Sponsored Links

MAC keys

Should how MAC keys are distributed be changed?

  • Yes the present system is wrong

    Votes: 31 88.6%
  • No Present system is fine

    Votes: 3 8.6%
  • not interseted

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other please post in thread

    Votes: 1 2.9%

  • Total voters
    35

Kits

ULTIMATE Member
Again we see many trapped by the MAC keys some have paid for these keys and still cannot get them. I personally think they should be linked to the phone number and never change or infact the phone number is the key.

I know some will disagree but again we are looking at the mess this is causing people who are trapped with a company not responding to tickets or answering phones. Connections not working all the time emails going missing and domain names and websites vanishing.

If a customer is made to pay for a MAC it should be handed over same day not like some have had almost a month later still waiting with no replies.

These companies should have to made to hand them over or face fines for not doing so.

Those not affected by these problems now might one day so really its in everyone interest to force the government to rethink its stand on how MAC keys are handled and you all can help.

Help by emailing number 10 here
 
I concur.

A mac code system should be madatory for all internet service providers and all should provide this either straight away or within 24 hours.

I myself requested a mac code off sky last Tuesday and im still waiting.
 
Not too sure about how they should be managed....
But it should be a **TOTALLY SEPERATE** entity that handles the handling.

OR...Maybe we should have it like it was in the dial-up days....
You simply called the number and entered the correct loging details
Is there any way that you can choose what ISP you are with at any given moment?
Maybe all routers would come with a front end that will allow you to enter a special code to log into a certain ISP (All ISPs would have a unique code...)

This would also allow you to track any and all internet activities....
I think? :shrug:
 
Sponsored Links
Thats a valid point.

Perhaps this is something that bt will implament with there 21st century network.

Either way something needs to be sorted out especially considering the rise of free broadband and its rapid growth.
 
But what about the situation where monies are owed to the ISP? Customers just being able to move on their own accord would just cause problems for them and I think would have a negative effect on the smaller providers.

I'm sorry but when people have more control and more systems are used, there are the possibilities for more f***k up's.

It just would not work

What about the situation where an ISP says there are monies owed but in fact the ISP is in the wrong. For example an ISP where a consumer canceled under the distance selling regulations (I think there was also a breach of contract on the ISP's part, but I don't recall the exact details) having taken legal advise that he was entitled to do so, but the ISP refused to release his line unless he paid for the entire term of the contract. Sitting on a customer's line is just plain wrong, if they are owed money they should take the customer to court just like most other businesses. Consumers shouldn't be put in the position where they have to order new lines and cancel the old ones and transfer the number, then sue the ISP for the cost just to get rid of the ISP.

The current system protects ISPs interests at the cost of those of the consumer. ISPs managed ok back in the days of dial up when they didn't hold the consumer by the b*lls.

The current system does not work, there are plenty of **** ups for example I was reading of a few cases a few months back where people who had recently migrated to a new ISP were migrated back to their old ISP and another more recently where someone's line was unbundled by their old ISP.
In fact an automated system would take out the ISP as the middle man for obtaining a mac eliminating human error so fewer **** *** and one less admin job for the ISP.
 
Thinking about MACs and how they should be accessible when a customer wants to change ISPs I have had a few people asking me who should pay etc .

Looking at Ideas mentioned in other threads there is the way a customer logs in on a BT radius and is given a MAC. I agree this method would need funding but how would it be funded any ideas?

I said MACs should be available within 24 hours and I have had this pointed out to me that some couldn’t cope with 1000 requests for a MAC.
Technically MAC should be mandatory if the customer is out of contract and not in arrears with payments but can anyone suggest the best way forward on this.

So now the discussion is open to you guys you are the customers you have either been affected by MAC code problems at some point or could in the future.
 
Besides, owing an ISP money was not supposed to be a bar to issuing MAC codes.. i.e holding a line hostage until someone coughs up is not supposed to happen. They supposed to issue MAC codes, and then do the money chasing!

Detail here: http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/codes/bbm_cop/

But the relevant bit is:
OFCOM Code of Practice said:
Customers' rights and obligations

Under the terms of the code:

* The existing service provider cannot unreasonably refuse to issue an authorisation code and may only withhold a code if:
o the request is not made by the account holder or the account holder is deceased
o the contract has already been terminated and the connection ceased
However, the existing service provider must explain the reasons and supply information on how to appeal against the decision;
* The existing service provider cannot withhold an authorisation code to enforce debt collection or contractual rights. However, customers are not freed from contractual obligations they have entered in to with their existing service provider - i.e.: they will have to honour the remaining term of an existing contract or pay early cancellation fees, if applicable. An existing service provider will still be able to take reasonable action to enforce their contractual rights even after a customer has migrated to a new service provider.
 
Sponsored Links
Also what's to stop a consumer paying whatever ransom the ISP demands for their line and as soon as they have their mac disputing the payments with their credit card company and charging the whole lot back.
 
Oh, another point, if you were allowed to have more than one ISP on your line, with the possiblity of a back-up ISP you might be more tempted to give new and small ISPs a try. Perhaps ISP could offer new services such as offering cheap bandwidth paid by the MB during the middle of the night when they might have a little spare capacity - this sort of thing might appeal to P2Per's who have used up their allowances or people who occassionaly want to download the latest windows update/ linux distros but are otherwise very light users. Some users who need a relible broadband for business, but can't justify having a second account on a second line, might be willing to pay a monthly fee for a backup service so they can switch over if the ISP falls over.
 
I have voted other for many reasons:

1: I think the whole way ADSL is provided is wrong in the first place like other have hinted and on with how things are going with bandwidth cap's FUP etc you should not be tied down to a single ISP and go back to like it used to be with dial up.

2: How some providers do not have to give you a MAC code to release your own phone line to change to something of your choice.

3: The system is flawed not that it is totally wrong it needs a alternative dispute path through a 3rd party (goverment/cival court) as this a breach of your civil rights in my veiw.

4: The current system can only be abused one way and I feel it was brought in to protect the ISP's as before you could migrate if you found out your CBUK number, people found this out and moved wile in contracts and cost BTwholesale money in claims.

Which what could happen again if some of the systems come out with what people are suggesting they sound good yes but in practicality would open up the same problems as just a CBUK number.

5: For any major change like in the migration process like what people would like to see it would cause even more problems that what people are experiancing now with migrations.

I could go on but hopefully I have put my views across, i think there should be a 3rd party like ISPA to be able to give them would be a huge jump.

Prob loads of mistakes and people with different views, pick everything I have said apart after all we want to try and come up with a idea, hopefully take our the public's views to the goverment etc as this is a huge problem that needs solving.
 
I think aslong you can only have one ISP on your line at any one time, and that they must release the hold on that line for you to go elsewhere, you will always get some ISP's refusing to let go of the line claiming they are owed such and such. even if MAC's were required to be provided by ALL ISP's, the ISP can still withhold providing the MAC claiming monies are owed. which is what happens now. there needs to be better regulation, and Ofcom needs the power to be able to get tough on ISP's who refuse to release a line or provide a MAC if the consumer is no longer under contract, or owes money to the ISP.

the ISP should email and mail copies of the contract, whatever length over 1 month to the consumer. they should do this after the line HAS been activated, not when the consumer places the order, as we know problems may arise with the connection and delays. so they may be paying for a service they cannot use. if the consumer, cancels the payments to the ISP while they are under contract, and tries to get a MAC with no success. the ISP can show their copy of the contract to Ofcom or any other regulator that the consumer might get in contact with trying to get their line released, and prove the comsumer still owes monies. so the customer can either pay what monies is owed in the contract and get the line released, or stick out the contract.

if the comsumer has no, or is not under contract any longer with the ISP, and does not owe any monies, and they cannot get a MAC or their line released because the ISP is claiming that monies are owed. the comsumer can mail a copy of the contract to Ofcom etc, and then let Ofcom put pressure onto the said ISP.

of course, just ideas, not fool proof by any means. think it may be somewhat harder to prove if any monies are owed or not owed.
 
Sponsored Links
I'm not sure entirely how it should work, but something needs to change. The trouble I am having is that, even though my isp says I can have a MAC, they cannot get it from their supplier. As I am paid up in full with my isp, I don't think I should be used as a pawn in squabbles with suppliers.

Maybe a way of stopping people moving when they shouldn't would be to have the isp register the length of contract somewhere impartial, at the start of the contract. The user could check this at the time. When the user wants to leave, this could be checked to see if they are out of contract.
 
I understand the need for a MAC key fee....I really do.
In fact I think many more people would be willing to pay the fee to get a key if they knew it would *guarentee* a MAC within a certain time frame...
Irrelevant of what your situation is with your ISP.
(As others have said. Reclaiming monies owed is for the courts to sort out)

Would it be possible for this fee to pay for the company that would supply and overview the system?

What is the fee as it stands now?
Who is it paid to?
And now the stupid question.....Who actually oversees MACs now?

Also...Maybe ISPs would need to pay a *very* small annual fee based on the volume of customers on the books?
Say something like....0.01p per customer?
Maybe that last bit would be hard for some of the smaller ISPs to bare....
 
I think a voluntary code is only as good as the ISP's signed up to it.

A better system would be:

1) An ISP is legally required to supply a MAC key within 2 working days of the customer's request for it, as long as the minimum contract term has expired and the customer does not owe the ISP money. If the minimum term has not been reached, then the customer should have the option of paying themselves out of it.

2) Where there is a dispute over whether money is owed, an independent arbitration panel should decide - maybe one set up by oftel or whoever it is now, with whoever loses the case paying, say £30 - £50 to cover the panels costs (similar to the way the small claims court works). The key thing here is that the panel should happen ASAP after the dispute arises.

3) where an ISP fails to supply a MAC code without due reason, there should be a fine which increases in line with the time it takes for them to supply the code. This money could also go to pay for the arbitration panel.

This issue just shows that self regulation only works when all the companies involved show good faith. Of course, if that were the case then regulation wouldn't be necessary.
 
Another idea would be to have to request the MAC key from BT OpenRetch (or whoever), with the ISP being notified, and having to actively block the migration.

The current system makes almost justfies unscrupulous companies doing nothing when a MAC request is recieved. The key fault with the system is that the very people you have to ask for a MAC keys and the same people who potentially have the most to gain by not supplying it.
 
Sponsored Links
2) Where there is a dispute over whether money is owed, an independent arbitration panel should decide - maybe one set up by oftel or whoever it is now, with whoever loses the case paying, say £30 - £50 to cover the panels costs (similar to the way the small claims court works). The key thing here is that the panel should happen ASAP after the dispute arises.

3) where an ISP fails to supply a MAC code without due reason, there should be a fine which increases in line with the time it takes for them to supply the code. This money could also go to pay for the arbitration panel.

Arbitration seems to be a long winded and rather expensive affair, even a few years ago OTELO (who I'm lead to believe are cheaper than CISAS) were apparently charging £350 per case on top of membership fees source here:- http://www.ero.dk/39C4D9CB-A6FA-4116-914A-D7382D845D6B?frames=no&


This issue just shows that self regulation only works when all the companies involved show good faith. Of course, if that were the case then regulation wouldn't be necessary.

I can't say I'm happy with the voluntary code, but with yet another incident of an ISP trying to foist its service on the customers of a failed ISP and the possibility of more ISPs failing because of competiton with the likes of Sky and CPW, I will be very warry about joining any ISP that isn't signed up to the COP http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/codes/bbm_cop/
 
I will be looking throughthis thread over the next few days there has been a lot of ideas. Sadly some will just not work and ofcom would never try to implement them.

Basicly the MAC keys need to be compulsary when they customer is outside the contract and wish to change.

Perhaps a charge for MAC while still in contract if the ISP is having problems.

OFCOM needs to act quicker when members of the public complain about a problem getting their MAC.
 
Thinking about MACs and how they should be accessible when a customer wants to change ISPs I have had a few people asking me who should pay etc .

Looking at Ideas mentioned in other threads there is the way a customer logs in on a BT radius and is given a MAC. I agree this method would need funding but how would it be funded any ideas?

I would be quite happy to see BT up the prices for migration to around the £20 mark (currently it is £11 +vat) to pay for an automated system (it would be up to the acquiring ISPs whether to pass it on to the customer or not), long term BT might even save money because an automated system could reduce the need to increase staffing levels in their tag-on line department. Although you would still need another means to obtain a mac if your line was not working.

Other than that allow advertising on the mac code portal as I suggested in the other thread:-

No only must they be made compulsary, but they must be readily available from another source so customers can still get them if their ISP doesn't respond (as with E7even, euro1net and fast24 and I think GIO and/or one or more of the isps that took on gios's customers)

One partial solution might be to have a system that works similar to the BT speedtest which also has a direct speedtest@speedtest_domain login to bypass your ISP. It could be set up so you could change the username in you router for instance to "Mac@code" to connect direct to a server that will indentify the phone number of the connection and automatically generate a mac code immediately (this would stop a dubious ISP blocking access to it). Maybe BT could set up such as system and let ISPs pay to advertise on it to fund the cost.


However, I don't see any justifiable reason for preventing people from setting up a second ADSL account on the same line so you could have a Pay As You Go backup ISP and preferably pay rental to BT or a LLU direct for the ADSL circuit on your line. (BT's current system apparently even allows for up to 5 ISPdomains associated with the same line - I think it is called limited service selection).


Perhaps migration fees should be raised to subsidise activation costs so they are both set at the same level: If activation was slightly cheaper consumers might find long contracts less appealing and choose to pay the fee up front and there would be even less grounds for an ISP to claim the need to be able to refuse to cease a line or provide a mac.

If macs aren't made compulsory, then customers should be allowed to have adsl on their line ceased without permission from their ISP. It can be surprisingly quick to get a line re-activated so either option would suit me.

I think compulsory macs (or compulsory ceases) should only be a short term fix and in the longer term consumers should have the choice of paying ADSL line rental and to have more than one ISP supplying them with a service as you can with dial-up ISPs and telephone services.
 
Last edited:
the whole system needs tougher rules. forget MAC's, line release etc. if it's all voluntary, then whatever system is used, ISP's can choose to ignore it if they so choose. as long as it's voluntary, people will have much more trouble leaving an ISP, than if there were rules that were enforced by law.
 
Top
Cheap BIG ISPs for 100Mbps+
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Vodafone UK ISP Logo
Vodafone £24.00 - 26.00
150Mbps
Gift: None
NOW UK ISP Logo
NOW £24.00
100Mbps
Gift: None
Plusnet UK ISP Logo
Plusnet £25.99
145Mbps
Gift: £50 Reward Card
Large Availability | View All
Cheapest ISPs for 100Mbps+
Gigaclear UK ISP Logo
Gigaclear £17.00
200Mbps
Gift: None
Community Fibre UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Virgin Media UK ISP Logo
Virgin Media £22.99
132Mbps
Gift: None
Hey! Broadband UK ISP Logo
150Mbps
Gift: None
Youfibre UK ISP Logo
Youfibre £23.99
150Mbps
Gift: None
Large Availability | View All
Sponsored Links
The Top 15 Category Tags
  1. FTTP (6026)
  2. BT (3639)
  3. Politics (2721)
  4. Business (2439)
  5. Openreach (2405)
  6. Building Digital UK (2330)
  7. Mobile Broadband (2146)
  8. FTTC (2083)
  9. Statistics (1901)
  10. 4G (1816)
  11. Virgin Media (1764)
  12. Ofcom Regulation (1582)
  13. Fibre Optic (1467)
  14. Wireless Internet (1462)
  15. 5G (1407)
Sponsored

Copyright © 1999 to Present - ISPreview.co.uk - All Rights Reserved - Terms  ,  Privacy and Cookie Policy  ,  Links  ,  Website Rules