99 per month, so I said fine.

Everything was ok for the first month except for the speed O2 told me "up to" 7.2mb at best I was getting 1.5mb usually 0.5-0.75mb.

this week I get an email from my account manager titled "bill shock" basically I had gone 13gb over my 15gb allowance. I would presume that may cost me €20 more or something like that but NO €277.09 for the 13gb!!! the 13gb was used in just 8 days!!!

I phoned my account manager and asked what was going on, I was simply told I used it so I have to pay for it, I agreed I should pay more If I used it, it's only right.

Now the first 15gb was about €1 each the excess was charged at €20 per gb!!!

That's just insane! I asked them to justify it and received no response, my account manager gave me his managers mobile no. when I phoned her she simply dismissed me and stated she cannot comment on O2's pricing, she was quite abrupt on the phone.

Now I'm not a small customer, I have 32 lines with them, a mix of mobiles, landlines and mobile broadband, which comes to about €2,000+ per month, I can't imagine how they must treat their smaller customers.

A few emails and phone calls back and forth to my account manager, he first said it was in my contract, I reminded him I never signed a contract as I ordered it of him over the phone, I said I was never informed of the charges for excess usage, he stated it was on their website, I asked where and It took HIM over 30 mins to find it, so how was I supposed to know if someone who works for them didn't???

I was really really annoyed, I have no problem with paying it, the problem I have is the extreme amount of the charges, they cannot justify charging 20 times the standard when you exceed your allowance.

I decided to sit outside the o2 shop on cruises st with a sign to protest at the charges, I arrived at 12pm and stayed until 5pm, I spoke to many, many people who said they had the same experience as I had.

Just before 4pm the store manager came out, offered me a cigarette and asked what was the problem, we had a nice chat, he was very polite, he told me he had spoken to O2 customer services and they had agreed to refund the charges.

I refused his refund as that was not the purpose of my protest, The purpose was to highlight the excessively high charges o2 inflict on their customers for exceeding their allowance, which I think I did.

More people should do this as it works, a lot of people complain and don't do anything about it, If your not happy you should say so, If you receive no satisfaction protest, IT WORKS

photo-2.jpg

lomb

Its madness tbh. Landline broadband has caps of 100+gbs and all you can get on standard contract wireless is 15? And then they lie and say thats all youll probably need. Ive heard the pitch to some girls in Carphonewarehouse with the salesman signing her up on a 12 month contract with the lure of a free dongle:rolleyes:

D1stant

Well bloody done you

The mobile operators are essentially screwing people for years. And now with mobile 'broadband' its just another goldrush.

You should formally complain your account manager who offered you false or ignorant advice on the package

red menace

I think this also highlights the importance of reading the Terms and Conditions before using a service

earpiece

Dude, while I sympathise with your plight..... mobile broadband providers have a limit on data transfer so that the mobile network doesn't get clogged up, and the high charges, I guess, are to discourage excessive use, which prompts my question.......... how the hell did you use 28GB in 8 days? That's excessive.

Smoggy

There is no doubt that the price is excessive and they are making money from peoples lack of knowledge about data usage. But most people sign contracts and therefore should be aware of what they are using.

On the other hand, 02 could send daily txt updates with data allowance left, that would solve this issue.

The Left Hand Of God

Fair fuks to you for being someone who actually bothered their ass making a decent protest rather than just going on about it and looking for a refund.

This country would be a lot better off with more people like you.

Chosen

€20 per Gb is indeed crazy, but (and no offence intented) when you sign a contract that includes a phrase that you are not familiar with ("15Gb allowance"), don't you feel like checking what it means?

D1stant

earpiece wrote: »

Dude, while I sympathise with your plight..... mobile broadband providers have a limit on data transfer so that the mobile network doesn't get clogged up QUOTE]

With all respect. Thats b*llix. Mobile networks are pretty simillar to fixed networks. They both get 'clogged up'. The difference is that the Mobile guys screw you into the ground because....em because...... they can?

ecowarm

earpiece wrote: »

Dude, while I sympathise with your plight..... mobile broadband providers have a limit on data transfer so that the mobile network doesn't get clogged up, and the high charges, I guess, are to discourage excessive use, which prompts my question.......... how the hell did you use 28GB in 8 days? That's excessive.

the first month I used less than 15gb the second month the 15gb only lasted 9 days and the following 8 was 13gb, I have no Idea how I used so much as I'm only home in the evening time and in the past two weeks all I've done is watched a handful of youtube clips maybe 30 mins total two episodes of topgear 1hr each and the grandprix last weekend, I would mainly use it for email.

Smoggy

lets look at this another way, parking in the Coombe is 2.50 for 4 hours, BUT every subsequent hour is 5 euro. So every hour is 8 times more than the previous hours. But you know you have four hours and if you choose to stay longer, you pay the higher price.

ecowarm

Chosen wrote: »

€20 per Gb is indeed crazy, but (and no offence intented) when you sign a contract that includes a phrase that you are not familiar with ("15Gb allowance"), don't you feel like checking what it means?

I didn't sign a contract, I ordered it over the phone, he said 15gb was loads and mentioned nothing about an excess.
When I questioned it, the solution he gave me was to use 4 sims in total with 15gb each, for €15.99 a go, so I did, the next day, after he activated them he told me (after I asked, he didn't offer the info) that there was an 18 month contract on each sim.
So I ended up with an 18 month contract without a hint of one, he mad it seem like he was doing me a favor, signed nothing, told no t&c's and I only found out i entered into a contract because I happened to ask the following day.

I then cancelled them of course, but they almost had me for another 18 months.

First he offered me a 30gb for €79+vat a month, when I said "that makes no sense" because 15 gb is €15.99 he then suggested having 4 separate sims.

ecowarm

Smoggy wrote: »

lets look at this another way, parking in the Coombe is 2.50 for 4 hours, BUT every subsequent hour is 5 euro. So every hour is 8 times more than the previous hours. But you know you have four hours and if you choose to stay longer, you pay the higher price.

The difference is they clearly say it, No?

Smoggy

ecowarm wrote: »

The difference is they clearly say it, No?

They do clearly say it as you drive in, but most times when taking on a new contract or even a change of contract you agree to the new terms and conditions - obviously this wasnt the case here.

ecowarm

Smoggy wrote: »

On the other hand, 02 could send daily txt updates with data allowance left, that would solve this issue.

I asked if they could do it and he said no, I also asked if they could restrict the modems to the 15gb so I couldn't go over it and again was told no.

A woman came over to me today and said she had been caught the same way except the girl who sold it to her told her she would get a message if she used her allowance, no text and she ended up with a bill for over €300.

I switch to 3 yesterday, the standing charges are €750 per month compaired to O2's €1300, 30gb allowance per phone/modem, free texts and unlimited calls.

Another thing about O2, when I moved from vodafone to them, I was told that I would not be charged ever for add-ons like text & data bundles,, I discovered on Thursday they only applied that to 5 out of 15 phones, they agreed to give refund on all texts but said they'd have to look into the data part

LaVail

ecowarm wrote: »

I switch to 3 yesterday

Out of the frying pan and into the fire IMO

roast

Fair play to you for protesting, nice to see some people standing up for themselves.

But in all fairness, its tough to not notice going over the limit, thanks to the software monitoring facility, and the option to check the usage on the website. I also find it shocking that some people don't have any interest in reading T&C's of any service they have subscribed to, in particular, the excess usage charges.

srsly78

Hah lightweights.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4436079/welp.png

roast

srsly78 wrote: »

Hah lightweights.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/4436079/welp.png

That is beyond awesome. You've made my day.

jor el

D1stant wrote: »

earpiece wrote: »

Dude, while I sympathise with your plight..... mobile broadband providers have a limit on data transfer so that the mobile network doesn't get clogged up

With all respect. Thats b*llix. Mobile networks are pretty simillar to fixed networks. They both get 'clogged up'. The difference is that the Mobile guys screw you into the ground because....em because...... they can?

No, mobile networks are completely different to fixed wireless or hard line networks, so don't come on here with this kind of misinformation. The cost of shipping data over a 3G network is far higher than for fixed wireless or cable. This is why the out of bundle costs are higher. The bundled data costs are heavily subsidised by the network, the out of bundle costs are more reflective of what the real charges should be.

If you can't read and understand the terms of a contract, or you have no intention to sticking to them, then you should be signing up for a service in the first place.

Nody

earpiece wrote: »

With all respect. Thats b*llix. Mobile networks are pretty simillar to fixed networks. They both get 'clogged up'. The difference is that the Mobile guys screw you into the ground because....em because...... they can?

No, because the cost of sending 1 GB of data via mobile network is noticably higher then sending 1 GB of data via a TV cable pulled in when the house was built excluding things such as bandwidth limitation in a given spectrum etc.

D1stant

jor el wrote: »

No, mobile networks are completely different to fixed wireless or hard line networks, so don't come on here with this kind of misinformation. The cost of shipping data over a 3G network is far higher than for fixed wireless or cable. This is why the out of bundle costs are higher. The bundled data costs are heavily subsidised by the network, the out of bundle costs are more reflective of what the real charges should be.

If you can't read and understand the terms of a contract, or you have no intention to sticking to them, then you should be signing up for a service in the first place.

Mobile transport networks are EXACTLY the same as fixed. IP or SDH or PDH technologies are identical. Fact

In the last mile they are different. A DSLAM uses last mile copper to hit the home usually. Thats pretty cheap. A 3G NodeB uses... erm... air which has a pretty low cost once the spectrum has been acquired...

Towards the core the mobile netwprks are more expensive in terms of RNCs and xGSNs but at nothing like the multiples the operators screw consumers for for breach of data ceiling

D1stant

Nody wrote: »

No, because the cost of sending 1 GB of data via mobile network is noticably higher then sending 1 GB of data via a TV cable pulled in when the house was built excluding things such as bandwidth limitation in a given spectrum etc.

The copper DSL runs over has a fixed bandwidth by virtue of its quality (In Ireland pretty piss poor) and its distance from the nearest Exchange

Mobile on the other hand can reach much higher speeds (1Gbit to the handset has been demonstrated) without digging up the streets to lay fibre

kippy

D1stant wrote: »

Firstly I dont have a contract

Secondly Mobile transport networks are EXACTLY the same as fixed. IP or SDH or PDH technologies are identical. Fact

In the last mile they are different. A DSLAM uses last mile copper to hit the home usually. Thats pretty cheap. A 3G NodeB uses... erm... air.

Towards the core the mobile netwprks are more expensive in terms of RNCs and xGSNs but at nothing like the multiples the operators screw consumers for for breach of data ceiling

To me, you may have a contract - albeit a verbal one, but one which no doubt has been recorded by the operator. My wife recently switched to three and didnt actually sign anything - all done verbally over the phone - apparently very common.

That "air" is licensed and costs money as well so its not as "free" as many would believe.


I have absolutely no idea why people think they have been screwed over by mobile operators when it comes to excessive data usage - sure the fees seem expensive but they are "well known" I would have thought - for years now.

srsly78

D1stant wrote: »

Mobile transport networks are EXACTLY the same as fixed. IP or SDH or PDH technologies are identical. Fact

In the last mile they are different. A DSLAM uses last mile copper to hit the home usually. Thats pretty cheap. A 3G NodeB uses... erm... air which has a pretty low cost once the spectrum has been acquired...

Towards the core the mobile netwprks are more expensive in terms of RNCs and xGSNs but at nothing like the multiples the operators screw consumers for for breach of data ceiling

Wrong. The spectrum available to a cell tower can only handle so many people. You might be surprised to find that in places like New York and London the contention is so bad that mobile internet often does not work.

PCPhoto

OP ... its good that you have made O2 aware of your situation and have used your perrogative (Spelled wrong I think !!) and moved to another network (personally from reports I have read online "three" are not the most reliable for data)

you would think that if you were spending €2K a month they would have some kind of customer loyalty - unfortunately these companies only think about "bottom line".

if you were to move to another network again - it might be a good idea to contact them prior to a move and ask for potential deals - see if you can get a proper bargain - explain what you require and what price you believe is fair.... also make agreements with payments and excessive usage.

Shop around (I have 6months left before I'm out of contract with O2 and I'll be considering moving, all the networks seem to have the same customer service style)

jor el

D1stant wrote: »

The copper DSL runs over has a fixed bandwidth by virtue of its quality (In Ireland pretty piss poor) and its distance from the nearest Exchange

Mobile on the other hand can reach much higher speeds (1Gbit to the handset has been demonstrated) without digging up the streets to lay fibre

Where are you getting this nonsense from? Mobile has better bandwidth and capability than fixed lines? Mobile networks are cheap because the run on air? :rolleyes: Just stop.

CiaranC

kippy wrote: »

I have absolutely no idea why people think they have been screwed over by mobile operators when it comes to excessive data usage - sure the fees seem expensive but they are "well known" I would have thought - for years now.

My last two mobile providers simply throttled the connection down to 56kpbs speeds and stopped transfer altogether respectively (vodafone and internode in OZ) when I reached the agreed limit, the limit which I had agreed to pay for. Charging 20 quid a GB is a joke, they are just taking advantage of their customers ignorance. They'll keep doing it until the regulator or the market says they cant get away with it any more.

kippy

CiaranC wrote: »

My last two mobile providers simply throttled the connection down to 56kpbs speeds and stopped transfer altogether respectively (vodafone and internode in OZ) when I reached the agreed limit, the limit which I had agreed to pay for. Charging 20 quid a GB is a joke, they are just taking advantage of their customers ignorance. They'll keep doing it until the regulator or the market says they cant get away with it any more.

Yep, There are plenty of standard broadband providers that will throttle the connection - all it takes is a phone call and you can "buy" some extra temporary data allowance for that month if you want.
Probably the way to do it in fairness.

D1stant

jor el wrote: »

Where are you getting this nonsense from? Mobile has better bandwidth and capability than fixed lines? Mobile networks are cheap because the run on air? :rolleyes: Just stop.

I get it from 3GPP. The guys who standardised GSM, 3G and now LTE. LTE can support much faster speeds than DSL.

D1stant

srsly78 wrote: »

Wrong. The spectrum available to a cell tower can only handle so many people. You might be surprised to find that in places like New York and London the contention is so bad that mobile internet often does not work.

And contention also occurs in fixed networks. Most DSLAMs are oversubscribed 40:1 for residential broadband

Depends on the version of mobile broadband you are talking about 2G, HSDPA, HSPA, HSPA+, LTE, WIMax etc etc, and where the bottlenecks and investments are per operator. A blanket statement like that is just not accurate

jor el

D1stant wrote: »

And contention also occurs in fixed networks. Most DSLAMs are oversubscribed 40:1 for residential broadband

You're mixing up contention with congestion. 40:1 contention is not a bad thing, and a fixed line network can easily be designed to handle it. That is not the case with 3G. 3G speeds are quoted as maximum and only apply to a single user in a cell, and only if the user is close enough to the mast. More users in a cell means the bandwidth available goes down dramatically. Fixed line networks can handle multiple users at full throttle.

D1stant wrote: »

A blanket statement like that is just not accurate

Much like all of your statements then, which are inaccurate and unhelpful.

D1stant wrote: »

I get it from 3GPP. The guys who standardised GSM, 3G and now LTE. LTE can support much faster speeds than DSL.

3GPP is an advocacy group whos job it is to bestow the virtues of 3G technology, not to enlighten all about it's negative as well as positive sides. Not at all biased then.

Congratulations, you've bought into the myth that our previous minister for communications tried to sell us. A lot of people are now discovering the truth, and are not too happy about what was sold to them.

D1stant

jor el wrote: »

You're mixing up contention with congestion. 40:1 contention is not a bad thing, and a fixed line network can easily be designed to handle it. That is not the case with 3G. 3G speeds are quoted as maximum and only apply to a single user in a cell, and only if the user is close enough to the mast. More users in a cell means the bandwidth available goes down dramatically. Fixed line networks can handle multiple users at full throttle.



Much like all of your statements then, which are inaccurate and unhelpful.



3GPP is an advocacy group whos job it is to bestow the virtues of 3G technology, not to enlighten all about it's negative as well as positive sides. Not at all biased then.

Congratulations, you've bought into the myth that our previous minister for communications tried to sell us. A lot of people are now discovering the truth, and are not too happy about what was sold to them.

Oh whatever. You havent a clue what you are talking about. An advocacy group. FFS

Im not intersted in 'arguing this' anymore. If you believe that the mobile operators have a significantly different cost architecture and that justifies them screwing the consumer then off with you

jor el

D1stant wrote: »

If you believe that the mobile operators have a significantly different cost architecture and that justifies them screwing the consumer then off with you

They do. Your refusal to accept that aside, it's a simple fact that 3G networks are fundamentally different, in cost structure as well as design, than cabled networks.

Profondo Rosso

The joke is on the OP in my opinion.

I have used O2 for 2 years and abide by their usage policy. If I go over I'm careful not to over-do it. Going over it by 13GB is insane.

LoTwan

I still can't get my head around that amount of usage but that's me!

Purple Lemons

Meteor!




...that is all.

William Powell

LoTwan wrote: »

I still can't get my head around that amount of usage but that's me!

I've seen much much more than that used. Often its parents who have bought mobile broadband after never having broadband and the kids use the allowance in the first few days. Then there are people that believe the lies that the sales people tell them and get rid of fixed line broadband and get mobile broadband as a replacement because its "cheaper" :rolleyes:.

the_syco

LoTwan wrote: »

I still can't get my head around that amount of usage but that's me!

I've seen regular automatic updates eat your cap very easily...

Casillas

There's a serious issue with O2 not updating their data usage frequently, sometimes for days. So if your check you account on-line and see that you have 1GB left, you may in fact have gone over your limit without realising and of course you'll be charged through the teeth. The whole service is shoddy, slow and customer relations are awful. But this is Ireland - it's not like we need regulation or anything.

srsly78

jor el wrote: »

They do. Your refusal to accept that aside, it's a simple fact that 3G networks are fundamentally different, in cost structure as well as design, than cabled networks.

Just confirming that D1stant is completely wrong.