Was I being setup to lose £65?

[loades]

I called support after many days of numerous drops and re-connects at speeds from anywhere between 27 and 61Mbs.  The agent said he could hear crackling on the line and he asked if I could.  "No" I replied "all my outgoing calls are via voip as is this one".  "Incoming calls over the copper pair seem fine to me".  I was then told to hold while he did a line test, he came back saying the test showed noise on the line and an appointment was made for an engineer to visit my home.  Only when I received an e-mail did I realise what I'd agreed to - I'd pay £65 if no fault was found!  Well, I'm 99% sure there is no fault with noise on my line so no fault will be found and I'd have to pay £65  I called support again and waited the usual 40 minutes because of 'exceptionally high call demands' (they're not exceptional, they're the norm) and said I wished to cancel the engineer unless PN would pay the £65 if no fault was found as I expected.  The agent couldn't hear any noise on the line and agreed to cancel the engineer's visit and logged a support ticket for the broadband drops.  Now I'll declare that I'm waiting to be connected to another provider and the first agent made reference to this saying that this may effect how they handle the fault.  I asked why since I was still a customer of PN and paying PN.  He couldn't expand on why it may effect how they handled the fault.  Then he suddenly heard the noise on the line!

These drops have been going on for over 3 weeks now and the inability to speak to speak to support without enormous waiting times are the reason why I sought another provider.  A more expensive price but one I'm prepared to pay for a better service.  The other problem with PN is their inability to make outgoing calls which are not 'number withheld'.  My 'phone rejects anonymous calls so they're never able to call me back.  I ask them to spoof a number but they say they can't, so I'm unable to receive their calls.  A telecom company which is unable to provide a calling number - incredible!

[chenks76]

the £65 charge is normal and is what is applied to the customer if the fault is "internal" to your property, ie not an openreach issue.

this is not unique to plusnet, and almost all telco providers will apply this to the customer.

with the regards to the outgoing withheld number, this is also very common and it's not plusnets fault that you have decided to block all incoming calls with a withheld number. why should they spoof a number just to appease you?

[loades]

Yes, I agree with you that if a fault is within my property then I should pay.  No dispute over that.  However if no fault is found why I should I still be liable to pay?  Here's the e-mail from PN saying that if the engineer is "unable to locate a fault" then I must pay.

"If the engineer finds the fault to be within the boundaries of your property or is unable to locate a fault, the engineer will demonstrate to you where the problem exists and we will add a one off fee of £65 to your bill ...".

Outgoing numbers being withheld is indeed very common ...... with cold callers.  However, it is relatively rare for reputable to companies to do this.  Callers to my number hear a message asking them to redial without withholding their number. 

[chenks76]

"unable to locate a fault" means no fault found.
and if there is no fault then why would you be raising a fault ticket?

if you have an interemittant fault then that would be noted in the job that the engineer may not find a fault at that time. clearly in this instance you would not be charged for that.

and withheld numbers is common everywhere and not just cold-callers, it's used when it would be of no use to phone the number back as it wouldn't put you in touch with the person that was calling you, and in plusnets case would result in you being put in a queue for circa 30 minutes. clearly there is no benefit to having a number attached to those calls.

as i said, it's you that it choosing to block those calls, so you have the power to allow you to recieve them.

[loades]

""unable to locate a fault" means no fault found.
and if there is no fault then why would you be raising a fault ticket?"

That's the whole point.  The ticket says:-

Fault Type:Noisy
Test Results:N/A

but I wasn't raising a ticket for a noisy line, I was raising a ticket for continued broadband drops.  A BT engineer had been to my house and said all was OK when these drops started over 3 weeks ago.  PN were making it a noisy line ticket not me, with the highly likely result that no noise would be found and therefore I'd be liable for an unnecessary visit.  I wasn't using the copper pair to talk to the support guy and told him that.  I couldn't hear any noise, the second support person couldn't understand why it was ticketed as a line fault not a broadband fault.

[chenks76]

broadband drops can be caused by a noisy line though, and as you said "The agent said he could hear crackling on the line".

only at the point did you mention VOIP to the agent, which to be honest i doubt would have understood what you meant.

the agent would simply be following script to raise a noisy line fault as they heard a noisy line.

[Anoush]

Hi there @loades I am sorry to see the adviser arranged a line engineer for a broadband fault. I can see the appointment has since been cancelled and a fault has been raised.

I've checked our suppliers systems for an update. We've been advised of an estimated response time of by 25-03-2017. Our faults team should follow this up early next week. Apologies for the inconvenience caused.

[loades]

Thank you for taking an interest, Anoush.

[Anoush]

No problems. I'm just following up on this. Our suppliers have requested us to book an appointment with yourself so that an engineer can fully test the line from your phone socket.

I've updated your ticket too, if you let me know on here once you've replied I can get it booked in for you.

[7up]

---

@chenks76 wrote:
 why should they spoof a number just to appease you?

---

You could also ask why they should with hold it for genuine calls! Seems a bit odd that you wouldn't want your customers knowing that you're calling.

[loades]

Anoush, I've only just read what you wrote properly :-(  I responded in My Questions yesterday, about 20 minutes after you posted but didn't notice that you wanted  confirmation that I'd done that here.  I guess that's why I've heard nothing?

[Anoush]

No worries. The ticket was with our faults team and they aim to be in touch within 72 hours of replies. A reply via the community forums gives me a notification by email so a bit of a nudge to check your ticket.

I've updated your ticket with more information.

+Edit+

It looks like our faults team replied to your ticket just at the same time as I did.

[chenks76]

---

@7up wrote:

---

@chenks76 wrote:
 why should they spoof a number just to appease you?

---

You could also ask why they should with hold it for genuine calls! Seems a bit odd that you wouldn't want your customers knowing that you're calling.

---

they're not my customers.

but if there is no way for someone to call back the person that tried to phone you then it would moot anyway.
the reasoning i gave previously is still valid. what's the point in giving a number for a person to call back that will result in them being in a queue for 30 minutes. no-one is ever going to wait that long to return a missed call.

[7up]

Yes I see your reasoning but then the person that called isn't going to be easily available either so what would be the point in providing a direct dial number? - none!

It's easier just to provide the main company number and let the client know who it is thats calling.

[loades]

Some companies present a number which if you call it back says something like "This is xyz, You weren't available when we called, we'll try again later".

I would add that PN actually offer the anonymous call blocking service for £4.95 per month.  They sell the service which then prevents them calling their own customer!  A bit ironic?