PLUSNET: Left without a phone line for 5 days now

[Deleted User]

sasparillo wrote: »

No provider of a basic utility such as a phone should leave anybody, I emphasise anybody, without access to emergency services

Home telephone is not a "basic utility", nor is it deemed "essential"

sasparillo wrote: »

this all costs a lot more than £10, not to mention the stress and aggravation.

If all you want is "compo", then I think you are going to be disappointed.

Just buy a cheap mobile phone with the tenner which BT have already offered.

Retrogamer

sasparillo wrote: »

Hi,

Thanks for your responses.

No provider of a basic utility such as a phone should leave anybody, I emphasise anybody, without access to emergency services for more than a day or a day and a half.

What would you propose they do if it's not physically possible to fix the fault in under a week or so? As i mentioned, it's mostly not a case of them not willing to fix it faster it's just not possible.

sasparillo wrote: »

That people have been conditioned to think that an outage of a week is a norm and believe that everyone should spend money on a landline provider and then also in addition a mobile and then pay for pay as you go for a phone line and Internet (Internet is often also an essential now for people to manage their financial affairs as is a phone) because of outages on landlines is a very sorry state of affairs.

It's not a case of being conditioned. I've been working on technical faults mainly with various communications providers for the last 8 years. My advise is based on real world experiences and realistic expectations backed up with a full understanding of how the fault process works.

I merely suggested if communication is so important, then it would be a good idea to have a back up because technical faults can and do occur.

sasparillo wrote: »

And this all costs a lot more than £10, not to mention the stress and aggravation.

£10 for a PAYG phone and £10 top up.
£20 in total and having that there would prevent a lot of the stress and aggravation.
It has the added bonus of being able to be contacted when out the house as well so a worthwhile investment for people who relay strongly on being able to be contacted by phone.

sasparillo wrote: »

In fact if you all think it's necessary to have an active mobile phone on standby for voice calls and Internet just in case of such lengthy outages, then the telephone landline providers should then work out a system of providing mobile phones and a means of them paying for pay as you go.

Not necessary but a good idea if communication is so vital to someone's life.
For a provider to provide such a service they would need to increase charges so much to pay for this that no one would use them because the general public like to have their service as cheap as possible. It's not a good business model.
Some providers will do it for business customers as business customer's pay extra so they're protected by faster SLA's (where possible) and sometimes back up methods (i.e landline calls can be diverted to a mobile)

sasparillo wrote: »

I expect there are discussions about these phone companies expanding beyond their capacity but for the customer it's about having a telephone line, a basic utility and at the very least access to emergency services. The internal workings of telephone companies are nothing to do with the customer.

You're right, however if technicians could just press a botton to fix everything straight away they would.
If they could provide back up communication methods without increasing the cost to the customer, they would.
These don't happen.

I'm not getting on at you, but just giving you some insight to how things work at the other end of the spectrum so you can see it's not a case of not willing to help quicker, but sometimes it's just not possible.

sasparillo

Hi all, thanks for your response. A phone is a basic utility because it gives access to the emergency services. If something else gave access to the emergency services, then it would be the basic utility. I myself have lived long enough to remember when there was only one firm and the phone would never be down for over a week which has happened to my friend now. It seems there are now a plethora of phone companies, with no control over the infrastructure, all clamouring for BT's attention when things go wrong leaving customers without phone or Internet (and for many internet is now an essential to handle his or her affairs which would push any additional costs up. As you can see at the beginning my friend was willing to wait but then she was left without a telephone for an unreasonable length of time and it continues. It seems that for whatever reason are over extending themselves, especially when they have no control over the infrastructure and can be pushed to the back of the queue and there may also be a question over the maintenance and checking of cables, if there is no 'switch' involved!

flashg67

OP, you are entitled to your opinion, but the fact that I, and others disagree, does not mean our opinion doesn't count. You can ignore us of course, but I can't ever seeing me agreeing that telephone is an essential utility. I have candles for if we have a power cut, two legs if my car breaks down, so buying a cheap mobile is hardly a big deal, imho.

You haven't explained, though, how a telephone provider is supposed to act if the fault cannot be fixed quickly? Should they buy us all a PAYG mobile?
You've had an excellent explanation of how the system works - even if BT had a chap standing by at every street cabinet, there are so many other parties involved in fixing a major fault, it would be impossible to plan for every eventuality - you don't seem to be prepared to accept this?

BTW, I too can remember when BT owned the whole lot, and my (admittedly fuzzy) memory recalls that things were often even worse then....

littleboo

I think the OP has a slightly skewed view of the general situation, both now and in the past. To suggest that faults never took a week to fix back in the day of a single provider is ludicrous. Likewise, most people today don't wait a week to have their line fixed. But sometimes people do, and its very frustrating if that's you.

savemoney

I remember when it was Post office that owned network before Thatcher sold it off and you put 2d in a slot I think it had two slots a and b, now I am showing my age

You can easily get a cheap mobile with large buttons for £20 plus extra for top up.

http://www.carphonewarehouse.com/phones/doro-508/ppay?colourCode=BLACK

I know it ain't the point of why you should but this line might takes weeks and doesn't get you any where getting it sorted quickly. At least as others said, if a phone is so important and I don't dispute that, then mobile may be one way to go for now

parttimeskint

You wouldn't even need to top the mobile up. emergency calls can be made from a mobile phone without a sim.

force_ten

sasparillo wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for your response. A phone is a basic utility because it gives access to the emergency services. If something else gave access to the emergency services, then it would be the basic utility. I myself have lived long enough to remember when there was only one firm and the phone would never be down for over a week which has happened to my friend now. It seems there are now a plethora of phone companies, with no control over the infrastructure, all clamouring for BT's attention when things go wrong leaving customers without phone or Internet (and for many internet is now an essential to handle his or her affairs which would push any additional costs up. As you can see at the beginning my friend was willing to wait but then she was left without a telephone for an unreasonable length of time and it continues. It seems that for whatever reason are over extending themselves, especially when they have no control over the infrastructure and can be pushed to the back of the queue and there may also be a question over the maintenance and checking of cables, if there is no 'switch' involved!

I also remember when telecoms was a public utility but we have got the tory government and margaret thatcher to thank for selling off the family silver telling us it would increase competition and make things better for the consumer

all the service providers that have sprung up are only interested in making money for shareholders and in a situation like yours the service provider will have a service level agreement with the network provider and will be claiming compensation for this outage which is more than likely far more than you are paying them for your line rental

what a sad sad situation our country is now in when all of our public utilities have been sold off and are now foreign owned, and we rely on the regulators to keep them on a tight reign to stop us getting ripped off :rotfl::rotfl:

[Deleted User]

sasparillo wrote: »

. A phone is a basic utility

You can state this as often as you want, that won't make it so or gain you any compensation for "stress and aggravation". Most of your "aggravation" is down to your opinion about landline phones being at odds with everyone else's.

Retrogamer

force_ten wrote: »

I also remember when telecoms was a public utility but we have got the tory government and margaret thatcher to thank for selling off the family silver telling us it would increase competition and make things better for the consumer

It was a good idea, unless you think BT being able to monopolise the communications network in the UK is better? I.e everyone paying £50 per month for a broadband connection.

force_ten wrote: »

all the service providers that have sprung up are only interested in making money for shareholders

That's true, but not just restricted to service providers. It applies to almost every business because without shareholders big business' don't last long

force_ten wrote: »

and in a situation like yours the service provider will have a service level agreement with the network provider and will be claiming compensation for this outage which is more than likely far more than you are paying them for your line rental

This doesn't happen.