Alternatives to BT

PreacherUK

Just thought I'd pop in another variant. The Post Office does line rental for £10 currently and it means you can always avoid BTs dreadful service.

jhp

PreacherUK wrote: »

Just thought I'd pop in another variant. The Post Office does line rental for £10 currently and it means you can always avoid BTs dreadful service.

PO Homephone is just BT rebranded

jhp

rhowes2000 wrote: »

Hi, I had a look at samknows.com and under the LLU listing it says Sky and Orange are on my exchange. I have called Sky (as a recent previous customer) and Orange (as an existing customer) and both say that a BT landline is required. Am I looking at this incorrectly?

You need a BT compatible line and SKY can connect one free,but you do need to take Sky Digital TV.


"Sky Talk Line Rental is exclusively available to Sky TV customers with a Sky Talk package and a BT compatible line. New Sky customers who don't currently have a BT compatible line may be able to get one installed through Sky. Please call 08442 411 076 for details.


The cost of installing a new line is free for new customers but if customers miss their agreed appointment date and need to arrange for a second installation then the customer may be charged £105."


http://www.sky.com/portal/site/skyco...alk/linerental

OldGreyFox

dandyhighwayman wrote: »

Have you tried Virgin Media? As long as you take their cable service you won't need your BT line any more.

It helps if you read the original post.;)

QUOTE " In the past I have used Virgin and personally I had a very good exeperience with them for several years. Unfortunately the area I live in now is not on Virgin's cable network."

LardyCake

rhowes2000 wrote: »

Good afternoon,

Please could anybody advise if there is a complete alternative to BT? I had to use them recently and like my previous experience with them the customer service has been absolutely appauling.

I only require a landline for broadband. In the past I have used Virgin and personally I had a very good exeperience with them for several years. Unfortunately the area I live in now is not on Virgin's cable network.

All broadband and phoneline offers seem to require a BT landline, is there a true alternative? Or will I have to very begrudgingly pay BT for rental on my landline and use another proivder for broadband?

Kind regards

Richard Howes

I think your question is a perfect illustration of, the perfectly understandable, confusion caused by the different divisions of the BT group:
http://www.btplc.com/Thegroup/Ourcompany/Companyprofile/index.htm

When other broadband and phoneline offers say they require a BT landline they are talking about a phone line owned by BT Wholesale who rent this line to the company you, as a consumer, can rent it from (eg: BT Retail, Sky, The Post Office, Madasafish etc). To further muddy the waters, the line will be installed and maintained by Openreach (another BT company) on behalf of whichever retail company you deal with. At least that is how I think the structure works (and no doubt someone will be along to correct me )

So in effect BT Retail is just another reseller of BT Wholesale services. I don't see the problem as being that competitors of BT Retail are being 'economical with the truth' as has been suggested (how are they expected to describe the phone line required?) but rather that BT Retail gain an unfair advantage by using the BT name because people think they the only option available. I think your question is a perfect illustration of this.

deklan99

Heinz was pointing out the fact that many providers take advantage of the confusion by not admitting they could install/activate a BTw line if they chose to and implying it's all down to BT Retail.
BT Retail can't be held responsible for other providers lack of knowledge/propaganda/poor script writers.

LardyCake

deklan99 wrote: »

Heinz was pointing out the fact that many providers take advantage of the confusion by not admitting they could install/activate a BTw line if they chose to and implying it's all down to BT Retail.
BT Retail can't be held responsible for other providers lack of knowledge/propaganda/poor script writers.

So at least we agree that there is confusion! It may be possible to take the view that "other providers" gain some advantage in the case of installs/activates (which you and Heinz obviously do) but you need to consider the case of consumers wishing to change line rental supplier (without any install/activate required) where this confusion gives an unfair advantage to BT Retail. I blame OFCOM for not forcing BT to rename their retail division when they created Openreach.

Heinz

LardyCake wrote: »

It may be possible to take the view that "other providers" gain some advantage in the case of installs/activates (which you and Heinz obviously do) but you need to consider the case of consumers wishing to change line rental supplier (without any install/activate required) where this confusion gives an unfair advantage to BT Retail.

I don't follow that.

"Hello Talk Talk. I want to move my line rental to you."

"Fine. Do you have an active BT line?"

"Yes."

"Welcome."

How does BT Retail gain from that?

LardyCake

Heinz wrote: »

I don't follow that.

"Hello Talk Talk. I want to move my line rental to you."

"Fine. Do you have an active BT line?"

"Yes."

"Welcome."

How does BT Retail gain from that?

They don't - but I am suggesting that BT Retail gain because many people who might switch to another provider (for whatever reason) won't realise that they can and still have the magical "BT line" - they therefore don't switch from BT Retail because they need a "BT line" for another service (eg broadband) and think only BT Retail can provide a "BT line".

As evidence, consider the case of the OP in this thread: he is looking for an alternative to BT Retail (because of perceived poor customer service) and has to ask on this forum because he thinks he may "have to very begrudgingly pay BT for rental on my landline". Hopefully he now knows that is not true but I would suggest he is just the tip of the iceberg and that many people think they cannot switch from BT Retail and still have a "BT line".

Maybe I'm wrong but to me as an ordinary consumer that looks like an unfair advantage to BT Retail.

littleboo

LardyCake wrote: »

I blame OFCOM for not forcing BT to rename their retail division when they created Openreach.

But that would be a) costly to them, b) unfair as they would loose the brand and c) cause massive confusion to customers

It would be in the interests of the other providers to be more explicit in their explanation, there is no reason why they cant be. "BT Line" seems a bit lazy to me.