You will need to discuss the lack of consumer protection with your Federal Government representative. Perhaps they can explain why LNP Governments are predisposed to giving a higher priority to business profits than to consumer protection.
If you read the preceding posts you will find discussion about a range of alternative streaming services which cost less and offer more than Foxtel.
I doubt that the political hue of a government determines its leanings towards or away from the consumer. In all the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd years, Foxtel got away with whatever they are getting away with today.
I think a lot has to do with lobbyists and perceived quid pro quos between the parties.
Youâre spot on writing ppl shouldnât have to call up to cancel: we should be able to hit a key online, as we can if we want to upgrade. But to downgrade or cancel we need to call. And call when the call centre is open.
Speaking of Third World customer service, as mentioned earlier, putting aside the package I agreed to in March 2021 which was not honoured in its entirety in April, for a couple of months now I cannot record some channels within my package (as defined by Foxtel).
I asked for this to be fixed and after some emails I was told that:
(1) âthere is no compensation for being unable to record. There is compensation if youâre unable to view a channel for >3 days if youâve paid for that channelâ. So big fat zero is what Foxtel offered me;
(2) âfixing your problemâ (yes Foxtel constantly mentions the problem is MINE and not the lemon set top box or their infrastructure) requires TIME with the customer on the phone (for an undefined period). When I asked if itâs one hour or two hours, no reply was forthcoming. When I asked âwhy canât the problem be fixed without me having to return home during business hours in order to attend to this matter OR why must I devote my evening to resolve this issue (assuming their staff work at 19:00 AEST and will be available for the length of time needed to fix the problem)â, no specific response was given.
I am quite fed up so wrote to Foxtel that I will consider the matter and let them know by mid May if I want to return the lemon or have the problem resolved (ideally without wasting my time) or sign up to Netflix and Stan instead. Guess what? (a) no compensation was offered for the inconvenience of having 2 dozen TV shows fail to record correctly; (b) it was confirmed by Foxtel that even if they fix the problem, the 2 dozen shows in my âLibraryâ that are not viewable (by virtue of a comment near each indicating a yellow triangle or a comment like âENTITLEMENT LOSTâ, those shows will never be viewable by me. They are forever lost; and © notwithstanding my request not to call me but to wait until mid May when I will decide if to continue with this low rent over priced and under serviced product, three times I have been called to âdecide when I can set aside time to resolve the problemâ.
As Foxtel calls from various numbers, one of which I know, it may be impossible to add all the offending numbers to the DO NOT CALL register.
You register with the DNCR but you do not list numbers you wish to block, did you mean adding them to your phoneâs Block list?
If you had or have a relationship with a business in which you gave them permission either explicitly or implied then the DNCR will not protect you until you explicitly and provably (eg do a written request or a written response by the business confirming removal) remove that permission. Even then for some purposes you may not be able to sever all contact. If they continue to contact after removal of permission then you can take action via the DNCR laws.
Hi, thanks for the reply. Allow me to clarify: I registered with the DNCR years ago, so I mean I need to add Foxtelâs numbers to the list and (b) finally Foxtel confirmed by email my request that I NOT be called and that if they must contact me, do do so by email. And they agreed.
What DNCR does is list your own phone numbers which a business then checks against. If your number is listed they are not allowed to cold call you.
Sorry youâre right. My mind was elsewhere when I posted. I guess that even if one lists oneâs number on the register, there are (industry crafted) loopholes for those firms with whom the registrant has an existing relationship.
Update: In order to resolve the problem of being unable to record, Foxtel requires me to:
(A) be available on the phone for an open ended period with a staff member in order to trouble shoot âmy problemâ as they call it OR
(B) self troubleshoot via their website (with no indication from Foxtel that the problem can indeed be resolved via their website or the time I need to set aside for this) OR
(C ) to have a technician sent to look into the problem (with no indication how much I will be fleeced for this visit). And the inference is that I would have to leave work early in order to be home when he/she visits.
My requests for compensation for past and current service delivery faults ie inability to record channels that Foxtel says I should be able to record, have been denied.
I advised Foxtel that they leave me no option but to go to NCAT where they can explain why I had to pay and still have to pay $49/month for the inability to record programmes.
In a competitive environment I would NOT be charged until the problem was fixed and that I would be compensated for past inability to record and inability to view those recordings.
But sadly for Joe Average, Foxtel works as a monopoly.
Maybe itâs time to break it up? Or cap its subscription charges?
I presume you know Foxtel heritage?
Fox = Newscorp (Fox being their most identifiable brand), Tel = Telstra
Fox+Tel = what does one expect considering the numbers of comments on customer service at each parent?
You are correct. I recall when OptusVision pulled out of the pay TV market (or âsubscription televisionâ as marketers call it), it was a sad day. While OV was cheaper than Foxtel and didnât offer as many channels, the benefit was not their price, but their very existence in the market. I am bewildered as to why nobody in government raised their heads to craft regulations that would encourage diversity in that market.
It was just another case of Optusâ predatory behaviour.
They launched Optus Vision in partnership with PBL and Seven but Kerry Stokes launched legal action to wind up the partnership when he alleged breaches of law.
Their foray into landline telephone services was a disaster which they soon abandoned.
They have used their resellers, dealers, franchisees, suppliers and some staff as cannon fodder.
And they continue to advertise their second or third rate mobile network as a credible alternative to Telstra.
What a bunch of grubs.
I am bewildered that you would be bewildered that successive governments have refused to even consider tackling a Murdochracy.
LOL
Maybe a Member at NCAT can indicate his/her displeasure at the hull in the china shop attitude of Foxtel, if itâs too tall an order for our overpaid MPs.
My latest query to Foxtel asking for a name and contact details of the person NCAT needs to send a copy of my claim to at Foxtel, was as expected, unreplied. As was my request for compensation for being unable to record. And no compensation was offered for me to leave work early so as to be home while their technician looks into the problem to determine according to Foxtel âif the fault is not deemed to be with the Foxtel equipmentâ. What arrogance! I have proof of recording that in the words of the iQ3 box has âfailedâ or âpartially recordedâ or not recorded because I suffered âentitlement lossâ (of the package of programs). It seems they are insinuating that I may be the reason the recordings have failed. the fact that some not all channels are affected leads me to believe it is not an infrastructure fault per se but a defective set top box.
The best Foxtel can do when I pointed out that I canât just leave work early so that a technician can investigate is to send someone on Saturday. Presumably they expect me to be available anytime b/w 12pm and 6 pm or similar. Like I or anyone can just hand over a large part of the w/end so Foxtel can attempt to fix its problem.
Just as my initial complaint was ignored and only acted upon after I wrote to the CEO with a CC to the SMH, I expect activity on Foxtelâs part only when the CEO receives a copy of the complaint from NCAT and a date for the hearing.
Having been to NCAT in the past against Apple, Sydney Water and Flight Centre, I have a pretty good idea how to maximise my chance for securing a just outcome.
Update as at 13MAY21
Re: Inability to record many programs since March 2021
I spoke to NSWFT staff about this matter and they suggested I file an application with them directly listing what I am after. They will then approach the monopolist. If they fail to resolve the matter, then I should apply to NCAT.
I followed their direction.
Interestingly:
Further update: NSW FT called soon after I lodged my application and indicated that I should allow Foxtel to investigate the matter with their technician and then let NSWFT know the outcome. I told NSWFT that Foxtel had no interest in paying compensation immediately, but wanted to send their technician and offered to âdiscussâ compensation with me afterwards. NSWFT indicated that if compensation for the months of service failure is denied and/or if Foxtel ignores its obligation to provide me with programs I recorded but cannot view, then to touch base again with NSWFT before going to NCAT.
I await Foxtel locking in a technician.
I did ask to be compensated for the time to travel from work to home and back (as well as my time in lost wages) to be available for the technician but Foxtel denied this, stating:
section 11.5 of the Residential Subscription Television Agreement, which states:
âExcept where we have breached any of your rights under the Australian Consumer Law or any other applicable legislation which cannot be lawfully excluded or limited, we are not responsible in any way for any indirect or consequential loss that arises our of or in connection with this Agreement, the Foxtel TV Service, any Third Part y services, the Equipment and/or the Infrastructure.â
Perhaps Choice should lobby to amend this one sided pro-monopolist outrage and make Foxtel liable for every cost imposed on a customer due to its failing equipment.
I am no legal scholar but the one sidedness of this Agreement apes the one sidedness of state govât agreements with their private sector partners in infrastructure building.
Update:
Issue: Customer is unable to record programs within his subscription package.
Foxtelâs response: Initially suggesting the customer may have caused the problem and while offering to send a technician to investigate the matter, engaged in foot dragging and misrepresentation when asked by the customer âhow much will the customer be charged for the technicianâs visitâ?
Finally, the technician came today. He was in and out in a few minutes, diagnosing the issue within a minute of turning on the set top box: (STB) âthere is a software bug in the STBâ.
He pressed a few buttons on the STB, checked the cable and was on his way, mentioning (a) this will now allow you to record and (b) that what you were told earlier is correct: you cannot view and will not be able to view the shows you recorded unless they are available on demand or in Foxtelâs library.
I then emailed Foxtel with the result of his visit. I trust he will do so independently of me. I seek compensation for the two and a half months of being unable to record and as per NSW FTâs suggestion, compensation also for the shows I expected to be able to view but am unable to given the lemon of an iQ3 STB I was issued.
I await Foxtelâs reply.
Update as of evening of 31MAY21
Foxtelâs reply just received. They offered a small monthly discount for 12 mths.
To say that I am insulted is a gross understatement.
I immediately replied as follows:
Quote
Thank you for your email where you very low offer is frankly insulting.
Your email fails to address the key issues in my earlier email being;
1. A refund for the months I could not record;
2. Your responsibility to provide me with the programs I tried to record but could not, because the Foxtel product was not fit for purpose; and
3. The fact that I was a victim of price discrimination as per the denial by Amanda of extending to me the low price offered to other subscribers
I am taking the matter to NCAT.
I expect NCAT will contact you in due course with a court appearance notice. I will share this email with the Sydney Morning Herald and Choice Magazine given the public interest it will generate.
Unquote
Update
Papers were lodged with NCAT on 05JUL21. I will let yâall know the hearing date, when I am informed.
I wonder if I should send a copy to the ACCC for their reference.
Background
It took weeks for Foxtel to confirm that I would not be charged for a technician to be sent to investigate what I claimed was a lemon of a set top box (STB). The technician when he arrived, spent under a minute diagnosing and resetting the STB (he upgraded the software apparently). He claimed that my experience was not uncommon as âthere were some STBâs out there with software bugsâ and âthe failure in recordings was not the fault of the customersâ (as Foxtel hitherto suggested to me).
The next day his âfixâ failed as I was again unable to record, let alone view old failed recordings.
Foxtel offered as compensation $10/month for 12 months. This is for
(a) my subscription fees to date (ie whilst possessing the lemon); and
(b) over 80 failed recordings.
Foxtel declined providing me with the $35/mth plan for the whole of its programming that it offered some others (as per smh.com.au)
Foxtel recently asked when I could allow them to send yet another technician to fix the problem. I declined given
(a) Busy with work as itâs EOFY;
(b) Our beloved (NSW) Premier (Gladys) recommends against non essential activities (such as tradesmen visiting whilst were are in lockdown)
© There is no guaranty that this time the technician will fix the problem; and
(d) Foxtel point blank refuses to compensate me fairly (ie refund fees to date whilst I cannot record; provide me with the recordings which failed; and let me in on the $35/mth deal it offered others. IMHO the latter is naked price discrimination.
You mention that businesses are free to operate as they see fit so long as they are not behaving unlawfully.
I spent way too much time in the last few months on this topic and have arrived at the same conclusion.
I am shocked that this is the case, especially when it comes to monopoly suppliers of a product or service.
Itâs time to put the blowtorch to some MPs perhaps?
In the above I forgot to ask the following question:
If one goes to NCAT and at the first meeting, call it âconciliationâ, the Tribunal Member suggests the parties go away and see if they can come to an agreement before a formal hearing takes place and if an agreement is reached the the applicant is to withdraw his application, am I right to infer that even if the respondent makes good on any promise made to the applicant in order to have the matter withdrawn, that there will be no mention of the matter on the public record? That is to say, it is as though the respondent never did anything wrong, was never taken to NCAT and never had to make good what the applicant accused the respondent of doing.
Is my understanding correct?
