Broadband provider withdraws providing service after my complaint - Consumer & Legal Rights

littleboo

So did the "drunk" installer drive to and from your property? Surely if true, that's the worst part of it.

buildingbee

@user1977 - Yes you have a valid point.  It certainly is difficult to prove discrimination and I could be wrong here but my own understanding is that if the company has been informed about your disability and they still choose to not provide some clarification on what they're real reason is for the cancellation, then they are potentially discriminating.

@littleboo - yes I found out later on that he had driven.

MattMattMattUK

buildingbee said:

@user1977 - Yes you have a valid point.  It certainly is difficult to prove discrimination and I could be wrong here but my own understanding is that if the company has been informed about your disability and they still choose to not provide some clarification on what they're real reason is for the cancellation, then they are potentially discriminating.

@littleboo - yes I found out later on that he had driven.

That is not correct in the way you seem to think it is. If they are choosing to not do business with you because you are disabled then yes, if they are choosing to not do business with you for another reason but do not inform you of the specific reasons then that is not discrimination. They do not need to give you specifics, although it may be in their interest to make a statement that the reason was a commercial decision and not related to your disability.

I really cannot see you have anything to gain from flogging this dead horse any further.

user1977

buildingbee said:

@user1977 - Yes you have a valid point.  It certainly is difficult to prove discrimination and I could be wrong here but my own understanding is that if the company has been informed about your disability and they still choose to not provide some clarification on what they're real reason is for the cancellation, then they are potentially discriminating.

What’s the source of your “understanding”? It’s incorrect.

Isthisforreal99

So the installer has went from 'seemed to be drunk' to you are now certain? Do you have any proof?

Seems to me the company have taken both versions of what happened and decided they don't want your custom, for which they owe you no explanation.

To be honest, you are coming over as the nightmare customer.

buildingbee

@MattMattMattUK - Thanks for explaining that to me.  The whole point I posted on this forum was to help me understand and I appreciate your advice.  Would this mean that another customer such as a family member would not be able to get the service in the near future?

@user1977 - It's just from reading up in the past, I thought that was the case, but maybe I'm wrong.

@Isthisforreal99 - I'm not going to waste my time in replying to users like you.

Aylesbury_Duck

buildingbee said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Are there other options to get fast connectivity?  Do you really need really fast speeds?  I have 264Mbps but I don't need anything that fast - Virgin just kept on increasing the speed - and even with a couple of devices streaming, 30Mbps has been fine before.

I can't imagine tying myself into a contract with a supplier who I perceive to have treated me badly.  Would you trust them to sort things out when they go wrong?

You have a very valid point, but a number of family members work from home including myself so fast broadband has now become a necessity.  I totally appreciate what you've said about the fact why bother joining a provider after the perceived mistreatment, but in my opinion if everyone did that then many companies would just walk all over the customers, getting rid of those they felt were problematic, knowing that customers would just move on, so for me it's also a matter of standing your ground and sticking with your principles.  I don't know....maybe I'm getting too old 😆

You're determined to enter into a contractual agreement with a company you believe to have sent a drunk and abusive employee to your house and which you believe has discriminated against you.  That strikes me as a very unusual way to stick to your principles and stand your ground.

Contrary to what you suggest, if everyone walked away then there wouldn't be customers to walk over.

I'm afraid that if you're determined that this business take you on as a customer, you're going to have to change your approach.  Threatening them into supplying to you is not the way to do it.

powerful_Rogue

buildingbee said:

powerful_Rogue said:

buildingbee said:

Thank you for all your replies and advice which is much appreciated. 

@eskbanker

• By “challenging it”, I meant that even though they quoted the right section, all they really said was that some internal team reviewed it. They still haven’t explained why the provider decided to use this clause in my case. From what I understand, the T&Cs give a company the right to act, but that doesn’t mean they get a free pass to skip explaining themselves — especially when their actions come across as retaliatory.  Surely if this was the case, then a company could hypothetically cancel orders if they didn't want them from customers of a certain race, creed or colour?
• I agree that there are two sides to a story, but if they had said that the reason they have cancelled my order was because my complaint was found to be possibly malicious, then that's totally understable, hence they could use their clause to not provide me with services, but they've not said anything other than it's an internal decision only after I closed my complaint and after I was given a new installation date.
• I have already requested a SAR, so waiting for a reply.

@Markdavid1962

• I could forward everything I've sent to complaints, but I don't have the CEO's direct email address.

@MattMattMattUK

• You might be right.  I'm just concerned that they have blacklisted my address, hence in the near future if someone else from my family wants to get broadband service they won't be able to do it and it would be banned.

@Ayr_Rage

• Yes I agree.  I've learnt that the hard way.  Although as I said to Matt, I'm concerned that they have banned my address and it would mean if anyone wants to get the broadband, they will be banned.

@Aylesbury_Duck

• That's a great question - Since I was advised that the matter would be dealt with internally, I just want them honour the installation and the matter would then be closed.  I appreciate it sounds desperate, but in my location where it's difficult to get fast broadband this was something I could really do with.  If that is not currently possible because of what has happened, then at least they need to confirm that they haven't blacklisted my address, hence that my family members can apply as new customers in the near future.

Houses don't get 'blacklisted' - People do.

From reading your original post, it all seems quite nonsensical and i'm not surprised they no longer want your custom.

What's your reason for being so nasty?  So you would be happy to have a drunk installer arrive at your property, be rude and aggressive and you'll just sit back and say it's nonsensical? 

I don't believe I have been nasty. If you thought I had, maybe the installer wasn't rude but it was just your interpretation.

The reason I said I believe your post was nonsensical was because you originally said the installer 'seemed to be drunk', then later on you said he was drunk. How do you know the installer didn't have a disability which may have made you think this? 

buildingbee

Aylesbury_Duck said:

buildingbee said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Are there other options to get fast connectivity?  Do you really need really fast speeds?  I have 264Mbps but I don't need anything that fast - Virgin just kept on increasing the speed - and even with a couple of devices streaming, 30Mbps has been fine before.

I can't imagine tying myself into a contract with a supplier who I perceive to have treated me badly.  Would you trust them to sort things out when they go wrong?

You have a very valid point, but a number of family members work from home including myself so fast broadband has now become a necessity.  I totally appreciate what you've said about the fact why bother joining a provider after the perceived mistreatment, but in my opinion if everyone did that then many companies would just walk all over the customers, getting rid of those they felt were problematic, knowing that customers would just move on, so for me it's also a matter of standing your ground and sticking with your principles.  I don't know....maybe I'm getting too old 😆

You're determined to enter into a contractual agreement with a company you believe to have sent a drunk and abusive employee to your house and which you believe has discriminated against you.  That strikes me as a very unusual way to stick to your principles and stand your ground.

Contrary to what you suggest, if everyone walked away then there wouldn't be customers to walk over.

I'm afraid that if you're determined that this business take you on as a customer, you're going to have to change your approach.  Threatening them into supplying to you is not the way to do it.

I guess when you put it like that, then yes, your right and maybe I'm going about it the wrong way.   I think hearing all the advice from users on this forum, I'm going to let this go and call it quits. 

However I am worried that unless new broadband providers are available that if in the near future my family wanted to join this company they would block anyone who lives at that address.  If this happens then will my family be able to challenge them or again will they have no leg to stand on?

powerful_Rogue said:

buildingbee said:

powerful_Rogue said:

buildingbee said:

Thank you for all your replies and advice which is much appreciated. 

@eskbanker

• By “challenging it”, I meant that even though they quoted the right section, all they really said was that some internal team reviewed it. They still haven’t explained why the provider decided to use this clause in my case. From what I understand, the T&Cs give a company the right to act, but that doesn’t mean they get a free pass to skip explaining themselves — especially when their actions come across as retaliatory.  Surely if this was the case, then a company could hypothetically cancel orders if they didn't want them from customers of a certain race, creed or colour?
• I agree that there are two sides to a story, but if they had said that the reason they have cancelled my order was because my complaint was found to be possibly malicious, then that's totally understable, hence they could use their clause to not provide me with services, but they've not said anything other than it's an internal decision only after I closed my complaint and after I was given a new installation date.
• I have already requested a SAR, so waiting for a reply.

@Markdavid1962

• I could forward everything I've sent to complaints, but I don't have the CEO's direct email address.

@MattMattMattUK

• You might be right.  I'm just concerned that they have blacklisted my address, hence in the near future if someone else from my family wants to get broadband service they won't be able to do it and it would be banned.

@Ayr_Rage

• Yes I agree.  I've learnt that the hard way.  Although as I said to Matt, I'm concerned that they have banned my address and it would mean if anyone wants to get the broadband, they will be banned.

@Aylesbury_Duck

• That's a great question - Since I was advised that the matter would be dealt with internally, I just want them honour the installation and the matter would then be closed.  I appreciate it sounds desperate, but in my location where it's difficult to get fast broadband this was something I could really do with.  If that is not currently possible because of what has happened, then at least they need to confirm that they haven't blacklisted my address, hence that my family members can apply as new customers in the near future.

Houses don't get 'blacklisted' - People do.

From reading your original post, it all seems quite nonsensical and i'm not surprised they no longer want your custom.

What's your reason for being so nasty?  So you would be happy to have a drunk installer arrive at your property, be rude and aggressive and you'll just sit back and say it's nonsensical? 

I don't believe I have been nasty. The reason I said I believe your post was nonsensical was because you originally said the installer 'seemed to be drunk', then later on you said he was drunk. How do you know the installer didn't have a disability which may have made you think this? 

Because you could smell it from his breath.

user1977

buildingbee said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

buildingbee said:

Aylesbury_Duck said:

Are there other options to get fast connectivity?  Do you really need really fast speeds?  I have 264Mbps but I don't need anything that fast - Virgin just kept on increasing the speed - and even with a couple of devices streaming, 30Mbps has been fine before.

I can't imagine tying myself into a contract with a supplier who I perceive to have treated me badly.  Would you trust them to sort things out when they go wrong?

You have a very valid point, but a number of family members work from home including myself so fast broadband has now become a necessity.  I totally appreciate what you've said about the fact why bother joining a provider after the perceived mistreatment, but in my opinion if everyone did that then many companies would just walk all over the customers, getting rid of those they felt were problematic, knowing that customers would just move on, so for me it's also a matter of standing your ground and sticking with your principles.  I don't know....maybe I'm getting too old 😆

You're determined to enter into a contractual agreement with a company you believe to have sent a drunk and abusive employee to your house and which you believe has discriminated against you.  That strikes me as a very unusual way to stick to your principles and stand your ground.

Contrary to what you suggest, if everyone walked away then there wouldn't be customers to walk over.

I'm afraid that if you're determined that this business take you on as a customer, you're going to have to change your approach.  Threatening them into supplying to you is not the way to do it.

However I am worried that unless new broadband providers are available that if in the near future my family wanted to join this company they would block anyone who lives at that address.  If this happens then will my family be able to challenge them or again will they have no leg to stand on?

I don't know where are you getting the idea that broadband providers "blacklist" addresses or families.

But as already explained, generally companies are free to decide not to do business with anyone they like, as long as they're not discriminating on the basis of a protected characteristic. So yes, in theory they could do that if they wanted.