Fair use policy - has this changed recently?

Forums › 2degrees (including Slingshot, Orcon, Flip, Stuff Fibre, MyRepublic, 2talk and Vocus) › Fair use policy - has this changed recently?

jscriv

38 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#197902 17-Jun-2016 10:47

After 3.5 years of being a very happy 2Degrees customer (always on a plan with 'unlimited' calls), yesterday I got a txt from them asking me to reduce my monthly call usage by half!

Have there been any changes in policy?

Cheers,

Jeremy

1 | 2 | 3

5889 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2094

ID Verified

#1575559 17-Jun-2016 10:48

How many calls do you make?

jscriv

38 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#1575560 17-Jun-2016 10:51

a lot - but my usage hasn't dramatically changed over the time I've been a customer.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1575594 17-Jun-2016 11:04

Having just had a look at their fair use policy, it would pretty much seem to be "Unlimited isn't anything even close to unlimited, and if your usage is above what we consider average we can tell you to sod off any time we like"

If its not unlimited they simply should not be able to call it unlimited. I'm fairly sure that selling a product as Unlimited calling, then having small print that says "Psyche! Not even close to unlimited" its a pretty blatant breach of the Fair Trading Act.

It's a bit like advertising an unlimited data plan then saying "actually, average usage is 50gb, so if you go over 100gb/month we're goin to threaten to cut you off".

If I purchased an unlimited calling plan, I would reasonably expect there to be no limits to the number or duration of calls I could make.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1575596 17-Jun-2016 11:05

http://www.comcom.govt.nz/fair-trading/fair-trading-act-fact-sheets/fine-print/

jscriv

38 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#1575625 17-Jun-2016 11:19

Thanks - useful information. I wonder if any of the ISPs or telcos have been challenged on this?

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9996

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#1575678 17-Jun-2016 12:11

Their terms and conditions seem incredibly clear - they say a fair use policy does apply and they make it very clear what that is. On that basis I don't see you really being able to argue with them.

On the other hand saying unlimited and not making a fair use policy clear has caused issues in Australia with warnings by the ACCC. I've never seen anybody argue this in NZ.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

jscriv

38 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 4

#1575682 17-Jun-2016 12:15

Doesn't the ComCom article argue that you can't call something 'unlimited' if it isn't actually that? (i.e. you can't disclaim it away in a fair use policy or any other 'fine print').

IANAL - just wondering.

dickytim

2514 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 537
Inactive user

#1575743 17-Jun-2016 13:35

jscriv:

Doesn't the ComCom article argue that you can't call something 'unlimited' if it isn't actually that? (i.e. you can't disclaim it away in a fair use policy or any other 'fine print').

IANAL - just wondering.

That's how I read (scanned over) it.

I'd be annoyed if I hadn't increased my usage and got that message.

I am interested with how many minutes is considered fair use, I am sure this should be a published amount.

malpasolan

30 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 12
Inactive user

#1575757 17-Jun-2016 13:53

Some telco's could benefit from having a dictionary handy when they dream up their plans.

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1041

Trusted

Vocus

#1575759 17-Jun-2016 14:04

sbiddle:

Their terms and conditions seem incredibly clear - they say a fair use policy does apply and they make it very clear what that is. On that basis I don't see you really being able to argue with them.

On the other hand saying unlimited and not making a fair use policy clear has caused issues in Australia with warnings by the ACCC. I've never seen anybody argue this in NZ.

ASA came down on Orcon several years ago for advertising Unlimited when there was a fair use policy. So it's not entirely unprecedented here.

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1575808 17-Jun-2016 15:07

sbiddle:

Their terms and conditions seem incredibly clear - they say a fair use policy does apply and they make it very clear what that is. On that basis I don't see you really being able to argue with them.

On the other hand saying unlimited and not making a fair use policy clear has caused issues in Australia with warnings by the ACCC. I've never seen anybody argue this in NZ.

Just because it is in the fine print of the contract, doesn't mean that it may not be considered an 'unfair contract clause'. There was a new law introduced that prevented companies using unfair contract clauses in their terms. Not sure i this one is unfair or not, only he Commerce Commission can determine that via their processes.

IANAL, but IMO, these companies shouldn't be sending such messages to say reduce your usage to a set figure, if they are advertising it as unlimited, as that simply is not unlimited, as the whole definition of unlimited is without restriction or limit. Obviously you went over a limit they had in place, which triggered teh message, so the limits is obviously half your current usage, and not unlimited. The OP should probably phone the Commerce Commssion to see what they think about it.

HP

Shop now for HP laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1575811 17-Jun-2016 15:15

If they say 'unlimited calls' they could be referring to the number of the calls being unlimited, and not the duration of the calls being unlimited. Just thinking about their wording, but it should be clear to the consumer.

nigelj

856 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 125

#1575813 17-Jun-2016 15:19

mattwnz:

sbiddle:

Their terms and conditions seem incredibly clear - they say a fair use policy does apply and they make it very clear what that is. On that basis I don't see you really being able to argue with them.

On the other hand saying unlimited and not making a fair use policy clear has caused issues in Australia with warnings by the ACCC. I've never seen anybody argue this in NZ.

Just because it is in the fine print of the contract, doesn't mean that it may not be considered an 'unfair contract clause'. There was a new law introduced that prevented companies using unfair contract clauses in their terms. Not sure i this one is unfair or not, only he Commerce Commission can determine that via their processes.

IANAL, but IMO, these companies shouldn't be sending such messages to say reduce your usage to a set figure, if they are advertising it as unlimited, as that simply is not unlimited, as the whole definition of unlimited is without restriction or limit. Obviously you went over a limit they had in place, which triggered teh message, so the limits is obviously half your current usage, and not unlimited. The OP should probably phone the Commerce Commssion to see what they think about it.

Just to tack onto Matt's post, from my experience the Commerce Commission seem very interested in practical examples of unfair contract terms. They certainly took an interest in a non-Telco one I reported.

My problem with this one is that if it's based on 'the average' then by continually enforcing it, 'the average' usage is going to come down closer & closer to zero, either through people using less 'unlimited' minutes or the higher users moving to other technologies or plans. Plus it's so vague they could change their mind at any moment and not need to update the terms.

I think you've got a good case to say to 2degrees "Please explain, I've used X minutes every month +/- 5% for the last Y months, how is my usage so excessive that I suddenly need to halve it?"

mattwnz

20515 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4795

#1575818 17-Jun-2016 15:26

nigelj:

Just to tack onto Matt's post, from my experience the Commerce Commission seem very interested in practical examples of unfair contract terms. They certainly took an interest in a non-Telco one I reported.

My problem with this one is that if it's based on 'the average' then by continually enforcing it, 'the average' usage is going to come down closer & closer to zero, either through people using less 'unlimited' minutes or the higher users moving to other technologies or plans. Plus it's so vague they could change their mind at any moment and not need to update the terms.

I think you've got a good case to say to 2degrees "Please explain, I've used X minutes every month +/- 5% for the last Y months, how is my usage so excessive that I suddenly need to halve it?"

That is a good point about the average calling time becoming less and less, as people are using their mobiles more for data and messaging. But still tying the word 'Unlimited', to an average usage in their fine print, is not 'Unlimited calling'. You also don't know what the average usage of their other customers is, so unless it is advertised what that average usage is, how is the customer supposed to know. Obviously they do have limits, so IMO they should stop calling it unlimited, and call it something else more fitting for the plan, such as the 'Average Plan'. Don't think too many people would signup to a plan called that.

ubergeeknz

3344 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1041

Trusted

Vocus

#1575860 17-Jun-2016 16:25

nigelj:

My problem with this one is that if it's based on 'the average' then by continually enforcing it, 'the average' usage is going to come down closer & closer to zero, either through people using less 'unlimited' minutes or the higher users moving to other technologies or plans. Plus it's so vague they could change their mind at any moment and not need to update the terms.

Exactly - assuming a roughly normal distribution of usage, approximately half of users will be "above average" ... so this doesn't make a lot of sense

1 | 2 | 3