Taking sky to court

alleycat`

Tricky one to prove is "loss of enjoyment". In effect you have the service but at a reduced rate to that which you were "sold".

However it doesn't appear on the face of it to be "faulty" just not as advertised.

Even at 2Meg which is about where the current "universal service obligation" aims to get people to you'd struggle to use a lot of the online services properly.

Assuming you have no inherent "faults" on the line or in your own cabling and it's all down to copper line length then you are really arguing about if that additional speed would have given you a load of extra service.

If Sky wave off the charges and let you go free and clear, which appears fair based on the information as supplied, i don't think you'll get much more out of them.

You can ask but i doubt you'll get very far.

arsat

Thanks for you comments alleycat,

At the minute sky wants me to pay for cancellation charges for sky TV. And really this has bugged me a lot. And the response from the sky customer services department and their dont-care attitude has provoked me to take these actions.If they dont waive off the cancellation charges, I will be very much taking them to court, no matter how far I have to go!

My point is, its not fair to entice customer with the offers that cannot be fulfilled. Once it goes wrong Sky should hold its hand up and settel this, instead of arguing with the customer hoping to get as much money out of the customer as they can. And they have passed me around in so many circles that I eventually lost my temper.