How I Sued China Mobile and Won Over Broadband Speed Throttling

Initial Problem & Operator Response

• ⚠️ The speaker's elderly parents experienced severe broadband throttling by China Mobile, preventing basic communication like WeChat messages.
• 💬 When questioned, China Mobile accused the parents of "violating" rules and demanded they sign a "confession" to restore service, without any proper investigation.
• 📞 Attempts to resolve the issue through 10086 customer service were unsuccessful, with internal staff seemingly deflecting responsibility.

Suing China Mobile

• ⚖️ Frustrated by the lack of resolution and the operator's tactics, the speaker filed a lawsuit against China Mobile and ultimately won.
• 🏛️ During the first court hearing, China Mobile's legal team presented a lengthy, jargon-filled defense focusing on technical terms like PCDN and company rules, rather than law or contract.
• 🗓️ A key claim by China Mobile was that they had published a speed limit announcement on March 6th, which the speaker had not seen.

Courtroom Confrontation

• 📊 The speaker presented speed test records showing 0.6 Mbps upload, serving as undeniable evidence of throttling.
• 💬 Further evidence included chat logs where a repair technician explicitly admitted to limiting the speed.
• 🎧 A recording of a 10086 call contradicted China Mobile's lawyer, as the customer service representative never mentioned a March 6th announcement, leading the speaker to accuse them of misrepresentation.

Uncovering Evidence Manipulation

• 🔍 The speaker discovered that China Mobile had submitted a printed announcement where the release date was precisely covered by their official company seal.
• 📅 The original electronic version of the announcement revealed its true release date was March 28th, not March 6th as claimed.
• 🚨 This meant China Mobile had throttled service on March 6th but only issued the announcement 22 days later, attempting to conceal this "procedural violation" by obscuring the date on their court evidence.

Victory and Implications

• ✅ The speaker refused to sign the "confession" document, asserting that they would not admit to a violation they did not commit.
• 🏆 The victory demonstrated that legal action can succeed against large corporations when ordinary people are persistent and challenge their tactics.
• ⏭️ The speaker hinted at more "outrageous" evidence to be revealed, involving China Mobile potentially forging a signature in a future video.