ISPs slow to fess up about being slow

A report just released by Which? reveals that many of us here in the UK appear not to be getting anything like the broadband speeds our Internet Service Providers (ISPs) promise us.

Which? has found that although among a sample of broadband subscribers who bought packages promising speeds of 8Mbps or more, actual speeds delivered are often much lower – averaging only 2.7Mbps.

ISP’s have one easy get-out. According to the Advertising Standards Agency, it is apparently OK for an ISP to add the words ‘up to’ when promising broadband speeds - if most people can get close to those speeds.

Given that 2.7Mbps was the average obtained on the Which? test, it doesn’t sound like “most people” are even getting close. “Du-uh,” you cry “what do you expect in rip-off Britain? No point in complaining – big business isn’t going to listen...”

Well, they might.

I’m no consumer rights lawyer, but unlucky subscribers in the Which? test sample might want to take a look at S14 of the Trades Descriptions Act 1968, which has a few things to say about “false or misleading statements as to services etc.”

The beauty of this for the man in the Clapham cyber cafe is that he stands a very good chance of getting his local Trading Standards Department to take an interest, and maybe prosecute - yes, prosecute - the ISP on his behalf.  (I'm guessing that’s not the kind of publicity ISPs want.)

Not all offences under S14 even need a provable guilty intent. If I was an executive in an “8Mbps or more” ISP, I’d think very carefully about S14 (1) (b). And how I’d deal with S14 (2) (b) while being interviewed under caution...

Comments

[Lee Evans]

An interesting read, but I think the ISPs are being perfectly honest here and the report is perhaps uninformed.
The 'Up to' caveat is a relatively recent and now standard claause on most ADSL based broadband services, but is not an advertising get-out put in by the ISPs to cover their backs - it is a technical reality of the ADSL technology used to deliver these services.
The speeds available to different people are for the most part out of the control of the ISPs themsevles, and essentially depend on the customer's telephone line quality and distance from their BT Exchange.
I can't think of a better way to advertise the service and I think the OFT's definition of when they should or shouldn't say 'up to' is irrelevant and based on someone's opinion rather than the technical facts behind the technology involved.

[Deryck]

Lee,

I can see where you're coming from on this, and although the ISP's may technically be telling the truth, I can't help thinking that if these references to high internet speeds didn't help sell their services, ISP's wouldn't bother making them as prominently as they do.

Also, just because these claims are factually accurate, it doesn't mean they can't also be misleading - especially where ordinary consumers are concerned.

You could say it's only like the car adverts that show a high spec vehicle with a price caption "from £X", where the model shown actually costs a lot more, but I think the broadband issue is different for a couple of reasons:

(1) You can go to the car showroom and actually SEE what equipment and accessories you get for the money - and then try to haggle.

(2) You can't haggle with ISP's - you can only shop around, and on what basis do you do that if their claims are not to be relied on? Given the requisite know-how you can see the broadband speed actually delivered by your ISP, but only AFTER you've bought the service, when your only sanction is to bin that provider as soon as contractually possible and start all over again with someone else.

Is this the best we can hope for?