Should I pay bad ISP?

Hello,

I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small popular DSL
provider and they said they would set it up for me within ten working
days.

Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set it up. By that
time I had got cable broadband instead. I thought I'd try and see if I
could get DSL working as backup but it didn't work. So I called them
and told them to cancel.

They agreed to cancel, but insisted that I pay them the setup fee and
for the couple of days (they claimed) the line had been active. I
explained why I thought that was unreasonable. They said it wasn't
their fault it had taken so long to set up because my line already had
a marker on it from a previous occupant's ISP. They said they had
already paid BT so I should pay them.

So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What are the risks
of not paying them?

Dombey

"Dombey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com
> Hello,
>
> I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small
> popular DSL provider and they said they would set it up
> for me within ten working days.
>
> Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set
> it up. By that time I had got cable broadband instead. I
> thought I'd try and see if I could get DSL working as
> backup but it didn't work. So I called them and told them
> to cancel.

Why did you get cable set up while you were still waiting for the original
order to be put through..? Granted, they took longer than the 10 days they
quoted, but you should have taken it up with them at the time rather than
ordering a second product from elsewhere.

> They agreed to cancel, but insisted that I pay them the
> setup fee and for the couple of days (they claimed) the
> line had been active. I explained why I thought that was
> unreasonable. They said it wasn't their fault it had
> taken so long to set up because my line already had a
> marker on it from a previous occupant's ISP. They said
> they had already paid BT so I should pay them.

Correct.

> So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What
> are the risks of not paying them?

It will almost certainly affect your credit rating, which may come back to
haunt you if you ever need credit maybe several years from now. You should
have cancelled one order before placing the second.

I may be wrong (I'm not a lawyer) but from where I see it you're stuffed.

Ivor

In message <(E-Mail Removed)>, Ivor Jones
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>"Dombey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed) oups.com
>> I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small
>> popular DSL provider and they said they would set it up
>> for me within ten working days.
>>
>> Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set
>> it up. By that time I had got cable broadband instead. I
>> thought I'd try and see if I could get DSL working as
>> backup but it didn't work. So I called them and told them
>> to cancel.

>Why did you get cable set up while you were still waiting for the original
>order to be put through..? Granted, they took longer than the 10 days they
>quoted, but you should have taken it up with them at the time rather than
>ordering a second product from elsewhere.

Seems like poor communication on both sides. "Dombey" should have
contacted them to find out what the delay was, and the DSL provider
should have kept him up to date with the progress of his order.

>> So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What
>> are the risks of not paying them?

>It will almost certainly affect your credit rating, which may come back to
>haunt you if you ever need credit maybe several years from now. You should
>have cancelled one order before placing the second.

I think it would depend on whether the DSL provider exchanges details
with the credit reference agencies. I suspect most (if not all) don't.

Of course the DSL provider could always take the matter to court.
--
Martin Jay
Phone/SMS: +44 7740 191877
Fax: +44 870 915 2124

On 20 Jul 2006 09:44:03 -0700, "Dombey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Hello,
>
>I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small popular DSL
>provider and they said they would set it up for me within ten working
>days.
>
>Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set it up. By that
>time I had got cable broadband instead. I thought I'd try and see if I
>could get DSL working as backup but it didn't work. So I called them
>and told them to cancel.
>
>They agreed to cancel, but insisted that I pay them the setup fee and
>for the couple of days (they claimed) the line had been active. I
>explained why I thought that was unreasonable. They said it wasn't
>their fault it had taken so long to set up because my line already had
>a marker on it from a previous occupant's ISP. They said they had
>already paid BT so I should pay them.
>
>So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What are the risks
>of not paying them?
>
>Dombey

I would have thought it would have been safer to cancel the adsl
service BEFORE taking the cable service in addition

jim

"Dombey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small popular DSL
> provider and they said they would set it up for me within ten working
> days.
>
> Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set it up. By that
> time I had got cable broadband instead. I thought I'd try and see if I
> could get DSL working as backup but it didn't work. So I called them
> and told them to cancel.
>
> They agreed to cancel, but insisted that I pay them the setup fee and
> for the couple of days (they claimed) the line had been active. I
> explained why I thought that was unreasonable. They said it wasn't
> their fault it had taken so long to set up because my line already had
> a marker on it from a previous occupant's ISP. They said they had
> already paid BT so I should pay them.
>
> So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What are the risks
> of not paying them?
>
> Dombey
>

In my humble opinion - you owe them the money and are lucky that they don't
claim for a full contract.

"Dombey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) ups.com...
> Hello,
>
> I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small popular DSL
> provider and they said they would set it up for me within ten working
> days.
>
> Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set it up. By that
> time I had got cable broadband instead. I thought I'd try and see if I
> could get DSL working as backup but it didn't work. So I called them
> and told them to cancel.
>
> They agreed to cancel, but insisted that I pay them the setup fee and
> for the couple of days (they claimed) the line had been active. I
> explained why I thought that was unreasonable. They said it wasn't
> their fault it had taken so long to set up because my line already had
> a marker on it from a previous occupant's ISP. They said they had
> already paid BT so I should pay them.
>
> So my question is: should I pay this DSL provider. What are the risks
> of not paying them?
>
> Dombey
>

If you never used the service, don't pay for it. It doesn't matter if the
ISP claims the line was active. You couldn't verify the service was active,
so you are under no obligation to pay for service that you did not receive.

The beef here is between the DSL provider and the telephone company, but the
DSL provider is trying to strong-arm you into paying their bill for them.

How it works is this. You call up UUU and ask them to install DSL for you.
They (UUU) call YYY and ask YYY (the "last mile" provider, usually your
local telephone company) to "provision" your telephone line for DSL service.
This involves some minimal work at the local CO, to patch service into your
line. Unfortunately, the telephone company usually doesn't keep close track
of the lines. It is not uncommon for the tech to provision the WRONG line
for DSL service. Every time I've ordered DSL, the line has had to be
provisioned at least twice, because the tech patched service into the wrong
pair of wires on the first (and second) try.

BUT, after the phone company attempts to provision your line for DSL
service, they report back to UUU, and tell UUU that the line is active. So
UUU turns around and tells you (the customer) that the line is active. They
aren't lying to you, they simply are passing along bad information that they
got from someone else.

Since you couldn't get the service working, it's likely that YYY provisioned
the wrong line. REGARDLESS, even if your telephone line is provisioned for
DSL, you haven't used the service. You shouldn't pay the bill.

They might try to hand it off to collections. Don't deal with a collection
agency, in any manner. If it gets to your credit report, DISPUTE IT as a
bill that you never owed. -Dave

<alt.internet.providers.uk>
<jim>
<Thu, 20 Jul 2006 19:04:04 +0100>
<(E-Mail Removed)>

> I would have thought it would have been safer to cancel the adsl
> service BEFORE taking the cable service in addition
>

Or cancel the same day cable broadband had been signed up for .


--
Encrypted email address
www.emailuser.co.uk/?name=KRUSTOV

<alt.internet.providers.uk>
<Dombey>
<20 Jul 2006 09:44:03 -0700>
<(E-Mail Removed). com>

> I recently needed to get broadband. I called a small popular DSL
> provider and they said they would set it up for me within ten working
> days.
>
> Nearly six weeks later they told me they had finally set it up. By that
> time I had got cable broadband instead. I thought I'd try and see if I
> could get DSL working as backup but it didn't work. So I called them
> and told them to cancel.
>

Your little experiment didnt work - so you dont want to pay for it ? .

They arnt a bad ISP its you who is the bad scientist .

- did you do any research to try and find out if it would work

- did you even ask anybody if they thought it would work


--
Encrypted email address
www.emailuser.co.uk/?name=KRUSTOV

> Why did you get cable set up while you were still waiting for the original
> order to be put through..? Granted, they took longer than the 10 days they
> quoted, but you should have taken it up with them at the time rather than
> ordering a second product from elsewhere.
>

I take it you've never had broadband. Once you've had it, if you have to go
without it, even for a day or two, it feels like a severe hardship. I would
have done the same. Gone for DSL first. If there was a significant delay,
order cable modem. But don't cancel DSL, see who gets the house wired first
and stick with that. -Dave

> I would have thought it would have been safer to cancel the adsl
> service BEFORE taking the cable service in addition
>
> jim

Not safe at all. There is no guarantee that cable modem will work, even if
you live in an area that is served, until AFTER the cable modem is
installed, and verified to be working. Considering that DSL sometimes takes
several weeks to install, it's stupid to cancel an ADSL order on the
supposition that you might have cable modem service soon. If cable modem
doesn't work out, you've just shot yourself in the foot. -Dave