BT fined

[#1]

BT has been hit with a record fine from telecom's regulator Ofcom £42m

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39401577

[#2]

So that's another line rental increase in the near future then...

[#3]

In theory it shouldn't, as the money is to be paid to the ISP as the original compensation was scaled back. So in theory its money they should have paid in the first place. But hey, any excuse I guess.

[#4]

The significant words in the detail of the fine is that it is for the failure to provide service to business users. No concern for us mere residential users then, or maybe there will be another fine to come to reflect to failings as regards the individual given that BT have set aside £300 million to settle the issue.

[#5]

As a BT shareholder I'm really the onanistic executive management of BT have such poor Compliance with the regulations that they are repeatedly fined by the regulator thereby wasting shareholder's money. The fines were totally avoidable and should be offset against senior executive pay/bonus.

As a business user of Broadband I'm annoyed with BT abusing its monopoly position to disadvantage fair access by its competitors.

[#6]

So... If they have set aside 300 million pounds.. they must know they are guilty.. and because they already have that money... (?)  there should be no increase in line rental.... ( ha ha hah )   - oops.. forgot, they need to recoup that money from somewhere

[#7]

@AlaricAdair  so... as a BT sharelholder.... what are you going to do about it.... except  moan about your disgust with them on PlusNet forum ?

Surely.. other Shareholders feel the same.. or similar to you... and you, and them...should be hammering away at the management to get something done about the abysmal service they are giving to ALL customers... not just business..

[#8]

---

shutter wrote:

@AlaricAdair  so... as a BT sharelholder.... what are you going to do about it.... except  moan about your disgust with them on PlusNet forum ?

I take your point; in fact the reason why I bought the shares was to enable me to attend the BT Annual General Meeting and raise "points for clarification" with the Chairman. Unfortunately last year my daughter inconsiderately produced a grandson on that day. I'll be going to go to the AGM this year.  Not wishing to embarrass him I'll send him a week's notice of the questions.  As an investment BT shares are not spectacular value.

So you can see I'm not one of those people who moans only on the PN forum.

[#9]

Commented on this earlier as well on another forum but just to repeat here, fine to fine BT, after all they really have screwed this one up but how about some compensation to us end user customers rather than third party suppliers.

Sorry, I just don't get it..... neither am I going to by the look of things. 

Moderator's note by Adie (Dvorak) removed html tags that were causing issues. 

[#10]

It's good to know that BT are so awash with profits they have 300 mill just laying around that they can "set aside".

[#11]

@billnotben  Isn't there a requirement for a Plc to maintain a reserve fund of some sort?  Also the banks did 'save up' when the PPI 'scandal' hit the headlines, so as not to be bankrupted when the claims started coming in; perhaps BT were expecting something like this and prepared for it.

[#12]

@shutter

Not so sure the little man shareholder 'in it for profit and investment' is going to make much of a difference. Just small fry looking out for themselves in a pond full of pike.

Make your money maybe but have a voice? It's not even going to be a squeak. 

[#13]

From the Daily Telegraph this morning in relation to the issues leading to the fine:

Most of the sharp practice took place under former Openreach chief executive Liv Garfield, who is now running Severn Trent. It continued under her successor Joe Garner, who is now in charge of Nationwide Building Society.

also:

The bulk of the responsibility must lie with Patterson and the BT board....

[#14]

So basically those in charge who are responsible for the sharp practice get off free and in some cases move to a better job whilst leaving the company to pick up the fine.

There should be a register of directors who have made a bodge of things in the past and anyone on that register prevented by law from holding a senior post again.

There are those in various professions who are barred from working in that particular profession if they are guilty of various misdemeanours so why not directors of any public or private company ?

[#15]

---

gleneagles wrote:

so why not directors of any public or private company ?

---

Cos generally, they have the lawyers to to challenge such things and drag everything through the courts and end up winning against the lawmakers, that's how business works, be a pain and get their way...