Caller display displaying incorrectly

[#1]

They are not doing themselves any favours with this fault. After my retaliatory charges, I have been informed they will not pay them if no fault is found at my address, or if the engineer fails to keep the appointment. We'll see.  They also pointed me to a t&c that was missed on sign up:

Quote

No charges normally arise with the standard fault repair service. However, we will make a charge for new and replaced items. If you ask us to carry out work to repair a fault on items that we are responsible for maintaining, and we are not able to find a fault, we will charge you for the visit.

I haven't asked for the visit. I don't believe the fault is at my property. I believe the OR person will turn up and ask what they are doing here. I am really beginning to rue the day I came back to the PN family!!!

[#2]

Quote from: Marksfish

They are not doing themselves any favours with this fault.

Absolutely!  It's the mark of good support to understand the problem and then pursue a solution with 'suppliers' actively rather than passively just pass messages   PN are falling very short of the mark here, and the lack of response to this thread says a lot...
Have you considered closing the fault and then re-opening it as

Quote

Calls to my number are often (but not always) recorded incorrectly by the exchange and are presented with an extra leading zero when dialling 1470.  This error is also reflected on the caller ID display of my phone. For info, my number was originally provisioned by Sky so this fault may be related to the forwarding process as a result of porting the number into BT Please make certain that this information is passed to BT with the fault report as it clearly is not a line or wiring issue and a request for an engineer visit will be rejected

This may help focus minds!

[#3]

I have added my final comments to my open ticket, can't/ won't close it as the button says my issue is resolved and it isn't. I have cut and paste your suggestion, thank you, and I have raised it as a complaint. Will have to start exploring my options when they keep trying to fob me off.
Mark

[#4]

Seems this BT customer had problems years ago, ex Sky customer too!! Thread finished without a resolution, so doesn't help me much.
https://community.bt.com/t5/Phones/Extra-zero-quot-0-quot-in-front-of-caller-ID-numbers/td-p/1036088
I tried the 151 as said in the thread, but that number is not obtainable from this line, so that puts the lid on that idea too.

[#5]

You've gone round in circles - You looked at that back in February 
http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,136447.msg1198117.html#msg1198117
Hopefully your complaint will make PN take the issue seriously - I hope so for your sake!

[#6]

So I did, whoops. Getting a lack of satisfaction is what is doing it, it is frying my brain 

[#7]

Just to update, still getting nowhere. We appear to have hit an impasse and I don't believe BT or PN are wanting to see this as the exchange/ voice fault that it is and are insistent on going through all the same palava as would be necessary if it was a broadband fault. 

[#8]

Unfortunately we aren't going to be able to book an engineer without the agreement that if the issue is caused by your equipment there will be a charge, from reading the thread it's highly unlikely this is the case but that's where we're at right now.

[#9]

I'm very disappointed (for you) that Plusnet are still pushing for an engineer's visit as this is clearly a waste of your time.  They need a grown up to push back against BTOR 'process' and get them to see sense.
I'd suggest closing this fault and then reporting that 1471 returns numbers with a leading zero.  Not mentioning CLI will hopefully focus minds on the obvious exchange fault.

[#10]

And i'm not going to agree that I can potentially be billed if it is my fault, or if no fault is found as is stated in your t&c's, but I can't bill if the fault is found to be at exchange level, or if the engineer can't be bothered to turn up. It's all a one way street and I would say could be classed as an unfair term within the Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.
Mark

[#11]

Quote from: pwatson

I'd suggest closing this fault and then reporting that 1471 returns numbers with a leading zero.  Not mentioning CLI will hopefully focus minds on the obvious exchange fault.

I have no open fault as I escalated it to a complaint. Unfortunately, the complaints team don't seem to be very over helpful either....
Mark

[#12]

Still as much help as a chocolate teapot and the fault has been closed. I am having to escalate to the ADR process now.
So glad I came back to the PN "family"-  NOT 

[#13]

Back to my suggestion of reporting the fault as 1470 giving a spurious leading zero - No harm in progressing this as a separate fault while your complaint trickles through the system?

[#14]

Oh dear, that's disappointing - hang in there Marksfish. 
Watching with interest...

[#15]

This is a pan-industry issue and needs to be referred to the regulator....