cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

BT being underhand?

Community Veteran
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 4
Registered: 14-08-2007

BT being underhand?

My sister in law tried to sign up with plus net (she would have been my first referreal)

However, she had a DACS on the line (because before they bought the house, their (or a neighbors) line had failed, and the dacs was installed to allow the two houses to share the single line back to the exchange.

BT were called out a number of times to have the dacs removed, and a new line fitted (which should have been done in the first place). However, after a few weeks, BT finally said it would be too expensive to do, and therefore she would not be able to have broadband.

Plusnet reported to her that BT would not install ADSL on her line. She called BT and was told there was nothing she could do.

On a whim, and without much hope, she called BT Broadband, and asked to sign up. Within a couple of weeks, the dacs was removed, and she was signed up to a one year contract with BT.

This seems anti competitive to me - BT (presumably wholesale) refuse to remove the dacs for plusnet, but will do it for BT retail.

Is this even legal?
17 REPLIES
glloyd
Rising Star
Posts: 1,652
Thanks: 20
Fixes: 1
Registered: 06-04-2007

Re: BT being underhand?

If you can prove this has happend then report it to OFCOM as it is indeed illegal.

]
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,469
Registered: 30-07-2007

BT being underhand?

No it is not legal. BT should not give preferential treatment to BT Retail (who supply ADSL) and this appears to have been the case here. If BT state they cannot remove the equipment for octs reasons, this should be the same for any ISP requesting ADSL on the line.

I guess the next Q is what do you intend to do knowing that fact as OFCOM is who this needs to be reported to.
N/A

BT being underhand?

Indeed. There are times that BT deem it too expensive to change wiring in situations like this. But if they do so, the situation should be the same for all ISP's.

It's possibly more down to the inefficiencies and general disorganisation within BT than anything underhand, but it is still wrong and should be reported.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 4
Registered: 14-08-2007

BT being underhand?

Quote


I guess the next Q is what do you intend to do knowing that fact as OFCOM is who this needs to be reported to.


Unfortunately there is not much I can do. She is just happy to have broadband now. She accepts (even states) how ridiculous it is - but there is nothing in it for her now to take it up with anybody.

Obviously if plusnet wanted to take it up - presumably they have the proof that BT refused the change for them, and presumably it is a matter of record that the line is now ADSL enabled.
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,469
Registered: 30-07-2007

BT being underhand?

This kind of action does need to be reported as BT retail should not get away with it - just think if this is happening to say 10 people every day, that soon adds up to a lot of revenue for BT retail.

So if PN do want to look into this I'm sure a PN rep will be in touch.
Plusnet Staff
Plusnet Staff
Posts: 12,169
Thanks: 18
Fixes: 1
Registered: 04-04-2007

BT being underhand?

Hi,

I would like to look into this in more detail because as others have said this shouldn't be allowed to happen (unless your sister in law signed up with us 3 or 4 years ago when the cost limits were lower). If you want to PM me her username I'll do some digging.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 4
Registered: 14-08-2007

BT being underhand?

She never got a user name, because she was never signed up (I don't think) as the dacs was never removed from the line.

This has all happened in the last couple of months. I can probably give you her phone number, but I'll have to check with her first that she doesn't mind me supplying it.

Cheers.
N/A

BT being underhand?

Go Dave Smiley Have fun investigating a possible BT faux-pas instead of us hassling you about PlusNet ones Wink

Hopefully collinet can remember or get his sister to remember the username they used and the info is still around on PlusNet's servers (subject to data protection laws, yadadada).

edit: collinet, yerp, it's very important to get everything above board and okayed by your sis else any possible complaint to OFCOM about BT could fall through. With a name/number PlusNet should be able to investigate, but it may be best pm'ing Dave and liaising with him directly about the best way to approach this.
N/A

BT being underhand?

On the face of it you seem to have a prime example of double standards being applied. It would be a shame not to pin BT down on this one.

I sincerely hope you triumph...
N/A

BT being underhand?

Oooh the drama! Tongue
Community Veteran
Posts: 14,469
Registered: 30-07-2007

BT being underhand?

Quote
She never got a user name, because she was never signed up (I don't think) as the dacs was never removed from the line.


An order cannot be placed until you are signed up to PlusNet so she must have gone through the sign-up process, selected a username and paid her initial activation fees (unless they were deferred) which would have been refunded on the failure to get ADSL.
Community Veteran
Posts: 1,124
Thanks: 4
Registered: 14-08-2007

BT being underhand?

I'll see what I can find out.
N/A

BT being underhand?

keep this one updated, the company i work for tried to get adsl on one of their lines, THROUGH BT!! bt however like this have decided to say no due to dacs, they deem it too expensive to sort out, so if this is indeed illegal, I think they would find it very interesting news
Community Veteran
Posts: 26,357
Thanks: 607
Fixes: 8
Registered: 10-04-2007

BT being underhand?

@robynfali

I wonder what would happen if they ordered a new line. Are BT allowed to provide new lines by using DACS?
jelv (a.k.a Spoon Whittler)
   Why I have left Plusnet (warning: long post!)   
Broadband: Andrews & Arnold Home::1 (FTTC 80/20)
Line rental: Pulse 8 Home Line Rental (£13/month)
Mobile: iD mobile (£4/month)