Broadband provider can't provide a proper service: advice on switching

pmduk

Now you've told us that your ISP is BT, we know that any escalation of a complaint will be to BT's choice of ADR scheme, which is Ombudsman Services: Communications (OS:C). They are known to fixate heavily on whether each side has stuck to the terms of the contract and are not generally regarded as consumer-friendly. You will be well advised to have all your records of actions in good order before escalating to them.

Let's be positive, you might find that going down the formal complaints route gets you out of the contract, it happens frequently.

GreatBritain

Carrot007 wrote: »

Ok so it's not wifi, but you say the speed is fine, is it just a bad route to some services? Is it everything?


Regardless of wheather it is the issue they wil lexpect you to be using wired and the master socket for all tests. Are you?

Yes I used ethernet for the test, and I tested it wireless as well, both tests show up as normal.

GreatBritain

Carrot007 wrote: »

Again you have not given the info.


What is your connection speed? Both up and down from the router and a speedtest on your machine. (speedtest will also give a latency score).



What game and what server are you connecting to, some just suck or are a bad idea. All I can see is you have said games are laggy? Define laggy ias the context of the game.


You say speed is good, have you tried a vpn?

BT already know this issue as they did the test themselves. As for me, it depends on the website I use. Tell me the best website to use, I'll run the test and give you the details. But all the websites show the test as normal. Laggy as in input lag. It happens on all games, but improves when I disconnect other devices, and is nonexistent when playing offline.

I don't see what a VPN has to do with this? If anything it would make everything slower, and VPN is not an option on the game console.

GreatBritain

pmduk wrote: »

Now you've told us that your ISP is BT, we know that any escalation of a complaint will be to BT's choice of ADR scheme, which is Ombudsman Services: Communications (OS:C). They are known to fixate heavily on whether each side has stuck to the terms of the contract and are not generally regarded as consumer-friendly. You will be well advised to have all your records of actions in good order before escalating to them.

Let's be positive, you might find that going down the formal complaints route gets you out of the contract, it happens frequently.

Is there a course of action I can take that doesn't involve ombudsmen? Judging by the absolutely appalling 0.8 out of 10 approval rate of ombudsmen, it appears they are just a scam set up to defend big companies.

pmduk

If you want to be able to justify a chargeback I'd suggest sticking strictly by the book. Hopefully, BT will cave in before it gets to OS:C. I'm not a techie, it might be worth investing in someone checking your home setup. BT won't do this for you and it can make a huge difference. Ombudsmen aren't are a scam, I can assure you, people just have the wrong expectations of them.

onomatopoeia99

GreatBritain wrote: »

Is there a course of action I can take that doesn't involve ombudsmen?

No, alternatives potentially mean winding up in court or with debt collectors after you for non-payment.

GreatBritain

onomatopoeia99 wrote: »

No, alternatives potentially mean winding up in court or with debt collectors after you for non-payment.

And in court wouldn't I be able to prove the chargeback was justified?

GreatBritain

pmduk wrote: »

If you want to be able to justify a chargeback I'd suggest sticking strictly by the book. Hopefully, BT will cave in before it gets to OS:C. I'm not a techie, it might be worth investing in someone checking your home setup. BT won't do this for you and it can make a huge difference. Ombudsmen aren't are a scam, I can assure you, people just have the wrong expectations of them.

Then I guess I'll just have to file a complaint first. Are you sure they're not a scam? 0.8/10 rating out of 266 people and they are all misunderstood?

Also, I read somewhere that a chargeback was a final option so that essentially the company fights with the credit card company over the money instead of you. I'm guessing he was wrong?

GreatBritain

Everybody, if me doing troubleshooting steps is important for you, then I will try to do them, even though my question was about the scenario after doing them.

I will try to clarify myself as much as possible, I can assure you my intention is not to confuse you

I was expecting for people to give a few tips, but it appears I had the wrong idea of what a chargeback is for, so that's where all the misunderstanding is.

I would appreciate if someone could explain then when exactly it is appropriate to use a chargeback in any situation? According to consumer advice and some people, it is to be used when you don't receive the goods or services you pay for. Which? themselves recommend doing it. So many people abuse it and commit fraud through chargebacks and get away. But I'm being told the opposite. Could someone clarify all this please?

Thank you, I appreciate all your help.

JJ_Egan

Problem is its your opinion that you are not getting the goods and services .
Unlike say non delivery of an item .


You are 100% of the view that the ISP is totally in the wrong .
Go down the cancel / swap ISP route and see what happens with a charge for contract .


A charge back would be on monies already paid and only your bank can give the real answer based upon your evidence .