Help Please - Legal advise needed. ISP in breach of contract & wondering how to pursue.

Hi all,

We are a small business with a long standing account with an ISP.

We regraded a 2 Mbit ADSL line with 128 static IPs about 6 weeks ago.

During the regrade the subnet masking was misconfigured and our 128 static IPs
were reduced to 6.

The ISP acknowledged the fault after 1 week of me calling everyday until
someone finally had enough basic TCP/IP knowledge to understand what went wrong.

The ISP then decided that their error was not a support issue but rather a
provisioning error,... "So what" I hear you ask?
Well, we were bounced between the two departments for another week while the
fault continued.

It transpires that the ISP has re-provisioned portions of our range to new
clients who would have been provided these IP ranges up to a maximum of one
month ago (when the reconfiguration was botched).

At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We have
had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from a
healthy network!)

Now the ISP is stating that UNTIL all the new clients can be re-provisioned
they cannot fix us.... So they are waiting until 12 new clients are all
comfortable with their new lines until they will correct ours!!!!

Totally amoral business practice driven entirely by making money and "path of
least resistance" mentality....

Anyway, I want to sue these bastards for 4 weeks worth of business impact.

Can anyone suggest a legal firm or statutory body that can assist in these
cases?
Am I even able to seek compensation....? Any help greatly appreciated!

"WillC" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
newsart1of1.1.QrulN5X%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Hi all,
>
> We are a small business with a long standing account with an ISP.
>
> We regraded a 2 Mbit ADSL line with 128 static IPs about 6 weeks ago.
>
> During the regrade the subnet masking was misconfigured and our 128 static IPs
> were reduced to 6.
>
> The ISP acknowledged the fault after 1 week of me calling everyday until
> someone finally had enough basic TCP/IP knowledge to understand what went wrong.
>
> The ISP then decided that their error was not a support issue but rather a
> provisioning error,... "So what" I hear you ask?
> Well, we were bounced between the two departments for another week while the
> fault continued.
>
> It transpires that the ISP has re-provisioned portions of our range to new
> clients who would have been provided these IP ranges up to a maximum of one
> month ago (when the reconfiguration was botched).
>
> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We have
> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from a
> healthy network!)
>
> Now the ISP is stating that UNTIL all the new clients can be re-provisioned
> they cannot fix us.... So they are waiting until 12 new clients are all
> comfortable with their new lines until they will correct ours!!!!
>
> Totally amoral business practice driven entirely by making money and "path of
> least resistance" mentality....
>
> Anyway, I want to sue these bastards for 4 weeks worth of business impact.
>
> Can anyone suggest a legal firm or statutory body that can assist in these
> cases?
> Am I even able to seek compensation....? Any help greatly appreciated!

These any good?

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/i...mall/index.htm
Upto £5000
http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/i...ulti/index.htm
Upto £50,000


Fisher

WillC wrote:
....
> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We have
> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from a
> healthy network!)

A month minimum? Doesn't that suggest something very wrong with your
setup? IP addresses are bound to change sooner or later - I'd be /very,
very/ hesitant about allowing into the world any system that relied
absolutely on fixed ones.

--
Please use the corrected version of the address below for replies.
Replies to the header address will be junked, as will mail from
various domains listed at www.scottsonline.org.uk
Mike Scott Harlow Essex England.(unet -a-t- scottsonline.org.uk)

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:14:04 UTC, WillC <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

> It transpires that the ISP has re-provisioned portions of our range to new
> clients who would have been provided these IP ranges up to a maximum of one
> month ago (when the reconfiguration was botched).

Bad news, but mistakes happen.

> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We have
> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from a
> healthy network!)

Oh dear. Their lawyer would take you to pieces. An expert witness would
say that you have a badly set up network...IP addresses ought to be
changeable very quickly; that's what DNS is for.

> Anyway, I want to sue these bastards for 4 weeks worth of business impact.
>
> Can anyone suggest a legal firm or statutory body that can assist in these
> cases?
> Am I even able to seek compensation....? Any help greatly appreciated!

Certainly you ought to be able to get something for the impact, up top
the point where they offered you a new block (and perhaps a couple of
hours afterwards, for you to reconfigure). I'd think the chances of
getting any more would be low.
--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]

>> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We
>>have
>> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
>> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from
>>a
>> healthy network!)
>
>Oh dear. Their lawyer would take you to pieces. An expert witness would
>say that you have a badly set up network...IP addresses ought to be
>changeable very quickly; that's what DNS is for.
>

Not true. From a contractual point of view if the address range is
specifically referenced & legally documented then its not a question of the
client's network being setup badly... it is simply a matter of a specific
service not being provided when there is a contractual obligation. Check your
documents.

"that's what DNS is for" = non sequitor
"IP addresses ought to be changeable very quickly changeable" mute.
Thankfully no "expert witness" is needed.

Better equiped audience in uk.legal IMHO...

WillC wrote:

> We are a small business with a long standing account with an ISP.
>
> We regraded a 2 Mbit ADSL line with 128 static IPs about 6 weeks ago.
>
> During the regrade the subnet masking was misconfigured and our 128 static IPs
> were reduced to 6.

How have you managed for 6 weeks? - or put another way what isn't
working at the moment?

karlsbad wrote:

>>> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We
>>> have
>>> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies on
>>> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even from
>>> a
>>> healthy network!)

>> Oh dear. Their lawyer would take you to pieces. An expert witness would
>> say that you have a badly set up network...IP addresses ought to be
>> changeable very quickly; that's what DNS is for.

> Not true. From a contractual point of view if the address range is
> specifically referenced & legally documented then its not a question of the
> client's network being setup badly... it is simply a matter of a specific
> service not being provided when there is a contractual obligation. Check your
> documents.

I agree - and the most likely scenario is that the contract limits
damages to no more than the cost of the contracted service. Which is
why adding a backup with another ISP and having a good disaster
management plan is essential. As is a good knowledge of DNS etc.

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:14:04 GMT, WillC <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>Hi all,

>
>Anyway, I want to sue these bastards for 4 weeks worth of business impact.

I suspect you'd be on very shaky ground as I can't imagine for a
moment that the contract you have with the ISP covers you for this. IP
addresses don't "belong" to anybody, not even to the ISP, so while
your contract may state that you are entitled to a /25 assignment I'd
be very surprised if it specifies which particular /25.

As someone else pointed out this appears to be a mistake by the ISP.
Sloppy, yes, but a mistake nonetheless and very unlikely to be breach
of contract.

>Totally amoral business practice driven entirely by making money and "path of
>least resistance" mentality....

I doubt it, by offering to inconvenience 12 other customers on your
behalf it sounds like they're genuinely trying to restore things in
your favour. The path of least resistance would be to say "stuff you,
these 12 other customers are happy..."

--
Address munged but valid - remove mungbeans.

Colin Forrester <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>karlsbad wrote:
>
>>>> At first the ISP offered to supply US with a new range. Unacceptable! We
>>>> have
>>>> had the range for 4 YEARS. I have put 100s of hours into work that relies
>>>>on
>>>> these addresses and I would need a minimum of a month to migrate (even
>>>>from
>>>> a
>>>> healthy network!)
>
>>> Oh dear. Their lawyer would take you to pieces. An expert witness would
>>> say that you have a badly set up network...IP addresses ought to be
>>> changeable very quickly; that's what DNS is for.
>
>> Not true. From a contractual point of view if the address range is
>> specifically referenced & legally documented then its not a question of the
>> client's network being setup badly... it is simply a matter of a specific
>> service not being provided when there is a contractual obligation. Check
>>your
>> documents.
>
>I agree - and the most likely scenario is that the contract limits
>damages to no more than the cost of the contracted service. Which is
>why adding a backup with another ISP and having a good disaster
>management plan is essential. As is a good knowledge of DNS etc.

why would damages limited "to no more than the cost of the contracted service"
make anything essential?
i think "always get it in writing" & "read the small print" are more
appropriate in the circumstances.
why so bent on criticising this person? not very helpful.
goodbye

On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:49:37 UTC, karlsbad <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Not true. From a contractual point of view if the address range is
> specifically referenced & legally documented then its not a question of the
> client's network being setup badly... it is simply a matter of a specific
> service not being provided when there is a contractual obligation. Check your
> documents.

Of course. But damages would surely be limited to what a competent
customer would require to resolve the situation.

> "that's what DNS is for" = non sequitor

Not at all.

> "IP addresses ought to be changeable very quickly changeable" mute.

Silent? Of did you mean 'moot'? It's a fact - change of addresses should
be trivial.

--
[ 7'ism - a condition by which the sufferer experiences an inability
to give concise answers, express reasoned argument or opinion.
Usually accompanied by silly noises and gestures - incurable, early
euthanasia recommended. ]