BT line repair strategy

My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3 years I've
had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is now
playing up.

The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is only
paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!

I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective repair is
preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's exchange
based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year old
ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also managed
to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who is
denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid unless
the problem is fixed!

My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3 days).
BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely low -
less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.

Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin bloody
Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?

Has anyone else had similar problems?

Gareth.

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:07 -0000, "Gareth" <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3 years I've
>had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
>chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is now
>playing up.
>
>The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
>according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
>self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is only
>paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!
>
>I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
>problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective repair is
>preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's exchange
>based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
>exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year old
>ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also managed
>to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who is
>denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid unless
>the problem is fixed!
>
>My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
>2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3 days).
>BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely low -
>less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.
>
>Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin bloody
>Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?
>
>Has anyone else had similar problems?
>
>Gareth.
>

Sounds like you've got DIG cable .... to replace that with a new duct
and new cable BT will be charged something like £80 per metre by their
contractors. With your own estimate of 20metres that would a £1600
charge to replace a single working circuit ....... (assuming that it
is only your house that is fed by this DIG cable).

Can't see BT spending that amount to be honest ... if your cable were
to provide service to other properties then it might be different.

Also (consider this in the equation) .. BT have a £1000 threshold for
providing new service (ie £1000 is the maximum spend to provide a
customer with a new telephone service) - so again I can't see them
spending £1600 on a fault.

If you were to lay the duct for them, I'm sure they would provide the
cable & drawrope The actual jointing process wouldn't take very
long ...

Who knows though ...

Cheers

Jim!

"Jim!" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:07 -0000, "Gareth" <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3 years
>>I've
>>had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
>>chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is now
>>playing up.
>>
>>The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
>>according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
>>self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is
>>only
>>paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!
>>
>>I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
>>problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective repair is
>>preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's exchange
>>based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
>>exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year old
>>ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also
>>managed
>>to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who is
>>denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid
>>unless
>>the problem is fixed!
>>
>>My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
>>2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3 days).
>>BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely low -
>>less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.
>>
>>Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin bloody
>>Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?
>>
>>Has anyone else had similar problems?
>>
>>Gareth.
>>
>
> Sounds like you've got DIG cable .... to replace that with a new duct
> and new cable BT will be charged something like £80 per metre by their
> contractors. With your own estimate of 20metres that would a £1600
> charge to replace a single working circuit ....... (assuming that it
> is only your house that is fed by this DIG cable).
>
> Can't see BT spending that amount to be honest ... if your cable were
> to provide service to other properties then it might be different.
>
> Also (consider this in the equation) .. BT have a £1000 threshold for
> providing new service (ie £1000 is the maximum spend to provide a
> customer with a new telephone service) - so again I can't see them
> spending £1600 on a fault.
>
> If you were to lay the duct for them, I'm sure they would provide the
> cable & drawrope The actual jointing process wouldn't take very
> long ...
>
> Who knows though ...
>
> Cheers
>
> Jim!

This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a poor
second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses for its
directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to the business.

Regards.

Bill Ridgeway

In article <eqn158$o25$(E-Mail Removed)>, Bill Ridgeway
<(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
>customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a poor
>second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses for its
>directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to the
>business.

BT are a disgrace, my dad is having problems with his line, nothing to
do with computers, voice only, it's been reported 4 times since the
middle of January the last time on Thursday, pleas that as an 89 year
old he relies on his phone haven't helped as it's still listed as under
investigation today.

Mike

--
Michael Swift We do not regard Englishmen as foreigners.
Kirkheaton We look on them only as rather mad Norwegians.
Yorkshire Halvard Lange

On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:10:05 -0000, "Bill Ridgeway"
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>"Jim!" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>news:(E-Mail Removed).. .
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:07 -0000, "Gareth" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3 years
>>>I've
>>>had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
>>>chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is now
>>>playing up.
>>>
>>>The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
>>>according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
>>>self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is
>>>only
>>>paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!
>>>
>>>I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
>>>problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective repair is
>>>preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's exchange
>>>based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
>>>exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year old
>>>ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also
>>>managed
>>>to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who is
>>>denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid
>>>unless
>>>the problem is fixed!
>>>
>>>My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
>>>2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3 days).
>>>BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely low -
>>>less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.
>>>
>>>Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin bloody
>>>Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?
>>>
>>>Has anyone else had similar problems?
>>>
>>>Gareth.
>>>
>>
>> Sounds like you've got DIG cable .... to replace that with a new duct
>> and new cable BT will be charged something like £80 per metre by their
>> contractors. With your own estimate of 20metres that would a £1600
>> charge to replace a single working circuit ....... (assuming that it
>> is only your house that is fed by this DIG cable).
>>
>> Can't see BT spending that amount to be honest ... if your cable were
>> to provide service to other properties then it might be different.
>>
>> Also (consider this in the equation) .. BT have a £1000 threshold for
>> providing new service (ie £1000 is the maximum spend to provide a
>> customer with a new telephone service) - so again I can't see them
>> spending £1600 on a fault.
>>
>> If you were to lay the duct for them, I'm sure they would provide the
>> cable & drawrope The actual jointing process wouldn't take very
>> long ...
>>
>> Who knows though ...
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Jim!
>
>This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
>customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a poor
>second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses for its
>directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to the business.

Capitalism and The Market, mate!
Ya can't beat it.

On 11-Feb-2007, Fred <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> >>>My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
> >>>2.5Mb max

Are they on the same cable?
If so it has at least one good pair.
What's the phone quality like?

Michael Swift wrote:
> In article <eqn158$o25$(E-Mail Removed)>, Bill Ridgeway
> <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>> This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
>> customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a
>> poor second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses
>> for its directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to
>> the business.
>
> BT are a disgrace, my dad is having problems with his line, nothing to
> do with computers, voice only, it's been reported 4 times since the
> middle of January the last time on Thursday, pleas that as an 89 year
> old he relies on his phone haven't helped as it's still listed as
> under investigation today.
>
> Mike

Get the local paper involved - especially if they have a reporter who
investigates this sort of thing and files a weekly column on consumer
affairs - or if you live in Wales, contact a TV program called the Ferret at
HTV Wales

Fred wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:10:05 -0000, "Bill Ridgeway"
> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> "Jim!" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:07 -0000, "Gareth" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3 years
>>>> I've
>>>> had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
>>>> chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is
>>>> now
>>>> playing up.
>>>>
>>>> The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
>>>> according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
>>>> self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is
>>>> only
>>>> paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!
>>>>
>>>> I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
>>>> problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective repair
>>>> is
>>>> preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's
>>>> exchange
>>>> based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
>>>> exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year
>>>> old
>>>> ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also
>>>> managed
>>>> to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who is
>>>> denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid
>>>> unless
>>>> the problem is fixed!
>>>>
>>>> My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to obtain
>>>> 2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3
>>>> days).
>>>> BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely
>>>> low -
>>>> less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.
>>>>
>>>> Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin bloody
>>>> Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?
>>>>
>>>> Has anyone else had similar problems?
>>>>
>>>> Gareth.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sounds like you've got DIG cable .... to replace that with a new duct
>>> and new cable BT will be charged something like £80 per metre by their
>>> contractors. With your own estimate of 20metres that would a £1600
>>> charge to replace a single working circuit ....... (assuming that it
>>> is only your house that is fed by this DIG cable).
>>>
>>> Can't see BT spending that amount to be honest ... if your cable were
>>> to provide service to other properties then it might be different.
>>>
>>> Also (consider this in the equation) .. BT have a £1000 threshold for
>>> providing new service (ie £1000 is the maximum spend to provide a
>>> customer with a new telephone service) - so again I can't see them
>>> spending £1600 on a fault.
>>>
>>> If you were to lay the duct for them, I'm sure they would provide the
>>> cable & drawrope The actual jointing process wouldn't take very
>>> long ...
>>>
>>> Who knows though ...
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Jim!
>>
>> This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
>> customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a poor
>> second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses for its
>> directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to the business.
>
> Capitalism and The Market, mate!
> Ya can't beat it.

Especially since it was so badly run under public ownership.

Gaz

"Gaz" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Fred wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 12:10:05 -0000, "Bill Ridgeway"
>> <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>> "Jim!" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>> news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>>> On Sun, 11 Feb 2007 08:08:07 -0000, "Gareth" <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My ductless underground cable has been causing problems for the 3
>>>>> years
>>>>> I've
>>>>> had it. There's a physical fault with the underground cable but BT has
>>>>> chosen to swap pairs instead of fixing the problem - the other pair is
>>>>> now
>>>>> playing up.
>>>>>
>>>>> The second pair was recently fixed - almost inevitably a temporary fix
>>>>> according to the engineer. The engineer explained to me that he is a
>>>>> self-employed contractor who is used by BT to fix line problems and is
>>>>> only
>>>>> paid if the problem does not reoccur within 1 month of being repaired!
>>>>>
>>>>> I think there's something very wrong with BT's approach to addressing
>>>>> problems with DSL connections - the cheapest and least effective
>>>>> repair is
>>>>> preferred over the most effective repair. ADSL - or at least BT's
>>>>> exchange
>>>>> based implementation of it - depends upon good quality lines to the
>>>>> exchange. Yet there is no desire to replace 20 metres or so of 30 year
>>>>> old
>>>>> ductless copper wire which is clearly causing a problem. BT has also
>>>>> managed
>>>>> to shunt responsibility for fixing the problem on to an engineer who
>>>>> is
>>>>> denied the ability to authorise the needed work but is also not paid
>>>>> unless
>>>>> the problem is fixed!
>>>>>
>>>>> My neighbours enjoy rock solid 6Mb+ connections yet I am luck to
>>>>> obtain
>>>>> 2.5Mb max (and only then after line problems have stabilised for 3
>>>>> days).
>>>>> BT's threshold for responding to service speed problems is obscenely
>>>>> low -
>>>>> less than dual bonded ISDN iirc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Will I have to embrace Satan's yeast infection (NTL - now Virgin
>>>>> bloody
>>>>> Media) in order to obtain the promise of a decent service?
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone else had similar problems?
>>>>>
>>>>> Gareth.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like you've got DIG cable .... to replace that with a new duct
>>>> and new cable BT will be charged something like £80 per metre by their
>>>> contractors. With your own estimate of 20metres that would a £1600
>>>> charge to replace a single working circuit ....... (assuming that it
>>>> is only your house that is fed by this DIG cable).
>>>>
>>>> Can't see BT spending that amount to be honest ... if your cable were
>>>> to provide service to other properties then it might be different.
>>>>
>>>> Also (consider this in the equation) .. BT have a £1000 threshold for
>>>> providing new service (ie £1000 is the maximum spend to provide a
>>>> customer with a new telephone service) - so again I can't see them
>>>> spending £1600 on a fault.
>>>>
>>>> If you were to lay the duct for them, I'm sure they would provide the
>>>> cable & drawrope The actual jointing process wouldn't take very
>>>> long ...
>>>>
>>>> Who knows though ...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>>
>>>> Jim!
>>>
>>> This seems to come within the now widely re-defined use of the phrase
>>> customer service. Provision of a service to a customer now comes a poor
>>> second to making money for its shareholders and large bonuses for its
>>> directors - irrespective of benefits (if any) they bring to the
>>> business.
>>
>> Capitalism and The Market, mate!
>> Ya can't beat it.
>
> Especially since it was so badly run under public ownership.

It wasn't badly run - it was run as a public service.

The copper line infrastructure is still the same one being used today for
residential and most business customers (more or less). An UK private
business wouldn't be capable, in terms of short term shareholder interest,
of creating such an impressive infrastructure. Maybe in Japan.

The sad thing is that in the 21st century ADSL/DSL broadband availability in
the UK depends upon the quality of 40 year old plus copper cable wiring and
the consequent accident of geography. The privately owned BT has shown no
willingness, in the interests of profit, to develop a decent (by west
European standards) residential fixed line data network. Shit, it isn't even
possible to have ISDN and DSL on the same line in the UK. It's an expensive
joke.

Gareth.