Force Internet Service Providers to allow capped allowance usage

darkovo

Colin_Maybe wrote: »

Unless you've heard a rumour I wouldn't think anything is going to change in the next 18 months.

Since you're out of contract and paying for a lesser service to new customers why not call them and see if you can get the 400GB limit for around the same price? Given their monopoly (in effect) they don't have to offer anything but you never know.

I've asked in the past, they don't do any discounts at all.
As for the package, I don't need the newer speeds, could do with the extra data but not wanting to pay any more than I am.

What I do want is the option to cap

pmduk

Too much internet usage? Turn the router off!

darkovo

pmduk wrote: »

Too much internet usage? Turn the router off!

You sir are a breath of fresh air. I parp in your general direction. :rotfl:

Carrot007

littleboo wrote: »

KCOMs's product bandings are either a bit daft or designed to push customers to the top price. 200Mbps with a 200Gb cap or 400Mbps with a 400Gb cap. Most households today would be happy with a lower speed, say 100Mbps, with a larger cap, say 500Gb or unlimited.

Yes it's funny that they charge for the bit that costs them money and only restrict things that don't on the bottom tier.


That said, I would bite their hand off to get the top tier. But I ain't moving to hull!


OP you just have to admit you need more and pay for it. Try restricting your petrol usage to £30 a month and see how you go. Nothing wrong in paying for something you need and use.


Fortunatly this issue only occurs in hull, and in some new build estates too a lesser extent.

Carrot007

custardy wrote: »

Do you class 200GB a month as low usage?

https://www.kcomhome.com/products/broadband/

You don't? I mean I understand there are a lot of people at the bottom of the curve who don't use much. But for someone that actually does things it is.


Takes a quick look at plus.net usage (that as they say does not count everything)...


Billing Period Peak usage Off-Peak usage Total usage
11 Jul - 10 Aug 602.2GB 109.28GB 711.48GB

11 Aug - 10 Sep 191.19GB 34.04GB 225.23GB

11 Sep - 10 Oct 1416.73GB 264.64GB 1681.37GB



Yeah I would use that on a low use month.


By the way what do you consider a reasopnable allowence for mobile (given most use is going to be wifi)? Personally I think 2GB is about right, though 1GB is ok. Any lower should not be allowed.

custardy

Carrot007 wrote: »

You don't? I mean I understand there are a lot of people at the bottom of the curve who don't use much. But for someone that actually does things it is.


Takes a quick look at plus.net usage (that as they say does not count everything)...


Billing Period Peak usage Off-Peak usage Total usage
11 Jul - 10 Aug 602.2GB 109.28GB 711.48GB

11 Aug - 10 Sep 191.19GB 34.04GB 225.23GB

11 Sep - 10 Oct 1416.73GB 264.64GB 1681.37GB



Yeah I would use that on a low use month.


By the way what do you consider a reasopnable allowence for mobile (given most use is going to be wifi)? Personally I think 2GB is about right, though 1GB is ok. Any lower should not be allowed.

My usage isnt really relevant given I pay more than the OP for my BB,and as previously stated havent been on a measured connection since dial up.
for mobiles,You get the allowance you need,again I made sure I have enough to never have an issue with 'running out' of data.

moneyistooshorttomention

I must admit I'd be screaming quite loudly at having to pay for such expensive Internet - just because of a historical anomaly. I pay a similar amount to your current figure - and mine is unlimited.

I live in an area where I've had to "scream long and loud" to get Plusnet to get their act together and fix their faults properly. Five whole years of them "not taking me seriously" - but finally they've started to treat me normally/fix it properly/its working normally at last. I basically had to threaten them to make them.

So I feel your frustration at things not being "Normal" in your area.

Having said that - personally I'd pay that £276 extra per year if that's what it took to get a normal Internet service. Less wear and tear on the nerves than being restricted myself and trying to restrict other people.

Is there a reason (besides the principle of "Why should I just because of where I live?" - which I do understand - but it doesn't seem to be working out for you).

takman

darkovo wrote: »

Yes, tactically done.


I must also say that I'm on an older package so my limits are:
200 GB allowance

50 Mbps download speed

5 Mbps upload speed



I could sign up for the newer limits but at the expense of being tied in to a new 18 month contract, nfw to that! And tbh faster download and upload speeds would only eat into the allowance quicker, due to streaming apps would always default to the highest quality setting (although they probably do already).

It seems crazy to me that you want to stay on that package just to save £23 a month!.

Your family obviously need the extra data and the speed increase from 50 mbps to 400 mbps would obviously be beneficial if you have several people at once who will be using the connection for downloading and streaming.

So why not stop being so tight and just pay the extra £23 a month, i would say it's worth it alone just to avoid the time you must spend monitoring usage and telling your family what they can and can't download.

Yes this is a money saving forum but unless your broke money saving should be about getting what you need for the best price. Your household obviously needs the extra data and extra speed and the top package is the best price you can get where you live.

Nothing is going to change in the next 18 months, like others have said if anything was going to change it would be known about by now.

darkovo

takman wrote: »

It seems crazy to me that you want to stay on that package just to save £23 a month!.

So why not stop being so tight and just pay the extra £23 a month, i would say it's worth it alone just to avoid the time you must spend monitoring usage and telling your family what they can and can't download.

I'm sure I've said it already, I just want a cap to limit extra unwanted charges.
But if you're offering to help fund the extra cost a month I'll set up a crowdfunding source now, you've obviously got too much money already!

custardy

moneyistooshorttomention wrote: »

I must admit I'd be screaming quite loudly at having to pay for such expensive Internet - just because of a historical anomaly. I pay a similar amount to your current figure - and mine is unlimited.

I live in an area where I've had to "scream long and loud" to get Plusnet to get their act together and fix their faults properly. Five whole years of them "not taking me seriously" - but finally they've started to treat me normally/fix it properly/its working normally at last. I basically had to threaten them to make them.

So I feel your frustration at things not being "Normal" in your area.

Having said that - personally I'd pay that £276 extra per year if that's what it took to get a normal Internet service. Less wear and tear on the nerves than being restricted myself and trying to restrict other people.

Is there a reason (besides the principle of "Why should I just because of where I live?" - which I do understand - but it doesn't seem to be working out for you).

Its not an anomaly. There simply isnt any infrastructure for any other company to use.
Kingston own the hardware for the area. They are under no obligation to open that up to other companies.
so who is going to pay for Openreach to lay a full cable set up for the area Kingston cover?