BT connection charge

When we transferred to broadband about 14 months ago BT charged £75 to
enable the line, no matter which ISP you went to (and we had to pay to have
our ISDN taken away as well). Looking around for a friend who wants to go
on broadband I can find no mention of this, and Wanadoo for instance has
'free connection' on their broadband details.
Does anyone know if the BT connection charge still applies?
Thanks,
Barbara

In article <cvgerb$vde$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)ess
says...
> When we transferred to broadband about 14 months ago BT charged £75 to
> enable the line, no matter which ISP you went to (and we had to pay to have
> our ISDN taken away as well). Looking around for a friend who wants to go
> on broadband I can find no mention of this, and Wanadoo for instance has
> 'free connection' on their broadband details.
> Does anyone know if the BT connection charge still applies?
> Thanks,
> Barbara
>
>
>

Yes.. BT pull a very shrewed move here. There is no charge to have your
ISDN line disconnected however there is a charge to have the analogue
line reconnected. Hence your friend will stay pay the same charges as
you despite the free ADSL connection charge.

BTW there is little point in complaining to OFTEL as I got a very soft
response from them over this. Another government agency costing us
millions and doing sod all for the people it is supposed to serve.


--
Strawberry

Drop trousers to reply.

"Sean McConkey" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed) t...
> In article <cvgerb$vde$(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed)ess
> says...
> > When we transferred to broadband about 14 months ago BT charged £75 to
> > enable the line, no matter which ISP you went to (and we had to pay to
have
> > our ISDN taken away as well). Looking around for a friend who wants to
go
> > on broadband I can find no mention of this, and Wanadoo for instance has
> > 'free connection' on their broadband details.
> > Does anyone know if the BT connection charge still applies?
> > Thanks,
> > Barbara
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes.. BT pull a very shrewed move here. There is no charge to have your
> ISDN line disconnected however there is a charge to have the analogue
> line reconnected. Hence your friend will stay pay the same charges as
> you despite the free ADSL connection charge.
>
> BTW there is little point in complaining to OFTEL as I got a very soft
> response from them over this. Another government agency costing us
> millions and doing sod all for the people it is supposed to serve.
>
>
> --
> Strawberry
>
> Drop trousers to reply.

Sean,
Thanks for your quick reply. I am still confused though, is there still a
charge to switch from analogue to broadband?
Barbara

"Barbara Wiseman" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:cvgg3l$38o$(E-Mail Removed)...

> Thanks for your quick reply. I am still confused though, is there still a
> charge to switch from analogue to broadband?
> Barbara

In simplest terms, the BT reconnection charge is for the line. When Wanadoo
say free connection, that is for the broadband service only, not the line
itself. You cannot have a broadband service without an active telephone
service.
When getting broadband, you do not move from an analogue line as such, its
more like a plugin extra to your existing analogue line.

On Tue, 22 Feb 2005 23:44:00 -0000, "Barbara Wiseman"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Thanks for your quick reply. I am still confused though, is there still a
>charge to switch from analogue to broadband?

Analogue to ADSL is a different charge to ISDN to ADSL. The later
(as BT chooses not to provide ADSL over ISDN, even though they can)
usually involves physical changes to the ISDN2e/HH/BH faceplates in
your premises in addition to changes to your line at the exchange. As
it's BT, they charge for this, even though it would not be needed if
their policy makers were competent/conscious/sentient...

For someone with an analogue line, they should be able to simply
apply for ADSL from any supplier. BT will always charge the supplier
for the ADSL installation (50GBP+vat at wholesale rates for a new
install IIRC). However, some suppliers waive this charge and enforce a
minimum term contract instead, usually 12 months, to recover their
costs. You still pay for it in higher rental, or lower service, you
just don't see it as an initial cost on your bill. It can be a false
economy.

If you/they are not planning on moving house and you/they pick a
good supplier, this should not be a problem. However, if you/they are
planning to move, or you/they pick a bad supplier, it can be cheaper
to pay the fee and obtain service from an ISP with a 1 month rolling
contract.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
- Stuart Millington ALL HTML e-mail rejected -
- mailto(E-Mail Removed) http://w3.z-add.co.uk/ -
begin OE is broken read MS knowledgebase Q265230

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:28:28 -0000, "Beck"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>itself. You cannot have a broadband service without an active telephone
>service.

Although, there is talk of this. But may be I live in hope when it
comes to BT and OFTE^H^HCOM ;-)

>When getting broadband, you do not move from an analogue line as such, its
>more like a plugin extra to your existing analogue line.

When it should be a stand alone service where you can have xDSL
with or without either POTS/ISDN at your choice not BT's

--
------------------------------------------------------------------
- Stuart Millington ALL HTML e-mail rejected -
- mailto(E-Mail Removed) http://w3.z-add.co.uk/ -
begin OE is broken read MS knowledgebase Q265230

"Stuart Millington" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 00:28:28 -0000, "Beck"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>itself. You cannot have a broadband service without an active telephone
>>service.
>
> Although, there is talk of this. But may be I live in hope when it
> comes to BT and OFTE^H^HCOM ;-)
>
>>When getting broadband, you do not move from an analogue line as such, its
>>more like a plugin extra to your existing analogue line.
>
> When it should be a stand alone service where you can have xDSL
> with or without either POTS/ISDN at your choice not BT's

I agree, not everyone wants a telephone service and it should be a
standalone product.

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:17:41 UTC, "Beck"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> agree, not everyone wants a telephone service and it should be a
> standalone product.

But of course this would result only in a very small reduction in
cost...the physical plant (line, line maintenance, exchange equipment)
still has to be paid for. A small component of line rental is the
subsidy on calls, but most of it is recurrent costs to BT.

"Bob Eager" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:176uZD2KcidF-pn2-(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 10:17:41 UTC, "Beck"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> agree, not everyone wants a telephone service and it should be a
>> standalone product.
>
> But of course this would result only in a very small reduction in
> cost...the physical plant (line, line maintenance, exchange equipment)
> still has to be paid for. A small component of line rental is the
> subsidy on calls, but most of it is recurrent costs to BT.

In which case it shoud be far cheaper to rent a combined phone-line and ADSL
connection from BT than it is to use a separate ADSL supplier which is not
the case at present.

(kim)

In message <(E-Mail Removed)>
"kim" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> "Bob Eager" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:176uZD2KcidF-pn2-(E-Mail Removed)...

> >> ... not everyone wants a telephone service and it should be a
> >> standalone product.
> >
> > But of course this would result only in a very small reduction in
> > cost...the physical plant (line, line maintenance, exchange equipment)
> > still has to be paid for. A small component of line rental is the
> > subsidy on calls, but most of it is recurrent costs to BT.

> In which case it shoud be far cheaper to rent a combined phone-line
> and ADSL connection from BT than it is to use a separate ADSL supplier
> which is not the case at present.

I don't follow the logic(?) in that, or even recognise the starting point.

Whether the 'ADSL supplier' (ISP) is BT or someone else, you need, and
so have to pay for, three distinct elements :-
- a 'voice' line, including a bit of the exchange serving it (plus the
cost of any voice/fax calls you make): no such line, nothing to carry
*any* service.
- the stuff at the exchange (DSLAM, etc) to piggy-back 'broadband' onto
the voice-line, and connect to BT's 'broadband network' linked to
any/all ISPs
- The service from your ISP: its computers, storage, staff, etc., and
above all 'upstream bandwidth', i.e. capacity to send/receive data
'over the Internet'.

BT don't sell the second of these directly to end users, only
'wholesale' to ISPs: the charge is therefore included, with the third,
in the ISPs' charges to their customers.
Whether or not any particular ISP is a bit of BT is irrelevant (BT
aren't even allowed to treat their own more favourably): whatever the
'true' make-up of line-rental/ADSL-connection costs, one wouln't
therefore expect to see significantly different charges between BT and
other 'ADSL providers'.


Bob's statement is in fact correct (except that there isn't any element
of call-cost subsidy in the line-rental: if anything, call-costs still
subsidise line-rental)

--
Peter Duck <(E-Mail Removed)>