Sky Base Uncapped?

[skydance]

I'm on base connection, with speed's capped to 2084 / 256 kbps. I achieve regularly 1745 / 212 kbps. (exchange distance 2.7km).

Someone I know similarly has 'Base' and his stats are; 7036 / 670 and he gets actual connection speeds of 6800 / 540, he is definitely not paying the extra fiver a month.

My exchange is LLU / SkyEasynet enabled, his has neither, but he is less than half a kilometer from it?

Are Sky unable to 'govern' connection speeds on non-unbundled exchanges?

[Saturday]

Either you or your friend is mistaken.

If his exchange isn't LLU and he's a Sky customer then he's not on Base, he's on Connect. To have this he'd be paying £17 (or £5 if the exchange is due to go LLU shortly).

However, he'd not have the stats you report as Connect has an upstream sync of 448kbps which means (if the stats are correct) then he has to be LLU with a Sky Max profile.

[skydance]

Thanks Saturday,

He only has (he says) one payment out to Sky a month, which is his TV package direct debit, which apparently has remained unaltered since he switched to Sky broadband a year ago. 'Samknows' reveals his exchange as non LLU. I'll get him to run another speedtest to check the downstream and also get full router stats.

[Saturday]

If correct, it's his upstream which shows he is on Sky Max. Samknows is sometimes incorrect or he may not be on the exchange you think he is.

With regard to his payment, there have been cases in the past where the BB part hasn't been set up properly and so isn't charged. However, I think you should advise your friend that there's a good chance this will be discovered at some time in the future. If (more likely when) this happens Sky will want their money. If he doesn't pay they'll quickly cut off his BB and his TV, then put their debt collection agency onto him. They don't mess around.

[Isitme]

I think Sat is correct and he is not on the exchange he thinks he is. You are not always connected to the nearest exchange. He does not appear to be on Connect as his upload is too high. He should get it sorted as it could end up costing him a lot of money.

[skydance]

I think Sat is correct and he is not on the exchange he thinks he is. You are not always connected to the nearest exchange. He does not appear to be on Connect as his upload is too high. He should get it sorted as it could end up costing him a lot of money.

My friend only asked for Base, (a year ago now), as he's a low rate user, virtually email only, and knew nothing about stats etc, till I had a look, as his speeds were so good compared to mine.

As he requested 'Base', he should be 'charge-free', even if it results in a cap, to correct an initial error. Retro charging, would I feel be a difficult position to justify, as he never requested a better package and the mistake is Sky's?

[Saturday]

Yep, I can't see how they could charge him arrears if he is on Base - but, the problem could be that he's not on an "uncapped" Base package but on an "uncharged" Max.

My advice to him would be to call Sky and check he's really Base.

[Undecided Adrian]

This is similar to when BT "forgot" to charge for calls to some customers for 6 months and then they asked for all in 1 go.

When people queried this on BBC2's Working Lunch programme they were told that companies have 6 years to chase you up for mistakes they make if that involes the company being out of pocket.

So Sky still have 5 years to notice and to charge for the max product even though it was a fault that Sky has made. don't you just love corporate law?

[Isitme]

When he first started with Sky Broadband, he would receive a letter and in the letter would be the package that he signed up for. If it says there that he is on the free Base package, he should be OK as far as back charges are concerned. I think what has happened is that whoever set the line up has made a mistake and connected it incorrectly. This would be surprising as Sky employees seldom make mistakes