@John29 Your topic title was inaccurate, this one isn't.
In what way was it inaccurate.
The thread remains with that (accurate) title so if this was some attempt to cover this shambles up it failed.
I apologise if it seemed that way, and assure you there was no attempt to cover anything up.
This thread had the more established discussion, and while the thread title does not relate entirely to the direction it has taken, I do not believe it is off-topic enough to warrant closing or renaming.
As you have noticed, your thread's title remains on the front page and is clearly labelled, it will just link back to this thread where there is more discussion of the topic here.
Roy> "Someone on the TalkTalk forum was suggesting TalkTalk can’t tell if you actually have a YouView box or not since all updates come from YouView servers, but I think that is nonsense, as all the traffic flows through TalkTalk’s internet servers." Indeed it is, as YouView don't have any servers, per se. And what they do have aren't used by ISPs as the ISPs act independently. This is nothing to do with YouView and is purely a TalkTalk matter, as is the charge.
I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
Um, TalkTalk are NOT charging customers £4 a month just for using a YouView box.
And it is a wee bit unworthy to accuse anybody here of a cover up seeing as: (a) the only reason you started your topic was because you were not prepared to read what was already out there; and (b) your topic title was and remains temporarily available for all to see, despite its inaccuracy.
But seriously, that title is as inaccurate and misleading as any of TalkTalk's critics have accused them of being.
You still haven't said what is inaccurate about it?
If a customer who owns a Huawei YouView box joins Talktalk and takes a broadband package with no TV and has their price increased by £4 a month without being asked, and receives no additional services what so ever for it, how is that not charging them just for having a YouView box.
The fact they can opt out is neither here nor there.
To claim "ah, but you have the ABILITY to add boosts" is nonsense. That ability has always been there.
I also strongly suspect that those who "opt out" would be able to contact Talktalk and add boosts anytime they want.
So what is the £4 for and how is the title inaccurate.
To claim "ah, but you have the ABILITY to add boosts" is nonsense. That ability has always been there.
So what is the £4 for and how is the title inaccurate.
Ah, and the truth shall set you free. You have both asked and answered your own question there really. Yes the ability to add Boosts was always there. It still is. It used to cost zero. It now costs £4. Got it now?
I was staying with friends last week who have TalkTalk broadband and phone. They signed up last year and specifically said no TV. they have their own youview box. That box is not showing any boost channels, and neither have they had an email regarding the £4 charge, so something extra must be happening for new customers to be getting the mails. I do think this could have been handled better by TalkTalk, but the forum people seem to be handling this much better than online chat and the phone people. BTW, asking YouView for their comments I doubt will get any response, as this is a TalkTalk operational issue and not directly Youview related.
I couldn't agree more @Stevef_fr8ys regarding what I have seen of how the TalkTalk community team have handled this. In the face of some seriously disproportionate hostility it has to be said, just a taste of which we have had here.
I've just been looking back through this thread. It follows a strange course. Maybe that's because so many different conversations have been going on or maybe it's because another thread has been merged with it. If so maybe merging threads is not necessarily a great idea.
I doubt the merger changed things much, other than that we wasted time and effort discussing that, rather than the underlying topic. Hopefully things will settle down again now and any new contributor will not be confused by the subject as expressed in the excellent, clear title.
To claim "ah, but you have the ABILITY to add boosts" is nonsense. That ability has always been there.
So what is the £4 for and how is the title inaccurate.
Ah, and the truth shall set you free. You have both asked and answered your own question there really. Yes the ability to add Boosts was always there. It still is. It used to cost zero. It now costs £4. Got it now?
That's a poor argument for the customers who were provided a box by Talktalk.
What about those who weren't, who owned their box before joining and have had this fee thrown upon them.
They did not sign up to anything TV related and were always able to contact Talktalk and request TV boosts. To charge them this just for having hardware that they own is absurd.
For heaven's sake, have you actually read any of the information out there? Nobody is being charged for hardware. There is now a £4 fee to access TalkTalk TV services whereas previously there was none. But you can opt out of that if you wish.
Roy> "Someone on the TalkTalk forum was suggesting TalkTalk can’t tell if you actually have a YouView box or not since all updates come from YouView servers, but I think that is nonsense, as all the traffic flows through TalkTalk’s internet servers." Indeed it is, as YouView don't have any servers, per se. And what they do have aren't used by ISPs as the ISPs act independently. This is nothing to do with YouView and is purely a TalkTalk matter, as is the charge.
Where do the updates come from, then?
And what is supporting the operation of the YouView app?
Three cheers for reasoned debate, whether for or against
You'll have to ask YouView for a full explanation, sorry. But you may have forgotten I don't have apps.
I only have to ask YouView for an explanation if I think what you said was accurate, which I don’t.
These are questions that you have to answer if you wish to justify your assertions; if you can’t, then I suggest that my earlier statements should be allowed to stand, unless a well-founded contradiction is raised.
I need hardly add that whether or not you have apps, you should not be making unfounded assertions that YouView do not have servers to support the operation of those apps; and as you don’t have apps, possibly especially not.
Three cheers for reasoned debate, whether for or against
"I only have to ask YouView for an explanation if I think what you said was accurate, which I don’t." OK Roy. Your the one who likes to know everything. But not in this case. Honestly....
I'm now happy with the disagree icon, because its gone.
"I only have to ask YouView for an explanation if I think what you said was accurate, which I don’t." OK Roy. Your the one who likes to know everything. But not in this case. Honestly....
Comments
The thread remains with that (accurate) title so if this was some attempt to cover this shambles up it failed.
This thread had the more established discussion, and while the thread title does not relate entirely to the direction it has taken, I do not believe it is off-topic enough to warrant closing or renaming.
As you have noticed, your thread's title remains on the front page and is clearly labelled, it will just link back to this thread where there is more discussion of the topic here.
Louise.
"Someone on the TalkTalk forum was suggesting TalkTalk can’t tell if you actually have a YouView box or not since all updates come from YouView servers, but I think that is nonsense, as all the traffic flows through TalkTalk’s internet servers."
Indeed it is, as YouView don't have any servers, per se. And what they do have aren't used by ISPs as the ISPs act independently. This is nothing to do with YouView and is purely a TalkTalk matter, as is the charge.
And it is a wee bit unworthy to accuse anybody here of a cover up seeing as: (a) the only reason you started your topic was because you were not prepared to read what was already out there; and (b) your topic title was and remains temporarily available for all to see, despite its inaccuracy.
You still haven't said what is inaccurate about it?
If a customer who owns a Huawei YouView box joins Talktalk and takes a broadband package with no TV and has their price increased by £4 a month without being asked, and receives no additional services what so ever for it, how is that not charging them just for having a YouView box.
The fact they can opt out is neither here nor there.
To claim "ah, but you have the ABILITY to add boosts" is nonsense. That ability has always been there.
I also strongly suspect that those who "opt out" would be able to contact Talktalk and add boosts anytime they want.
So what is the £4 for and how is the title inaccurate.
TalkTalk drop charges for Multi-room but add charges for TV subscribers
If I may - FOR TV ACCESSMine was Faster Fibre - TV, Broadband & Calls.
(Now it isn't)
They signed up last year and specifically said no TV. they have their own youview box.
That box is not showing any boost channels, and neither have they had an email regarding the £4 charge, so something extra must be happening for new customers to be getting the mails.
I do think this could have been handled better by TalkTalk, but the forum people seem to be handling this much better than online chat and the phone people.
BTW, asking YouView for their comments I doubt will get any response, as this is a TalkTalk operational issue and not directly Youview related.
It follows a strange course.
Maybe that's because so many different conversations have been going on or maybe it's because another thread has been merged with it.
If so maybe merging threads is not necessarily a great idea.
That's a poor argument for the customers who were provided a box by Talktalk.
What about those who weren't, who owned their box before joining and have had this fee thrown upon them.
They did not sign up to anything TV related and were always able to contact Talktalk and request TV boosts.
To charge them this just for having hardware that they own is absurd.
And what is supporting the operation of the YouView app?
These are questions that you have to answer if you wish to justify your assertions; if you can’t, then I suggest that my earlier statements should be allowed to stand, unless a well-founded contradiction is raised.
I need hardly add that whether or not you have apps, you should not be making unfounded assertions that YouView do not have servers to support the operation of those apps; and as you don’t have apps, possibly especially not.
OK Roy. Your the one who likes to know everything. But not in this case. Honestly....
And you’re the one who likes to claim arcane secret knowledge not vouchsafed to the rest of us; as here, claims you assert, but decline to support.
I am always open to contradiction, but not by mere unsupported assertion.