New BT line. BT seem to limit my options?

infoleacher

Hi, I'm trying to find the best deal for my elderly mother to get broadband.

She recently moved into a brand new flat. There was a BT socket but it had never been connected before, so we had to pay BT £125(ish) to have it switched on. The problem now is that we had intended transfering her to the talktalk phone/broadband package, but BT have insisted that we keep her with them for 12months, apperntly this was in the T&C's.

So it would appear that we are stuck with BT AND she has to make at least one call on the BT line every month. Does anybody know if there is a good way round this problem? Or if there is a loophole (or secret) that BT are not telling us about?

Many Thanks J.

WageSlave_3

I'm afraid you are stuck with the contract as it is in the T's and C's. You are responsible for reading these and there is no duty on BT to tell you about that condition specifically. The only way you might be able to get out would be to pay for the remainder of the contract to be terminated early. No doubt, other posters will have a go at BT over this but it is common throughout the industry as it is, in general, with other services (e.g. mobile firms, broadband providers, gas and electricity etc).

infoleacher

Yes, thanks, but I didn't want a lesson in what was common industry practice or that I should read etc the main thrust of my post was not related to if I felt that the 12 month tie in was fair.

It does not change the fact that BT's T&C's are extremely unfair, with a new property that hasn't been connected before, you HAVE to have BT, then you HAVE to PAY for them to connect you and to add insult you then you HAVE to stay with for 12 months! If it was free connection, minimum 12 months then fine, but connection fee AND minimum 12 months is cake and eat it time!!

Anyway does anyone have any suggestions about best broadband or that loophole that I mentioned?

deklan99

You don't have to have BT. Any Telco can approach Openreach on your behalf to install a "BT Line".
Talktalk could but won't.
Minimum term contracts were introduced precisely because Talktalk were getting customers to join BT puerly for the phone line then taking the custom away.

WageSlave_3

* Answers with mild irritation at ingratitude shown by OP's response to someone simply trying to help (I meant no insult to your intelligence) *

So you expect BT to put in all that infrastructure to provide that brand new PSTN box and then simply hand over the opportunity to make money to another company without recovering any of the cost of that infrastructure and resources to put it in?

BT is a business, not a charity. There isn't any loophole I am aware of and life isn't fair, so get used to it.

infoleacher

answers with equal irritation. (thinks wageslave @ BT by any chance?)

What part of charging someone £125 to flick a switch at the exchange, is NOT passing on the cost of the infrastructure? They are having their cake and eating it. Simple.

normanmark

infoleacher wrote: »

answers with equal irritation. (thinks wageslave @ BT by any chance?)

What part of charging someone £125 to flick a switch at the exchange, is NOT passing on the cost of the infrastructure? They are having their cake and eating it. Simple.

Its a bit more than merely 'flicking a switch' at an exchange.

You'll find the cost of connecting a line from the various people who offer this service ranges from £110-115. BT are not the only company who do this, there are plenty of other telecommunication providers that connect lines too. Why did you not do your home work if you wanted a cheaper line connection?

WageSlave_3

Which company came out and physically put the cabling into the house, ran it to the nearest pole, did the cabling back to the local exchange and ensured all tests were completed to ensure that someone could jsut "flick a switch" to turn the line on? If you've a problem with that line at some point in future which company comes out and fixes it?

The answer is OpenReach (a BT line of business). Do you think they don't have costs to bare? Do you not think it is fair that they should recover some of that cost?

If I do happen to work for BT (and I am not saying that I do), do you not then think that perhaps you are in receipt of an informed reply?

deklan99

infoleacher wrote: »

answers with equal irritation. (thinks wageslave @ BT by any chance?)

What part of charging someone £125 to flick a switch at the exchange, is NOT passing on the cost of the infrastructure? They are having their cake and eating it. Simple.

It's a tired old argument which fails to address the fact that BT, and Kingston Communications in Hull, are under obligation to provide basic fixed line services to whoever wants them at an affordable price. Installations that cost £3400 or less are charged a fixed fee, £125.
With that in mind the bulk of installations may fall in the "flick a switch" category but they in part subsidise more complex installations costing up to £3400 which still costs the customer only £125.
Its that or each installation is charged job by job in which case you could get two properties side by side, one is charged £50 and the other £3000. I can imagine the squeals of outrage if that were the case.

Don't work for now, nor ever have done or will in the future, BT.

infoleacher

deklan99 wrote: »

With that in mind the bulk of installations may fall in the "flick a switch" category but they in part subsidise more complex installations costing up to £3400 which still costs the customer only £125.
Its that or each installation is charged job by job in which case you could get two properties side by side, one is charged £50 and the other £3000. I can imagine the squeals of outrage if that were the case.

I didn't know that, thank you. However they ARE still passing the cost of setting up the infrastructure albeit at a "discounted" rate. I also gamble that on the whole they do very well out of the deal! Otherwise they would not still be there overcharging for the same product.

infoleacher

normanmark wrote: »

Why did you not do your home work if you wanted a cheaper line connection?

Because I had no idea that there was an alternative! :mad: Are you saying that I could have paid less than £125, if I wanted a phone line installed?