Activation

[#1]

Can you please just post the router stats here. This is FTTC and the 10 day training period does not apply.

[#2]

1. Product name:    Plusnet Hub

3. Firmware version:    Software version 4.7.5.1.83.8.263 Last updated Unknown
4. Board version:    Plusnet Hub One
5. DSL uptime:    1 days, 08:57:11
6. Data rate:    6027 / 28457
7. Maximum data rate:    6027 / 28726
8. Noise margin:    6.0 / 6.1
9. Line attenuation:    16.9 / 17.4
10. Signal attenuation:    16.9 / 14.5
11. Data sent/received:    1.0 GB / 8.1 GB

23. Modulation:    G.993.2 Annex B
24. Software variant:    AA
25. Boot loader:    1.0.0

[#3]

I would follow the standard faults process here. The SNRM is 6dB but the speed is muchlower than the estimate so I would suspect a line fault or inaccurate speed estimate from BT Open reach. No amount of waiting is likely to induce the DLM to go much faster.

Is there noise on the line? Dial 17070 option 2.

Is the router in the master socket using only the supplied modem cable?

Are there any telephone extensions?

[#4]

Thanks @Townman . I've started the faults process.

* The quiet line test is good (pretty much silent).

* The router is connected to the master socket (it's an old style one without the faceplate) via the supplied micro-filter. I'm not using the supplied cable at the moment as the router is right next to the socket and I have a much shorter, good quality cable already.

* There are no extensions

I've also found my cabinet on GM and it's approximately 300m away (following the streets) and ~250m as the crow flies.

[#5]

Hi @ryansuchocki,

I'm sorry to hear that you've been experiencing issues with the speeds. As this doesn't seem to have improved over the last couple of days, I've run a line test and we can see the speeds are lower than we would expect, though I'm afraid that we're unable to detect a definitive reason for this. For the sake of troubleshooting, would you be able to switch our the microfilter and try using the supplied cable to see if this inspires any improvement to the speeds? If so, please let us know how this goes and if the problem persist we'll be happy to investigate further.

[#6]

@ryansuchocki 

Oh dear - old socket could mean old wiring not fit for VDSL.

Take a look here and try to identify your socket. ::. Kitz - BT Phone Sockets .::

If you are up to it, unscrew the face plate and take a look at the wiring behind it.

What colours are the wires / which pins do they connect to?  A photo would be helpful.

Trace the path of the wire into you house - does it pass through any junction boxes?  What kind of wire is it - round or a figure of 8 wire?

[#7]

@TheMightyAJ OK, I have now switched to the supplied RJ11 cable and there was no immediate difference in speed. I've also disconnected the (wired) telephone just in case that was affecting things.

@Townman it looks like my "master socket" is an "LJ2/2A", which kitz suggests is a "PABX master" (bit odd). It appears to have the capacitor but not any other components. Terminals 2 and 5 are fed from A and B in a BT80A junction. From there, a grey figure-8 dropwire goes out of the window frame and heads off somewhere (not sure where yet).

[#8]

---

@ryansuchocki wrote:

Terminals 2 and 5 are fed from A and B in a BT80A junction. From there, a grey figure-8 dropwire goes out of the window frame and heads off somewhere (not sure where yet).

---

@TheMightyAJ 

Alex, to get the best out of VDSL, does the drop wire need to be a twisted pair?

[#9]

Thanks for confirming this @ryansuchocki. Interestingly, upon re-running the test on your line in the last few minutes, we're now detecting an external phone fault, which could well be the cause of the low speeds. I've raised this to our suppliers to investigate further and I've logged this on the open fault ticket on your account, with some further details. This can be viewed here.

@Townman, generally speaking, a twisted pair will have less chance for interference to occur, though this isn't always indicative that faults will affect the service more often if a twisted pair isn't a part of the installation.

[#10]

@TheMightyAJ 

Alex,

Thank you for the review of this issue - this is better than waiting 10 days for something unlikely to change without intervention.

That's "Doing you proud!".

[#11]

@ryansuchocki 

There is something squiffy with your line, here are my stats...

Data rate:6.414 Mbps / 52.884 Mbps

Maximum data rate:6.421 Mbps / 52.925 Mbps

Noise margin:6.2 / 6.2

Line attenuation:9.2 / 20.0

Signal attenuation:9.2 / 25.7

My attenuation figures are somewhat worse than yours, yet my speed is nearly double yours.  You need to see what the engineer finds.  By they sounds of things, this is thought to be an external issue so you might not get a visit.  If you do, ask about the phone socket and the drop wire.

Keep an eye on the stats and look for a disconnection / change in speed.  Would be useful if you can report back here if this fixes the problem for you ... I am sure that you will if it does not! 🤔

[#12]

Don't worry @Townman -- I'll keep you up to date.

Things are looking promising so far. Openreach have turned up today! They've replaced my antique "master socket" with a '5C' and are about to dig something up in the path I think...

[#13]

It turns out that our phone line runs over the neighbor's side of the (semi-detached) house, into a junction box and then through the neighbor's front garden to the street. They did some measurements and determined that there's a fault right at the boundary between the neighbor's garden and the street, and they needed the neighbor's permission to dig there. The "locate and trace" engineer painted a box on the ground where he thought the fault was and said that the "civils" team would come and dig it up once they had the neighbor's permission.

Today, Plusnet have sent an email saying that the fault has been resolved. It hasn't. The ground has obviously not been dug up as the spray paint is still perfectly in tact and we haven't heard a thing...

Plusnet have also sent an email with the following ridiculous statement:

---

We're pleased to confirm that according to the information we have, we believe your broadband speeds are faster than the Minimum Guaranteed Speed of 44.5Mbps we promised you.

---

I've no idea what "information" they think they have, but the broadband speed has obviously not changed. The sync speed has not changed, and the "Current Line Speed" shown at www.plus.net/member-centre/broadband has not changed.

What's going on here? Are plusnet telling lies to try to wiggle out of the 30 day minimum speed guarantee?

[#14]

Thanks for getting back to us @ryansuchocki 

From what I can see the fault was cleared by our suppliers this afternoon with the engineer notes "Engineer has identified the issue located and made safe." which is why we've automatically sent you confirmation. 

I'm not sure why they've closed the job as there's no mention of the fault being fixed in the notes.

As the fault is clearly not fixed (Line tests prove this as we're getting a "Battery Contact") I've rejected the clear that we've been sent which means the fault has been passed back to Openreach to investigate further.

I've also started the clock again on the speed fault investigation and while this will give a new right to leave date, we'll honour the original if you do choose to leave us. 

We'll continue to monitor and provide an update as soon as we know more.

[#15]

---

@ryansuchocki wrote:

I've no idea what "information" they think they have, but the broadband speed has obviously not changed. The sync speed has not changed, and the "Current Line Speed" shown at www.plus.net/member-centre/broadband has not changed.

What's going on here? Are plusnet telling lies to try to wiggle out of the 30 day minimum speed guarantee?

---

You can be assured that Plusnet are not telling lies, but might be automatically forwarding "fabrications" from BT Openreach's engineering systems.  I have recently received a statement from BTOR (via Plusnet) claiming that at 3am a BTOR engineer tested the speed of a circuit at the customer's premises and found it to be "OK".

There is also the matter of what the engineer was asked to do: it might have been a specific task, which on completion has caused the whole of the job to be reported as resolved.  I suspect that BTOR systematically report that jobs have been cleared when they clearly have not so as to dump the problem back on the ISP and subsequently give rise to another chargeable service event.  It is also a sly way of managing service performance stats, for the whole job and the duration it takes to resolve can be made to look like multiple jobs, each completed very quickly.

We all know the adage, "There are lies, dammed lies and then there are BTOR stats".