TalkTalk is sh**

Sterling

Bod1467 wrote: »

TT (almost) always charge for a Qube engineer. The problem is that telephone CS don't always make this clear, and leave the customer thinking the charge only applies if a fault is found.

The fact that TT does this on a regular basis does not make it legitimate. Any reasonable person would assume they would only have to pay if the fault lay with their own equipment.

If a TT customer (whose equipment is working perfectly) is not getting the phone or broadband service as promised by TT, then TT are in breach of contract. It simply is not right to charge a customer in those circumstances.

Gordon_Hose

Sterling wrote: »

The fact that TT does this on a regular basis does not make it legitimate. Any reasonable person would assume they would only have to pay if the fault lay with their own equipment.

If a TT customer (whose equipment is working perfectly) is not getting the phone or broadband service as promised by TT, then TT are in breach of contract. It simply is not right to charge a customer in those circumstances.

It's how all other ISP's operate, but TT are a law unto themselves it seems.

Sterling

If TT is the only ISP to make a charge, when there is nothing wrong with the customer’s equipment, it’s a very strong indication that the other ISP’s recognise that such a charge is both unfair and invalid.

TT should not make unfair charges. It should also not try to justify doing so in half-baked explanations such as in post 8 above by its company representative.

TalkTalk

Hi Sterling,

the Qube engineers are not a must have. Any customer can refuse the Qube and opt for a BT engineer following normal process. A BT visit for customer premises fault i.e. not a fault on BT maintained equipment would cost £130.

We offer Qube engineers to prevent many customers ending with a far higher charge.

Ady

Sterling

Talk_Talk_Company_Representative wrote: »

Hi Sterling,

the Qube engineers are not a must have. Any customer can refuse the Qube and opt for a BT engineer following normal process. A BT visit for customer premises fault i.e. not a fault on BT maintained equipment would cost £130.

We offer Qube engineers to prevent many customers ending with a far higher charge.

Ady

Hi Ady

Thanks for your response.

Before I reply more fully, would you please let me know if I am right in taking your wording quoted in red above to mean that where the fault lies with BT’s equipment, rather than the customers, that BT does not charge the customer?

Mark_In_Hampshire

The way it's supposed to work is: you report the fault to your provider (line or broadband, depends on which service is faulty - if both, then line) and the provider then escalates this to BT Openreach.

They're supposed to fix the fault. If the fault lies upstream of the master socket (anywhere between - and including - that and the exchange) then they are not supposed to charge the provider because it is a fault for which they are responsible.

Even if they do charge the provider, the provider then has to look at that invoice and ascertain whether the charge is genuine, asking for more details if necessary. If the charge is seen as valid, then the provider pays Openreach and passes the charge on to you.

That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. However a BBC documentary piece on Watchdog revealed that this is anything but the case, and that Openreach (certainly used to) put in claims and invoice for repair work for which they were indeed responsible. Cases like this persist in the Home Phones forum to this day.

In such a case, the customer isn't going to pay the provider, who then has to dispute the bill with Openreach. Since Openreach is an infrastructual monpoly in about half the country (that doesn't have cable) then it isn't in the provider's interest to fall into dispute with them but nor is it in their interest to pick up the bill for repairs to Openreach's network either.

Hence I can see why Talk Talk offers this third party service since a number of faults could be rectified by such a service. And where the fault is indeed of the customer's making, or with their equipment - circumstances which would lead to a charge by Openreach - then this is the cheaper option.

The answer is simply to refuse the Qube enqineer, politely point out that Talk Talk (or whoever it is) remains in breach of contract, and insist it's sorted.

Sterling

Thanks for that Mark

If I understand you correctly, when a customer reports a fault to the provider (here TalkTalk) if an engineer’s inspection is considered necessary by the provider, the normal procedure would be for the provider to contact BT Openreach, who would send out an engineer.

What should happen here is that BT Openreach should not make any charge if it is a fault for which BT Openreach is responsible, but the indications are that charges are being made in those circumstances, and the providers are paying them even though they are invalid, and passing the charge onto the customer concerned. In other words, a false charge is being levied.

As a result, TT are opting to instruct an independent firm of qualified engineers to conduct the inspection instead. These only cost £50 compared to £130. The trouble is that the independent firm of engineers must be paid in any event, and TT passes the charge onto the customer, even though the customer was not at fault. Have I got that right?

Perhaps Ady of TT can enlighten us.

Mark_In_Hampshire

Yes, you have that right, apart from Talk Talk's assertion that nobody need "accept" the Qube engineer and could refuse same, therefore, Talk Talk could argue that the customer accepted the terms pertaining to the Qube visit which is that they are always chargeable. Always chargeable, yes, but not able to resolve all faults.

There's one other aspect to this which is related to so-called "difficult" repair cases. There's some detail here, if you're interested:

http://www.aaisp.com/kb-broadband-sfi.html

It's a pity there isn't an effective regulator for the industry.

Gordon_Hose

So, basically, TT get paid either way, regardless whether the fault in upstream of the master socket or downstream.

Now, imagine for a moment, you're a customer that has very minimal knowledge of how all this "fan-dangled technology"works, an old person for example. The TT rep is giving it the "Well the Qube engineer is only £50, but the BT Engineer MAY cost £130 if he finds a fault in your house"... now instantly the Qube engineer seems the better option, so the customer is going to request that service thinking they have got a decent deal.

It's nothing short of misleading.

TalkTalk

If the Qube engineer determines that the fault lies outside of the customers property and assuming that none of the many extenuating circumstances apply such as criminal or accidental damage by home owner or other parties etc. Then the customer would not pay a penny. The purpose Qube visits is primarily that many customers don't or are not able to carry out testing properly. They dont have their internal wiring repaired or installed correctly as a result the charges levvied by BT were enormous and unnecessary and customers complained. As a result rather than advising customers to source a local engineer, many said they couldnt or wouldnt trust local contractors we now offer Qube visits.

Heres a question for you guys. Should TT or indeed any ISP be liable for the quality of a customers premises wiring? Bearing in mind how old many houses are and how many modifications will have been made.

Ady