Misled purchasing a new build home. Help please!

n217970

Have you looked into satellite internet? Would be much more cost effect then the 4G but is susceptable to weather conditions.

yoshiyella

You say that if all the residents chip in then it comes under an upgrade - so why don't you all chip in, hand the dosh to teh developer and say get it done?

HouseBuyer77

The exchange was actually fibre ready when the development started so other than trying to save a few quid we can't understand why the cabinet is so poor.

Not that it helps you but I think this is the real crux of the issue. Developers don't have to put internet connectivity in, so they don't, to save a bit of money. They seem able to happily sell houses without it (people only discovering the internet is awful when they move in). I've heard stories of developments where they could have laid fibre and such when first doing the roads quickly and cheaply, but they don't. So the road has to be dug up at a later date at great expense. The developer doesn't care, they've sold their houses and gained some tiny fraction of percent extra profit from not install decent internet provision.

You could start looking into community broadband schemes. I have friends living in rural areas who have experimented with all kinds of interesting setups, e.g. commercial grade connection into local church with friendly vicar. Place directional wireless antenna on church to connect to freestanding tower a couple of km away. Have wired infrastructure from there to serve the local houses. Potentially pricey to setup but not too bad provided enough people can chip and you've got some keen people to look after the tech.

PersianCatLady

teddysmum wrote: »

Same here,but we used to get 6 with Sky (No fibre, yet).


However, you are probably not comparing like with like (you have ADSL and the poster has fibre). We could go faster with Virgin, but they are relatively expensive.

Before I moved into my new build house, BT had agreed that they would have the telephone lines and broadband up and running within two weeks.

The developers had already cabled the houses for basic telephone and Internet use.

Long story short, it took nine months for BT to get the telephones and broad band working.

There was no reason for the delay, they just didn't really seem to care about it.

In this time, whilst studying for an OU Computing & IT degree, I had no telephone and no internet AT ALL.

As the developers did not state that the house would have a functioning telephone line, they were not liable for anything, so we were at the mercy of BT.

If the OP thinks that he is going to claim that the developers should have known that he would need superfast broadband and therefore they are liable to pay for it, he is very much mistaken.

PersianCatLady

HouseBuyer77 wrote: »

Developers don't have to put internet connectivity in, so they don't, to save a bit of money

I don't think that the OP has completely understood this yet.

[Deleted User]

I'm pee'd as our new build has fttp [300 down 30 up] costing much more than originally budgeted

SuboJvR

jeepjunkie wrote: »

I'm pee'd as our new build has fttp [300 down 30 up] costing much more than originally budgeted

Out of interest, what sort of cost do you need to pay for this?

We were looking at a FTTP new build and I wondered if it would be more.

Thrugelmir

IllustriousMuz wrote: »

In fact, when we contacted them Monday they simply said that they we should just pull out and take a loss!! So yeah, never take the developers recommended conveyancing service!

To be frank not sure what else you expected them to say. If the issue of broadband speed is paramount to the purchase. You proceeded knowing the actual position having spoken to BT.

rtho782

IllustriousMuz wrote: »

4G up there is good but I need a public IP - I use VPN access for a lot of my work, especially if I'm working for a governmental department or body, and a public IP is essential. All 4G home broadband solutions use a carrier grade NAT and a private IP which means VPN is out of the question.

Three give you a public IP if you use the right APN.

You don't need a public IP to use VPN, indeed in one of my jobs we have various vans all over the country that connect via EE 4G sims with carrier grade NAT to our datacenter over a Cisco VPN that works perfectly fine. As the devices are on the VPN, I can then address them normally.

rtho782

jeepjunkie wrote: »

I'm pee'd as our new build has fttp [300 down 30 up] costing much more than originally budgeted

Where Openreach GEA-FTTP is offered, you can get all the normal fibre services on it. E.g. you can opt for the slower 55/10 BT Infinity 1 service at the normal price. Plusnet will offer you their 40/2 service at the normal price.

If you mean you want Sky/Talktalk/etc, the reason you can't have it is because Sky/Talktalk/etc choose not to offer a service on FTTP as they don't want customers to have an openreach box in their house to "dilute" their brand. So blame them, not BT!

If you have non-BT FTTP from another provider, SeeTheLight or someone else, you've been screwed by the developer, that probably got a kickback from the provider in order to offer their broadband at an inflated price.

In the 2nd case, it's similar to the leasehold thing really, housing developers are scum.