Am I being ripped off by bt?

iniltous

How is it a rip off ? , as stated there isn’t a sliding scale for customers that due to the distance from the cab get lower speed than those closer to it , if the line is capable of 20 Mb then the obvious profile to be on is 40Mb , if someone a lot closer to the cabinet gets 40Mb on the 40Mb profile paying the same price , that’s just the way it is ….no one is deliberately being disadvantaged, if you said the 20Mb  should get their service cheaper , why ? , both customers are connected to exactly the same equipment , and as far as the ISP is concerned , there is no ‘saving’ to be made on the slower line …it costs the provider exactly the same to provide the both services .

Ultimately the OP has a choice , if they feel they are not getting value for money they are under no obligation to take the service , or continue with it , but it is ridiculous is to get something that is exactly as it was described, and calling it a  as a rip off, if 16-20Mb was not going to be sufficient and the OP was told to expect 16-20Mb , why take it in the first place , if it’s a case that it’s better than nothing , then it was the OP choice , 

Somniac

jbrassy said:

Yes, that is a rip off.

You can get fibre broadband for below £30 a month easily (I would say around £25 per month is reasonable). 

Do you actually need a landline? Most mobile contracts have unlimited minutes these days.

I could get rid but it would be a pain for variuos reasons. Also it wouldn’t save much would it? A fiver a month?

wild666

In 2011 BT said I would get 32Mb speeds but within days it dropped to 2Mb and lower, after numerous calls I was told by someone to ask for the line from the pole to the property to be replaced. BT refused this so I told them that if it wasn't replaced within 14 days I would cancel the DD stating breach of contract. They replaced the line from the pole and the speed increased to 32.7 Mb overnight, I later increased to an up to 67 Mb speed and got 50Mb.  

Somniac

wild666 said:

In 2011 BT said I would get 32Mb speeds but within days it dropped to 2Mb and lower, after numerous calls I was told by someone to ask for the line from the pole to the property to be replaced. BT refused this so I told them that if it wasn't replaced within 14 days I would cancel the DD stating breach of contract. They replaced the line from the pole and the speed increased to 32.7 Mb overnight, I later increased to an up to 67 Mb speed and got 50Mb.  

Our cabling is underground unfortunately. I was told there was 700m of Ali cabling from the cab to my building. I think it must have been replaced though as other flats now have fast speeds..

uvarvu

Rob5342 said:

Just look on uSwitch and see what elae is available. You should be doing that every time a contract ends with anything. 

I wouldn’t go there first.  https://bidb.uk/ would be my first choice so you can plan for any possible future builds to your area.

Money_Grabber13579

iniltous said:

How is it a rip off ? , as stated there isn’t a sliding scale for customers that due to the distance from the cab get lower speed than those closer to it , if the line is capable of 20 Mb then the obvious profile to be on is 40Mb , if someone a lot closer to the cabinet gets 40Mb on the 40Mb profile paying the same price , that’s just the way it is ….no one is deliberately being disadvantaged 

It’s a rip off because you can get packages with much higher speeds for a much lower price. I agree that if the line isn’t capable of delivering those higher speeds, they shouldn’t necessarily be paying less for the service they are getting (for the reasons you mention). But they shouldn’t be paying almost double what I pay for a 500mb service. In other words, if I can get 500mb for £23 a month (after new joiner discounts), it should be equally possible to get 20mb for £23 a month.

iniltous

Who do you get 500Mb for £23 a month from ? , whoever it is , they don’t ‘sell’ FTTC or ADSL so it’s a pointless comparison, an argument that if Company A can provide 500Mb for £23 ( which undoubtedly will be an introductory, loss making , get customers  onto  our network at any cost because we are going bust and need income, any income, offer ) then Company B must be able to offer 20Mb for less than £23 , that is using a different network  is ridiculous,

 your argument also has another  issue , if your company offers 500Mb for £23 and had customers that didn’t need 500Mb and say 20Mb was sufficient , what price should they  pay the company you are with ? , why should they pay the same as you ( £23 ) for a speed they don’t want or need ? should your company offer 20Mb for 25 times less than £23 if they have  a customer who only wants 20Mb ( that’s 92p a month )
To have a consistent approach, you must also feel that if a customer on your network has to take 500Mb for £23 but only needs 20Mb are they being ripped off by having to take a speed they don’t want , and  your company should also  sell 20Mb for 92p, if you say ‘oh that’s different’ just shows your hypocrisy.

FWIW , I found FTTC for £23 a month within a few seconds on a comparison site , no reason whatsoever to be paying £46.