Maximum supported number of recipient proxy addresses is 200

[Ruth E]

I've made the jump to Namesco, and am going through the tedious process of adding all of my 800+ aliases. I started with the 300 used this year, and went to save the list, only to get this error:
There are too many proxy addresses: 291, and maximum supported number of recipient proxy addresses is 200
What the heck? I thought Namesco said we could have unlimited aliases?
Has anyone else seen this error? Does anyone know of a workaround?

My Vodafone email is stopping in 48 hours; I can't possibly amend all of the extra email addresses in that timescale.

[Mike]

In article <7f7ae9b9-e10c-48be...@googlegroups.com>,

Ruth E <cemy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>There are too many proxy addresses: 291, and maximum supported number of recipient proxy addresses is 200
>What the heck? I thought Namesco said we could have unlimited aliases?

Be aware the "unlimited" can mean "a limit that 90% of people wouldn't notice"
and still be legal. Like "unlimited download" plans that have a cap set
high enough that you shouldn't notice ;)
--
--------------------------------------+------------------------------------
Mike Brown: mjb[-at-]signal11.org.uk | http://www.signal11.org.uk

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ne...@netfront.net ---

[Ruth E]

It looks like you may be correct, Mike. Here is the response I have had from Namesco:

I can confirm Microsoft Exchange allows a maximum of 200 addresses. 800+ is a huge amount of emails, unfortunately this package does not support this.
Ultimately if this is what you require, then the best solution would be to register your own private domain registration with a Namesco email package which supports a Catch-ALL and you can notify your address book / contacts of your new email address.
I'm sorry the package does not meet your requirements, we have made every effort possible to meet Demon customers requirements with the bespoke packages we have created to insure you can continue to use your .demon address going forward.

So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!

[Ruth E]

> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!

... but am I really the only ex-Demon customer who has moved to Namesco with more than 200 aliases?

[Cliff Frisby]

Ruth E wrote:

<snip>
(quoting Namesco)

> I can confirm Microsoft Exchange allows a maximum of 200 addresses. 800+
> is a huge amount of emails, unfortunately this package does not support
> this. Ultimately if this is what you require, then the best solution would
> be to register your own private domain registration with a Namesco email
> package which supports a Catch-ALL and you can notify your address book /
> contacts of your new email address. I'm sorry the package does not meet
> your requirements, we have made every effort possible to meet Demon
> customers requirements with the bespoke packages we have created to insure
> you can continue to use your .demon address going forward.

Surely if the last statement was true, the limit would not be lower than the
current Demon offering, or a default/catchall rule would have been
supported.

>
> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!

It was limited only by *their* imagination. I'm sure I have aliases well
into three figures.

This seems an intolerable situation for you, given the deadline (tomorrow?).
Would/should Vodafone delay throwing the switch in the circumstances. It's
worth asking.

In any case, why could Demon not have offered the option for customers to
have their MX records set to whatever the customer chooses? That would at
least have provided other options, whether temporary or permanent, in an
emergency like this.

[Ruth E]

From this: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/msoffice/forum/msoffice_o365admin-mso_manage/new-limit-on-proxy-addresses-unable-to-delete-old/12b5c44f-c2ed-408f-9dda-fd45b76ba820 it looks like this 200 alias limit is a very recent (just earlier this month) change within Office 365. For existing Office 365 users with more than 200 aliases already set up, this has left their mailboxes - with zero warning - in an 'unsupported' state. How appalling is that?

Fortunately, someone on that thread has suggested a possible workaround, of setting up Shared Mailboxes, with an additional 200 aliases on each one. But I'm not sure whether that will work with my Namesco package until my email actually moves across. I wait with bated breath ...

[Peter Hill]

On 30-Sep-16 4:00 PM, Ruth E wrote:
> It looks like you may be correct, Mike.
> Here is the response I have had from Namesco:
>
> I can confirm Microsoft Exchange allows a maximum of 200 addresses.
> 800+ is a huge amount of emails, unfortunately this package does
> not support this.
> Ultimately if this is what you require, then the best solution
> would be to register your own private domain registration with a
> Namesco email package which supports a Catch-ALL and you can notify
> your address book / contacts of your new email address.

So the E-mail hosting they offer to "private" Domain is exactly what we
had per Demon subdomain. And exactly what "dial loyalty" etc still have
(until they they want to screw a bit more cash out of Demon customers -
next year).

The suggestion that a "private" Domain would be a solution proves that
they are they utter IDIOTS on par with Voda. How does a "private" domain
service 300 alias on hostname.demon.co.uk?

As MS EE doesn't have csv bulk e-mail address upload it isn't fit for
business use. It could only possibly service a shoestring operation in a
matchbox - 5-10 users. It takes about 2 hours to enter and check 130
e-mail alias. How much would it cost at IT support rates? £1 per alias?

A "new" Domain would entail going to each and every web site that has an
alias and changing it. That would take days and at IT support rates
would cost a lot. £10 per alias?

To reduce number of alias you could have a number of sites using one
alias. To set this up means those sites have to be visited and the
registered e-mail address changed. Then when one is hacked all sites
that share that alias have to be changed to a new alias. £50 per group of 5?

The more well known or high value Hacks so far
Santander (2x?)
Pay-Pal
E-bay
Facebook
Google
Last.fm

> I'm sorry the package does not meet your requirements, we have made
> every effort possible to meet Demon customers requirements with the
> bespoke packages we have created to insure you can continue to use
> your .demon address going forward.

MS EE doesn't look very "bespoke" to me. I doubt Office 356 is "bespoke".

> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!

I'm now thinking that namesco are more responsible for this than Demon.
I think they have swindled poor gullible incompetent Voda/Demon into
this deal.

1: Provide Demon with outsourced e-mail service - bet it was a good deal
for first year. (Just like our 1st year discount - it will be over £50
next year.)
2: Bang the cost to Demon up so it's not possible to continue.
3: Make the cost of transferring out excessive as well.
4: F**K the users, Go for the kill with high profit MS EE / Office 356
and sell MS addons to make the pig in a poke work.

Proper screwed we are.

Namesco didn't understand how many of Demon customers are individuals or
home users (yes even those with "business broadband") with 100's of
alias and not 100's of USERS at £50 per year.

How long before the high profit MS EE / Office 356 solution is all they
offer for "private" domains as well?

[Richard Stearn]

Peter Hill wrote:

A long and detailed account of Vodafone/Demon/Namesco inadequacy.

Has anybody gone to Namesco and asked what the cost of having
a d.c.u. MX record pointing to your own mailserver is?

Domains, in general, cost about £7/year so £8 or £10 a year to retain
our treasured :-) d.c.u. address would be cost effective.

[Joe]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 00:22:57 +0100
Peter Hill <peter...@skyshacknospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:


>
> MS EE doesn't look very "bespoke" to me. I doubt Office 356 is
> "bespoke".
>

Of course it's 'bespoke', sir, one size fits a billion people.

To be fair, email providers are used to dealing with one domain name
and no subdomains, so a certain amount of custom programming was
necessary to fit the Demon model.

> > So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of
> > 200" !!!
>
> I'm now thinking that namesco are more responsible for this than
> Demon. I think they have swindled poor gullible incompetent
> Voda/Demon into this deal.
>
> 1: Provide Demon with outsourced e-mail service - bet it was a good
> deal for first year. (Just like our 1st year discount - it will be
> over £50 next year.)
> 2: Bang the cost to Demon up so it's not possible to continue.
> 3: Make the cost of transferring out excessive as well.
> 4: F**K the users, Go for the kill with high profit MS EE / Office
> 356 and sell MS addons to make the pig in a poke work.
>
> Proper screwed we are.
>
> Namesco didn't understand how many of Demon customers are individuals
> or home users (yes even those with "business broadband") with 100's
> of alias and not 100's of USERS at £50 per year.
>
> How long before the high profit MS EE / Office 356 solution is all
> they offer for "private" domains as well?

Horses for courses. Demon was originally the specialist provider, for
businesses and more demanding home users. Brentwood Cathedral used
Demon, until the bishop found out...

Now it's owned by a business oriented towards mass-market consumer
users, and, let's be honest, mobile phone users. For people with
needs that don't fit the mass market, Demon/Voda is not the correct
choice.

I stayed with Demon because I in-sourced my email about fifteen years
ago, and Demon offered a fixed IP address which did not get onto email
blacklists, and at a price which was not doubled or quadrupled if the
word 'business' was involved. I believe Demon was the only ISP offering
'home' Internet without forbidding commercial use in its T&C.

I have just gone (yesterday) to Plusnet after BT jacked up its line
rental to £26 a month, which I considered excessive. People offering
combined phone and broadband are charging about £18-£19 a month for
(literally) the same thing, which is still excessive, but better. I'm
now on FTTC and phone for about six quid less per month than ADSL with
BT and Demon. Plusnet also offer a further small discount (worth having
in a zero interest rate world) for paying a year's line rental in
advance, which BT did for a couple of years and then stopped.

There's also means to set the DNS PTR record, although I've found the
address comes with a complementary A/PTR record pair, which is vital
for sending email directly. I've yet to find out if they maintain a
good reputation for their addresses, which is not something you can
read about in the advertising material... I can switch to sending
through a smarthost if necessary, but then I lose information from my
mail server's logs, which is often useful.

So, another one gone...

--
Joe

[Peter Hill]

The eviction notice has been nailed on the door. Give it up, it's time
to move on and get your own vanity domain.

Cheaper by the decade.

https://www.lcn.com

£51.42 (inc VAT) for 10 years
co.uk
uk
org.uk
me.uk

[Chris B]

On 01/10/2016 09:05, Joe wrote:

People offering
> combined phone and broadband are charging about £18-£19 a month for
> (literally) the same thing,

Is that really the case? I am considering jumping ship but currently
get a consistent download speed from Demon/Vodafone of 9-10 Mbit. (I am
in the Sam Knows monitoring programme and this speed has been pretty
steady for several years).

Enquiries with Zen show that my speed will be Typical 2, Min 1 Max 3.5

and Plusnet say 3-8.

Are these numbers deliberately deflated to try and convince me to go to
fibre, or is there some good reason why neither of them think they will
be able to supply the speed I already enjoy?

And another question do VF give refunds for the unexpired time when you
have paid a year up front (I took out a 2 year contract 3 or 4 years ago
but still pay annually)


--
Chris B (News)

[Graeme Wall]

Yes to the latter IME.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Friday, 30 September 2016 16:01:01 UTC+1, Ruth E wrote:

> Ultimately if this is what you require, then the best solution would be to register your own private domain registration with a Namesco email package which supports a Catch-ALL and you can notify your address book / contacts of your new email address.
> I'm sorry the package does not meet your requirements, we have made every effort possible to meet Demon customers requirements with the bespoke packages we have created to insure you can continue to use your .demon address going forward.
>

Err... aren't those two statements contradictory?
If they have worked so very hard to meet Demon customer requirements then why is their standard offering a better match to the Demon setup, with a catch-ALL alias?

Seems to me that Namesco and Vodafoe have worked very hard to annoy Demon customers and little else. Probably job satisfaction to some bored execs.

Having just gone through a similar exercise to you, topping out at 150 aliases, I now find it to have been a complete waste of time anyway. None of the alias addresses make it through to receipt - all emails appear to be addressed to the primary address when received. Consequently they cannot be routed to individual folders automatically using Outlook rules.

Worse still, when you synchronise your local Outlook to the Namesco service something strange happens: all of the emails in your local folders (including all those received on the old Demon service) mysteriously get their alias address changed to the primary account as well, so you lose all visibility of the alias. In short, these are not really alias addresses at all, they are just acceptance routes to the primary address.

I thought I was being forced by Vodafoe to buy Namesco's pig-in-a-poke, but the poke has a big hole in the bottom through which said pig has scarpered. Not at all happy with either party, but now determined to dump Vodafoe asap and Namesco in a year's time. :-(

[Cliff Frisby]

Peter Hill wrote:

> On 01-Oct-16 8:55 AM, Richard Stearn wrote:
>> Peter Hill wrote:
>>
>> A long and detailed account of Vodafone/Demon/Namesco inadequacy.
>>
>> Has anybody gone to Namesco and asked what the cost of having
>> a d.c.u. MX record pointing to your own mailserver is?
>>
>> Domains, in general, cost about £7/year so £8 or £10 a year to retain
>> our treasured :-) d.c.u. address would be cost effective.
>
> The eviction notice has been nailed on the door. Give it up, it's time
> to move on and get your own vanity domain.
>

<snip>

Whilst that may be good advice, the original question is still valid: has
anyone asked Demon (not Namesco, incidentally) for their hostname's MX
record to be set to their hostname?

I can't think of any good reason why they wouldn't, unless they are getting
a commission for each customer who signs up with Namesco (which would be
pretty grubby, if you ask me).

Isn't it basically daft for them to say that a customer can manage the
subdomain yourhost.demon.co.uk, but, oh no, we'll specifically prevent the
customer handling email addressed x...@yourhost.demon.co.uk?

In fact, it would be sufficient for Demon to simply delete the MX records
completely, in which case well-behaved relays should default to looking up
the A record.

[Ruth E]

> Having just gone through a similar exercise to you, topping out at 150 aliases, I now find it to have been a complete waste of time anyway. None of the alias addresses make it through to receipt - all emails appear to be addressed to the primary address when received. Consequently they cannot be routed to individual folders automatically using Outlook rules.

Kennedy - did you set up your offline Outlook account using IMAP? I have stuck with what I had before - sending via SMTP and receiving via POP3 - and I *do* still see the alias addresses in all of my emails. Some emails show the alias in the To: field, others show my name as the Display Name, but I can still see the alias if I double-click on that. I would say it is the same, for me, as it was with Demon. Moreover, I also seem to be able to send e-mails from my offline Outlook using a different alias (which others have suggested wasn't possible with Namesco, although perhaps that was from Outlook365).

I have also been able to circumvent the 200 alias limit by using MarcusAK's workaround described here: http://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/msoffice/forum/msoffice_o365admin-mso_manage/new-limit-on-proxy-addresses-unable-to-delete-old/12b5c44f-c2ed-408f-9dda-fd45b76ba820?page=1
This uses shared mailboxes, auto-forwarding to my primary e-mail address, which each support 200 aliases. This method also retains visibility of the alias address when I download the emails to my offline Outlook.

So I am relieved to have a setup which appears to work pretty much as it did via Demon (apart from the palaver of setting up all of my aliases manually). But, like you, I see Namesco as just a temporary solution. The prospect of changing my email was the only thing keeping me with Demon, now that FTTC is available at my location. So I will be off (probably to Uno, who offer a fixed IP and free hosted domain) as soon as I can find a convenient time to move.

[Joe]

On Sat, 1 Oct 2016 12:38:58 +0100
Chris B <ne...@salis.co.uk> wrote:

> On 01/10/2016 09:05, Joe wrote:
>
> People offering
> > combined phone and broadband are charging about £18-£19 a month for
> > (literally) the same thing,
>
> Is that really the case? I am considering jumping ship but currently
> get a consistent download speed from Demon/Vodafone of 9-10 Mbit. (I
> am in the Sam Knows monitoring programme and this speed has been
> pretty steady for several years).
>
> Enquiries with Zen show that my speed will be Typical 2, Min 1 Max 3.5
>
> and Plusnet say 3-8.
>
> Are these numbers deliberately deflated to try and convince me to go
> to fibre, or is there some good reason why neither of them think they
> will be able to supply the speed I already enjoy?
>

As far as I can see, you give both of them your phone number and
address, and they go away and ask BT what you're currently getting.
Both Plusnet and Zen quoted me 6-8MB/s, and I've been getting
7.7-8.0MB/s for some years. Possibly you only gave them your postcode,
so they gave you an average value.

I'm now on a connect speed of 37.36MB/s according to the router. I
haven't bothered doing any tests, as it's only been on for a couple of
days.

The Plusnet price after the discount period is £14.99 per month for
fibre, £9.99 for ADSL, so only a fiver difference. Both are unlimited
data, both are plus £17.99 line rental, plus either pay-per-call or a
couple of tariffs. Plus £6.99 carriage (one-off) for the new router,
unless you already have one with the capability.

Zen is about the same, but Plusnet does a year's advance line rental,
which knocks another couple of pounds per month off, once you've got
over the shock of how much it costs to hire a bit of wire for a year.

--
Joe

[Mike]

In article <9fd5936c-8318-4068...@googlegroups.com>,

Ruth E <cemy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!

Cynically predictable then ...

>... but am I really the only ex-Demon customer who has moved to Namesco with more than 200 aliases?

You are probably in a very small minority.

# wc -l /etc/mail/aliases
177 /etc/mail/aliases

So although I use a lot of role-addresses, I'd be under the limit. Currently :)

But then, I run my own server, and my backup MX server is AAISP (all role-address
aliases mirrored there too).

[Cliff Frisby]

Richard Stearn wrote:
<snipped>

>
> Has anybody gone to Namesco and asked what the cost of having
> a d.c.u. MX record pointing to your own mailserver is?

<snipped>

Yep, just asked Demon Support. Not about the cost, but whether they would
just do it, or, if not, whether they could simply delete the records (which
ought to have much the same effect).

Answer is no. I quote:
> Mx records can be only changed if the Domain is owned by users and if it
> Registered with Demon. However since 'scarpia1-adsl.demon.co.uk' is a sub-
> domain for Demon.co.uk which is owned by us we will not be able to
> change/delete the Mx records.
>

It don't think it is a technical problem, just their policy. A "won't",
rather than "can't".

I'm not expecting any email addressed that way anymore, but the current
situation is rather absurd: Demon is telling other relays that my mail
should be directed to a third-party server which nevertheless refuses to
accept it, whereas the very domain that the mail is addressed to is
perfectly capable of accepting it. Ugh.

[Peter Hill]

I noticed that the names co control panel "access office 365" page had a
button "submit MX records".

Having transferred the button has gone (I never selected it) it now reads.

Mx records submitted. Transfer under way or complete

Your new MX records have been submitted. If your Office 365 account is
not yet live it should be within the next 24 hours.

So myhostname.demon.co.uk MX record now points at Office 365 and that is
not registered with Demon.

[Cliff Frisby]

Indeed. The fact that myhostname.demon.co.uk is a subdomain of a domain
owned (whatever that really means) by Demon does not prevent them from
pointing the A record for that subdomain at a machine which is entirely
controlled by me. Why should the MX record be any different?

And why are they insisting that I must have an MX record at all, just so
that *they* can bounce my mail?

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 2 October 2016 16:23:56 UTC+1, Ruth E wrote:
> > Having just gone through a similar exercise to you, topping out at 150 aliases, I now find it to have been a complete waste of time anyway. None of the alias addresses make it through to receipt - all emails appear to be addressed to the primary address when received. Consequently they cannot be routed to individual folders automatically using Outlook rules.
>
> Kennedy - did you set up your offline Outlook account using IMAP? I have stuck with what I had before - sending via SMTP and receiving via POP3 - and I *do* still see the alias addresses in all of my emails. Some emails show the alias in the To: field, others show my name as the Display Name, but I can still see the alias if I double-click on that.

Hi Ruth - I was having trouble getting Outlook to connect using the POP3 and SMTP settings so I, perhaps foolishly, gave Namesco tech support a call. They "instructed" me NOT to do that and synchronise automatically to Exchange server. This is why I seem to be getting these issues - you may see the same if you look at the webmail on Office365. My local Outlook behaves exactly the same as that.

I had the opposite problem with my phone, which couldn't connect to exchange and ONLY connected with POP3 and SMTP. Incidentally, so did an ancient iPod Touch. They both show the correct alias in the "To" line.

I think I need to persevere with my Outlook to get it so collect by POP3 and SMTP instead of synching with Exchance, but another emergency meant I didn't have any more time to work on this at the weekend. :-(

[Richard Stearn]

Cliff Frisby wrote:
> Richard Stearn wrote:
> <snipped>
>> Has anybody gone to Namesco and asked what the cost of having
>> a d.c.u. MX record pointing to your own mailserver is?
> <snipped>
>
> Yep, just asked Demon Support. Not about the cost, but whether they would
> just do it, or, if not, whether they could simply delete the records (which
> ought to have much the same effect).

Cliff

Thank you for that. You beat me to it. Good point about it being
Demon/Vodafone rather than Namesco.

> Answer is no. I quote:

I rather expected that answer.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 2 October 2016 16:23:56 UTC+1, Ruth E wrote:

> But, like you, I see Namesco as just a temporary solution. The prospect of changing my email was the only thing keeping me with Demon, now that FTTC is available at my location. So I will be off (probably to Uno, who offer a fixed IP and free hosted domain) as soon as I can find a convenient time to move.

If you have FTTC, BT seem to be doing some pretty good deals at the moment:
£10/m gets a 52Mb unlimited connection and 100GB cloud storage or, for £25/m you get 76Mb unlimited and 500GB storage, both with a VDSL router AND £100 gift card thrown in as well. On the former offer, that gets you more than 3x Vodafoe's connection speed for less than 1/6th of the cost over a year!

What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them, of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most of their legacy Demon customers entirely.

[Andy]

In message <cfc39d2b-b59d-43be...@googlegroups.com>,
kennedym...@gmail.com wrote
[]

>
>What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them,
>of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most
>of their legacy Demon customers entirely.

Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
monetary value?
--
Andy Taylor [Editor, Austrian Philatelic Society].
Visit www dot austrianphilately dot com>

[Cliff Frisby]

Andy wrote:

> In message <cfc39d2b-b59d-43be...@googlegroups.com>,
> kennedym...@gmail.com wrote
> []
>>
>>What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them,
>>of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most
>>of their legacy Demon customers entirely.
>
> Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
> monetary value?

Given that the Vodafone-branded alternative makes a charge for additional IP
addresses (which I'm not against, in principle), then I suppose so.

Does anyone here know the charging structure for additional addresses?

[Richard Stearn]

Andy wrote:
> Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
> monetary value?

But those IP addresses are still going to be needed if Vodafone wish
to have an ISP business. Whilst a wholely dynamic IP allocation
scheme saves on admin the current situation where broadband routers
are on 24/7 does not save on IP addresses unlike the days of dial-up
where people connected only when necessary.

By driving away the "Demon" customers all they are doing is to raise
the need to get more customers. Getting new customers is a cost.

But there again, I never did totally understand the bean-counter mind
set (except them wanting the moon, on a stick with toffee sauce and
for free).

[David Rance]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 03:31:06 wrote:

>What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them,
>of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most
>of their legacy Demon customers entirely.

Why do you think that would matter to them? The number of Demon
customers must be minuscule compared with the rest of their business.

David

--
David Rance writing from Caversham, Reading, UK

[Joe]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 15:40:46 +0100
David Rance <david...@SPAMOFF.invalid> wrote:

> On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 03:31:06 wrote:
>
> >What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to
> >them, of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to
> >lose most of their legacy Demon customers entirely.
>
> Why do you think that would matter to them? The number of Demon
> customers must be minuscule compared with the rest of their business.
>

Complication, I would have thought. If we were all fbl...@demon.co.uk
there would be no problem, but the legacy sub-domain model must have
administrative costs, as it does not fit Exchange. I believe Exchange
would require a program instance (and therefore Windows Server
installation) per sub-domain to do the job properly, which is completely
uneconomic here.

Either Microsoft is handling the address mapping, which will not be done
for a one-off fee, or Vodafone have set up some kind of address
re-writer. Either way, I would think they would prefer to be rid of it,
and I suspect that when the number of remaining customers falls below a
certain threshold, they will be given notice of the end of the service.

Vodafone might just ask their customers to switch email addresses from
fr...@bloggs.demon.co.uk to something like fred....@demon-voda.co.uk
but this is exactly what customers want to avoid.

--
Joe

[Peter Hill]

On 03-Oct-16 3:00 PM, Richard Stearn wrote:
> Andy wrote:
>> Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
>> monetary value?
>
> But those IP addresses are still going to be needed if Vodafone wish
> to have an ISP business. Whilst a wholely dynamic IP allocation
> scheme saves on admin the current situation where broadband routers
> are on 24/7 does not save on IP addresses unlike the days of dial-up
> where people connected only when necessary.
>
> By driving away the "Demon" customers all they are doing is to raise
> the need to get more customers. Getting new customers is a cost.

Voda are advertising broadband on 101TouchFM. Maybe on the whole group
and other local radio.

[Richard Stearn]

David Rance wrote:
> Why do you think that would matter to them? The number of Demon
> customers must be minuscule compared with the rest of their business.

Yes, the number of Demon customers is miniscule compared with the
number of mobile phone customers, but how many broadband customers
did Vodafone have before they bought Demon? Note: I do not know as
Vodafone is one of those companies I avoid and have done for many
years.

[Graeme Wall]

On 03/10/2016 19:27, Richard Stearn wrote:
> David Rance wrote:
>> Why do you think that would matter to them? The number of Demon
>> customers must be minuscule compared with the rest of their business.
>
> Yes, the number of Demon customers is miniscule compared with the
> number of mobile phone customers, but how many broadband customers
> did Vodafone have before they bought Demon?

Simple answer, none as they have only just tried diversifying into the
world of broadband, presumably their own TV channels will follow shortly.

[Darren Salt]

I demand that kennedym...@gmail.com may or may not have written...

> If you have FTTC, BT seem to be doing some pretty good deals at the moment:
> £10/m gets a 52Mb unlimited connection and 100GB cloud storage or,

_Up to_ 55Mb/s, surely. Distance from the cabinet, line condition etc.; the
usual stuff.

> for £25/m you get 76Mb unlimited and 500GB storage, both with a VDSL router
> AND £100 gift card thrown in as well.

That's the “we'll drown out the neighbours' WLANs and we don't care if your
devices' transmitters aren't strong” one, right? (That's just how I read
their advertising. I have no idea whether it actually is like that; probably
not, but I'd not put it past them...)

Anyway, same again: up to 80Mb/s. (Stupid OFCOM and their 10% ruling.)

--
| _ | Darren Salt, using Debian GNU/Linux (and Android)
| ( ) |
| X | ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML e-mail
| / \ |

Caution: breathing may be hazardous to your health.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 3 October 2016 20:25:16 UTC+1, Darren Salt wrote:
> I demand that kennedymcewen may or may not have written...

>
> > If you have FTTC, BT seem to be doing some pretty good deals at the moment:
> > £10/m gets a 52Mb unlimited connection and 100GB cloud storage or,
>
> _Up to_ 55Mb/s, surely. Distance from the cabinet, line condition etc.; the
> usual stuff.
>
> > for £25/m you get 76Mb unlimited and 500GB storage, both with a VDSL router
> > AND £100 gift card thrown in as well.
>
> That's the “we'll drown out the neighbours' WLANs and we don't care if your
> devices' transmitters aren't strong” one, right? (That's just how I read
> their advertising. I have no idea whether it actually is like that; probably
> not, but I'd not put it past them...)
>

Well I don't think its quite like that, but my neighbours are far wnough away that its unlikely to bother them even if it is. However, I would certainly welcome being able to connect in the summer house at the bottom of garden without having to fire up the wifi repeater in the garage to get a signal down there. ;-)

[Martin Brown]

On 29/09/2016 10:24, Mike wrote:
> In article <7f7ae9b9-e10c-48be...@googlegroups.com>,
> Ruth E <cemy...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> There are too many proxy addresses: 291, and maximum supported number of recipient proxy addresses is 200
>> What the heck? I thought Namesco said we could have unlimited aliases?

Worth talking to their support team in case something can be done or
alternatively consider grabbing whateverdemon.co.uk on a decent email
system and send out a blanket email to all your correspondents saying
delete the "." between "whatever" and "demon" or if you are feeling more
vindictive and it isn't already taken delete ".demon" and be
"whatever.co.uk".

Otherwise I suggest you export your mailbase sort by frequency and add
the 200 most frequently used within some time limit.

It seems that getting out early on the dial loyalty deal was a smart
move givin this latest car crash!
>
> Be aware the "unlimited" can mean "a limit that 90% of people wouldn't notice"
> and still be legal. Like "unlimited download" plans that have a cap set
> high enough that you shouldn't notice ;)
>

I wonder if it permits fixed length wild cards (match any single
character) or even better regex (I still miss that from TP).

Why do you use so many active aliasses? I really only use heavily a
handful of core email addresses with trusted contacts and unique tagged
ones for untrusted third parties so I can block them if sold on.

Who cares if someone you bought an obscure component from two years ago
cannot get back in touch with you?

Regards,
Martin Brown

[Martin Brown]

On 30/09/2016 16:02, Ruth E wrote:
>> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!
>

> ... but am I really the only ex-Demon customer who has moved to Namesco with more than 200 aliases?

No. Some of us moved last year when a better product was on offer.

A lot of mine are of the form tagpNNNN where NNNN is incremented by for
every new untrusted contact and any that get sold on for spam get a kill
rule added to the incoming side.

I do have a catch-all rule server side. This is Voodophone inflicted
pain and suffering so I recommend you take it up with them.
Poor Namesco are limited to doing Voodofones bidding.

V are relying on noone being bloody minded enough to persue them for
legal redress for dumping you onto an inferior product. I suspect their
recent contracts may well allow them to do this but I haven;t looked.

Regards,
Martin Brown

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 3 October 2016 13:31:31 UTC+1, Andy wrote:
> In message <cfc39d2b-b59d-43be...@googlegroups.com>,

> kennedymcewen wrote

> []
> >
> >What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them,
> >of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most
> >of their legacy Demon customers entirely.
>
> Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
> monetary value?

Aren't they going to be "taken by force" next year anyway, when Vodoafoe shut down the Demon domain?

Dumping Vodafoe now, before they dump you, costs them 6 months of fees and an asset they are planning to junk anyway.

[Andy]

In message <bd137fad-6552-497b...@googlegroups.com>,
kennedym...@gmail.com wrote

Use or sell, more likely. IP4 addresses are a bit like land: "Buy now,
they aren't making any more".

[Richard Stearn]

Andy wrote:
> In message <bd137fad-6552-497b...@googlegroups.com>,
> kennedym...@gmail.com wrote
>> On Monday, 3 October 2016 13:31:31 UTC+1, Andy wrote:
>>> In message <cfc39d2b-b59d-43be...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> kennedymcewen wrote
>>> []
>>> >
>>> >What a poor business decision this seems to be. For the cost, to them,
>>> >of a few pence per customer per month, Vodafoe look likely to lose most
>>> >of their legacy Demon customers entirely.
>>>
>>> Doesn't that then release a block of IP addresses, which will be of
>>> monetary value?
>>
>> Aren't they going to be "taken by force" next year anyway, when
>> Vodoafoe shut down the Demon domain?
>>
>> Dumping Vodafoe now, before they dump you, costs them 6 months of fees
>> and an asset they are planning to junk anyway.
>>
> Use or sell, more likely. IP4 addresses are a bit like land: "Buy now,
> they aren't making any more".

If Vodafone want to have an ISP business they need IP addresses. They
currently hold all those IP address blocks that came with the Demon
purchase. Their maximum broadband customer numbers are dictated by how
many IP addresses they have. If they sell any of the blocks they currently
have then they reduce the maximum size of their broadband customer
base.

IPv6 changes the rules but that means new routers as most existing routers
can not cope with IPv6.

There are technical bodges that can be used but they bring their own
problems.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 3 October 2016 20:25:16 UTC+1, Darren Salt wrote:

> I demand that kennedymcewen may or may not have written...

>
> > If you have FTTC, BT seem to be doing some pretty good deals at the moment:
> > £10/m gets a 52Mb unlimited connection and 100GB cloud storage or,
>
> _Up to_ 55Mb/s, surely. Distance from the cabinet, line condition etc.; the
> usual stuff.
>
> > for £25/m you get 76Mb unlimited and 500GB storage, both with a VDSL router
> > AND £100 gift card thrown in as well.
>
> That's the “we'll drown out the neighbours' WLANs and we don't care if your
> devices' transmitters aren't strong” one, right? (That's just how I read
> their advertising. I have no idea whether it actually is like that; probably
> not, but I'd not put it past them...)
>
> Anyway, same again: up to 80Mb/s. (Stupid OFCOM and their 10% ruling.)
>

Well, having now got my email transferred to Namesco and working as it should, I have "pulled the trigger" and taken the £25/m BT offer. I did look at Virgin, who offer much higher speeds as the house is already connected to their fibre but, to be honest, the point it comes into the property is just inconvenient - nowhere near power sockets or anywhere I would put a router. The BT point comes directly into the office.

The BT line test shows I SHOULD get download speeds between 73Mb/s and 80Mb/s but also GUARANTEEs a speed of at least 65Mb/s, at least 4x faster than previously.

So, after more than 20 years with Demon, here we go:
"Dear Vodafoe,
as part of my ongoing investment in upgrading my home broadband infrastructure, I will no longer be a customer or financially supporting your Company. Your Direct Debit mandate at my bank account will be cancelled 30 calendar days from the date of this email. I apologise for any inconvenience this may cause at this stressful time, with sales down 3.2% last quarter, but you really should have thought about that before shutting down the only remaining services that retained your Demon customer base.

Kindest regards..."

[Peter Hill]

On 04-Oct-16 11:01 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 30/09/2016 16:02, Ruth E wrote:
>>> So, apparently "unlimited" means "unlimited up to a maximum of 200" !!!
>>
>> ... but am I really the only ex-Demon customer who has moved to
>> Namesco with more than 200 aliases?
>
> No. Some of us moved last year when a better product was on offer.
>
> A lot of mine are of the form tagpNNNN where NNNN is incremented by for
> every new untrusted contact and any that get sold on for spam get a kill
> rule added to the incoming side.
>
> I do have a catch-all rule server side. This is Voodophone inflicted
> pain and suffering so I recommend you take it up with them.

It isn't. Office 356 is a product that Namesco are pushing. Inty
(Namesco's partner) already provided E-mail services to ALL Demon
customers having e-mail accounts hostname.demon.co.uk since the
migration in August 2012. (was it a 4 year contract?)

> Poor Namesco are limited to doing Voodofones bidding.

I doubt that's the case. Demon clearly outsourced E-mail to the cheapest
bidder. That bidder could have offered a "no cost" transfer in 2012 and
moderate fees. Then in April 2015 they took over all Webhosting and
legacy E-mail accounts that didn't have Broadband.

Now they are changing the service to MS Office 365. This is a "high
margin" service re-sold to namesco by their "partner" (in crime) "INTY"
(remember them from 2012?).
https://www.intycascade.com/services/microsoft-office-365/

****High Margin - Recurring Revenues****
****Add multiple services to increase your revenue per user****

Demon clearly refused to pay the price/user. So the cost has been put on
us the customer for a product we don't want. Now Demon have no control
over it except the MX records. I would think that Demon tried to find
another outsource provider but Inty can and I have no doubt did demand a
transfer out fee that was exorbitant. Demon customers are now locked
into Namesco/Inty and can be milked by them at will.

[Peter Hill]

On 04-Oct-16 10:55 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 29/09/2016 10:24, Mike wrote:
>> In article <7f7ae9b9-e10c-48be...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Ruth E <cemy...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> There are too many proxy addresses: 291, and maximum supported number
>>> of recipient proxy addresses is 200
>>> What the heck? I thought Namesco said we could have unlimited aliases?
>
> Worth talking to their support team in case something can be done or
> alternatively consider grabbing whateverdemon.co.uk on a decent email
> system and send out a blanket email to all your correspondents saying
> delete the "." between "whatever" and "demon" or if you are feeling more
> vindictive and it isn't already taken delete ".demon" and be
> "whatever.co.uk".
>
> Otherwise I suggest you export your mailbase sort by frequency and add
> the 200 most frequently used within some time limit.
>
> It seems that getting out early on the dial loyalty deal was a smart
> move givin this latest car crash!

There are quotes from support staff in recent postings that they are
next year('s victims).

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

Wow, BT were quick off the mark.
Within 2hrs of signing up with them and deciding on a transition date, I had an email from Vodafoe confirming that BT had requested the change and confirming the date.
Of course, that was sent to postmaster@...dcu, an alias from which I should not be able to even confirm receipt with the Namesco account. Except there is a way...

In Outlook, setup a new email account using POP3 & SMTP with the alias email but logging into the account with the primary address and password. This creates new inbox and associated folders in Outlook. When sending emails, select the from address as this new account and it works OK.

Thanks to Brian Howie, who explained how he had managed to do this on Turnpike on another thread, but it works with Outlook as well. ;-)

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

Well, BT have just emailed to confirm that they have completed my connection transfer to their superfast service, so I'll plug in their new router, which arrived yesterday, when I get home from work and do a speed test to see how much faster than the 65Mb "minimum guaranteed speed" I actually get.

Goodbye Demon, after more than 20 years. :-(

[Andy]

In message <ab444986-9d79-4979...@googlegroups.com>,
kennedym...@gmail.com wrote
[]

>Well, BT have just emailed to confirm that they have completed my
>connection transfer to their superfast service, so I'll plug in their
>new router, which arrived yesterday, when I get home from work and do a
>speed test to see how much faster than the 65Mb "minimum guaranteed
>speed" I actually get.
>

If it's the same as mine, read the small print on the inside of the
wrapper of the box it came in. You have to wait till the light goes
steady-blue.

Also keep the box, in case you have to return it!

You may find this useful:
<URL:http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/networks/1403054/bt-home-hub-5-settin
gs-guide-how-to-make-it-faster-and-less-irritating>

I can't comment on the WIFI aspects as I'm using it via ethernet. I
can't recall altering anything in WIFI setup (Windows 7) and it does
work.

About the only irritation is that the "adjust the light" toggles it
between 'too bright' and 'far too bright'!

[Ian Jackson]

In message <ex$a4bBMJ...@kitzbuhel.co.uk>, Andy
<an...@kitzbuhel.co.uk> writes

Irritatingly bright indicator lights can attenuated by the application
of N layers of masking tape. Adjust N to give the desired brightness
(typically 3 or 4).
--
Ian

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 20 October 2016 20:12:47 UTC+1, Andy wrote:
> In message <ab444986-9d79-4979...@googlegroups.com>,
> kennedym...@gmail.com wrote
> []
> >Well, BT have just emailed to confirm that they have completed my
> >connection transfer to their superfast service, so I'll plug in their
> >new router, which arrived yesterday, when I get home from work and do a
> >speed test to see how much faster than the 65Mb "minimum guaranteed
> >speed" I actually get.
> >
> If it's the same as mine, read the small print on the inside of the
> wrapper of the box it came in. You have to wait till the light goes
> steady-blue.
>

The only small print seemed to be setup instructions. Waiting for the blue light was easy enough: it took that long to find what the steady red light was in the manual. Only when the blue light came on did I realise it must have been a steady orange light! ;-)

> Also keep the box, in case you have to return it!
>

I always keep the box - at least for a month or two anyway.

> You may find this useful:
> <URL:http://www.expertreviews.co.uk/networks/1403054/bt-home-hub-5-settin
> gs-guide-how-to-make-it-faster-and-less-irritating>
>

Ah. Mine was a Home Hub 6. No installation problems - unplug the old Technicolor router from Demon and plug in the new BT router. Up and running a few seconds later, then modifying the network and passwords for everything connected by wifi in the house.

> I can't comment on the WIFI aspects as I'm using it via ethernet.

Well it has connected pretty well at 79.99Mbps downstream and 20.00Mbps upstream. Using the Ookla speed test on office desktop in the same room I am getting actual throughput around 75Mbs down and 19Mbs up. Most of the house is at least 50Mbps downstream whilst my Android phone gets about 25Mbps downstream and 10mbps upstream from the summer house at the bottom of the garden. Well impressed!

Only issue was that I had been using the USB port on the Technicolor router as a wireless printer server, but couldn't figure out any way to get the same capability with the BT router. None of the online suggestions for earlier BT routers appeared to work, and there are a few comments that the USB configuration has been changed. Works well as a shared USB drive though.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, 20 October 2016 23:45:19 UTC+1, Ian Jackson wrote:

> Irritatingly bright indicator lights can attenuated by the application
> of N layers of masking tape. Adjust N to give the desired brightness
> (typically 3 or 4).

I didn't find that was the case with the HH6. In fact the lower setting is only visible after dark with the room lights out. In normal room lighting you can't tell if it is on or not at that setting, so I have left it at full level.

[J. P. Gilliver (John)]

In message <4b2c35a2-da75-408c...@googlegroups.com>,
kennedym...@gmail.com writes:
[]

>Ah. Mine was a Home Hub 6. No installation problems - unplug the old
>Technicolor router from Demon and plug in the new BT router. Up and
>running a few seconds later, then modifying the network and passwords
>for everything connected by wifi in the house.
[]

I'm always puzzled why people do this, especially if they have lots of
devices; it's surely a lot easier to change the SSID and password in the
router (via temporary cable connection if necessary), which only has to
be done on the one device. My blind friends always configure (or have me
configure) any new router to be the same as the previous -
BTVOYAGERsomething - though it hasn't been a BT Voyager for years.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Insane people are crazy, not stupid. - kenckar, 2015-7-23

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 24 October 2016 00:49:38 UTC+1, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
> In message <4b2c35a2-da75-408c...@googlegroups.com>,
> kennedym...@gmail.com writes:
> []
> >Ah. Mine was a Home Hub 6. No installation problems - unplug the old
> >Technicolor router from Demon and plug in the new BT router. Up and
> >running a few seconds later, then modifying the network and passwords
> >for everything connected by wifi in the house.
> []
> I'm always puzzled why people do this, especially if they have lots of
> devices; it's surely a lot easier to change the SSID and password in the
> router (via temporary cable connection if necessary), which only has to
> be done on the one device.

I used to do that, but if you then need technical support one of, if not the, first things they ask/do is to reset the router to the default... then its guaranteed nothing connects, and you are back at square one anyway.

[Peter Hill]

On 23-Oct-16 11:20 PM, kennedym...@gmail.com wrote:
> Only issue was that I had been using the USB port on the Technicolor
> router as a wireless printer server, but couldn't figure out any way
> to get the same capability with the BT router. None of the online
> suggestions for earlier BT routers appeared to work, and there are a
> few comments that the USB configuration has been changed. Works well
> as a shared USB drive though.
>
>

Can't you connect the Technicolor to a LAN port on the BT router? Switch
off the WiFi.

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

I was thinking about doing just that: putting the Technicolor to some use rather than sending to landfill or some metal recovery facility in India.

However it means another permanently powered box and associated cables and power brick, so I would prefer to get the USB on the router working as a print server port (as it did with the Tecnicolor) if at all possible.

[Wm]

On 04/10/2016 20:16, Peter Hill wrote:
>
> It isn't. Office 356 is a product that Namesco are pushing. Inty
> (Namesco's partner) already provided E-mail services to ALL Demon
> customers having e-mail accounts hostname.demon.co.uk since the
> migration in August 2012. (was it a 4 year contract?)
>
>> Poor Namesco are limited to doing Voodofones bidding.
>
> I doubt that's the case. Demon clearly outsourced E-mail to the cheapest
> bidder. That bidder could have offered a "no cost" transfer in 2012 and
> moderate fees. Then in April 2015 they took over all Webhosting and
> legacy E-mail accounts that didn't have Broadband.
>
> Now they are changing the service to MS Office 365. This is a "high
> margin" service re-sold to namesco by their "partner" (in crime) "INTY"
> (remember them from 2012?).
> https://www.intycascade.com/services/microsoft-office-365/
>
> ****High Margin - Recurring Revenues****
> ****Add multiple services to increase your revenue per user****
>
> Demon clearly refused to pay the price/user. So the cost has been put on
> us the customer for a product we don't want. Now Demon have no control
> over it except the MX records. I would think that Demon tried to find
> another outsource provider but Inty can and I have no doubt did demand a
> transfer out fee that was exorbitant. Demon customers are now locked
> into Namesco/Inty and can be milked by them at will.

I'm finding Mr Peter Hill's suggestions more persuasive than most about
this mess.

--
Wm

[Paul Wolff]

On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Wm <wm_o...@yahoo.co.uk> posted:

If you're the cynical Tarrcity Wm, nice to know that old ghosts still
haunt demonland. We have to admit that the world changes. After 20 years
or so of trusting the company I engaged to connect me to the Internet,
I've pinched my nose between finger and thumb, taken a deep breath, and
jumped overboard. Where once there were honest men, now we find company
pawns and chancers, who missed customer service 101 in their new
employees' induction courses.
--
Paul
who's only still reading demon.service because he's still waiting for a refund
of unused service charges from Vodafone

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

[Roy Brown]

In message <HrmsQfmd...@wolff.co.uk>, Paul Wolff
<boun...@two.wolff.co.uk> writing at 00:17:49 in his/her local time
opines:-

Whatever makes you think that Evadaphone even deliver that module?

(Waves to Wm)
--
Roy Brown 'Have nothing in your houses that you do not know to be
Kelmscott Ltd useful, or believe to be beautiful' William Morris

[Wm]

On 29/10/2016 09:33, Roy Brown wrote:
> In message <HrmsQfmd...@wolff.co.uk>, Paul Wolff
> <boun...@two.wolff.co.uk> writing at 00:17:49 in his/her local time
> opines:-
>> On Fri, 28 Oct 2016, Wm <wm_o...@yahoo.co.uk> posted:

>>> I'm finding Mr Peter Hill's suggestions more persuasive than most about
>>> this mess.
>>>
>> If you're the cynical Tarrcity Wm, nice to know that old ghosts still
>> haunt demonland.

I'm here until I make a decision about landline (currently BT) *and*
broadband.

>> We have to admit that the world changes. After 20
>> years or so of trusting the company I engaged to connect me to the
>> Internet, I've pinched my nose between finger and thumb, taken a deep
>> breath, and jumped overboard.

As you say, it's been 20 years with each so a month of thunking isn't
going to make a difference.

>> Where once there were honest men, now we
>> find company pawns and chancers, who missed customer service 101 in
>> their new employees' induction courses.
>
> Whatever makes you think that Evadaphone even deliver that module?

I was relatively unaffected by the latest crap as I've had my own
domains for a while, more a general, sigh, disappointed-face.

> (Waves to Wm)

Waves back (as they say on the radio) to everyone that knows me.

P.S. don't use TP any more as I'm on 64bit and I've become more relaxed
about standards on usenet, etc due to futility of complaint :)

--
Wm

[kennedy...@gmail.com]

On Thursday, October 20, 2016 at 12:34:18 PM UTC+1, kennedym...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Goodbye Demon, after more than 20 years. :-(

Not so fast...

I just checked my bank account and Vodafoe have taken their full monthly Direct Debit, just as I expected the crack accounts department would do! My Broadband account ran from 16th of one month to 15th of the next. As Vodafoe closed the account on 19th I expected to owe them for 4 days use, not a whole month - especially as their own confirmation letter stated there would be no early closure charges.

In fairness, having just called them, they immediately admitted the error and said they will refund money to my account "in the next 20-30 days"! It will be interesting to see how long it actually takes.

I had kept the Direct Debit mandate open as I expected Vodafoe to bill me and didn't want risk them initiating debt recovery for about £2, however now it is closed to prevent them taking any further charges.

[Tony]

On 01/11/2016 18:28, Fred wrote:
> Don't you need to keep the DD open so they can refund?

Might be safer to give them bank account details so that they can refund
by BACS, as happened in my case.

--
Tony

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

That's what I did. Now waiting to see how long they take.

[Graeme Wall]

Took around 6 weeks in my case IIRC.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

[bert]

In article <387450d...@fred.ypical-daemon.co.uk>, Fred
<fred@[127.0.0.1]> writes
>In message <ac16661e-7e12-43d0...@googlegroups.com>

>> me and didn't want risk them initiating debt recovery for about Ł2,

>> however now it is closed to prevent them taking any further charges.
>

>Don't you need to keep the DD open so they can refund?
>

>I'm probably wrong.
You probably are.
A DD authorises them to take money FROM your account. No-one needs any
authorisation from you to put money INTO your account.

--
Bert

[Invalid]

In message <pWKx44LR...@m1.co>, bert <be...@cghq.go.uk> writes

There was a rather good Chloe & Co cartoon in the Daily Mail earlier
this week

Chloe - on Phone
"Hi I need to pay my bill. What? You want my password"
"Why do you need my password? Would a fraudster phone to pay my bill?"
"And even if they did why wouldn't you let them?"

Well I thought it funny!!




--
Invalid

[Wm]

On 04/11/2016 18:30, Invalid wrote:

> There was a rather good Chloe & Co cartoon in the Daily Mail earlier
> this week
>
> Chloe - on Phone
> "Hi I need to pay my bill. What? You want my password"
> "Why do you need my password? Would a fraudster phone to pay my bill?"
> "And even if they did why wouldn't you let them?"
>
> Well I thought it funny!!

I find people reading the Daily Mail funny.

--
Wm

[kennedym...@gmail.com]

Refund has appeared in my bank account 3 weeks after reporting the excess DD. Hopefully its the last I'll hear of Vodafoe.