UKVoIPTalk.com

[ Cross-posted to uk.telecom.voip, etc. to provide exposure to another or
alternative audience that may be equally and maybe additionally able to help
in replying and may be additionally knowledgeable. {And equally for comment
regarding applicability to other permutations of below enquiry - e.g. to
broadband services, mobile service, etc.} See P.s. below for more. ]


==


Hi,


I am interested in what rules and regulations exist regarding obligations
for repair of primary main (residential) PSTN telephone lines.

Particularly, BT has always as I understand it, been obligated to provide a
pretty (very) prompt repair service (specification on this would be useful -
for example perhaps initial attempts at should be made within 3 days and
must have been made within 7 days?). Further, BT have (been required to?)
provide(d) compensation at a pro-rate + system of line rental (i.e. I think
it was something like 150% of pro-rate line rental rate). In later days they
offered to divert calls for free to a new destination which I understand was
probably actually cheaper for them but effectively meant they had met their
obligations regarding compensation for time out of service / repair time,
etc.

Can anyone please advise what requirements, regulations, etc. actually exist
that apply to publicly licensed telecommunications providers / operators
(e.g. / i.e. BT, Virgin Media, Talk Talk, etc.)?

Particularly, requirements on timeframes for repair and compensation for
time out of service.

I think or thought one of the reasons for stern requirements in these areas
were that customers were supposed to have the ability to call emergency
services and hence when their phone service is not working it is a (very)
high priority to restore that service. And... secondarily, that a customer
cannot be expected to pay line rental for that period of service when in
fact they are not receiving that service for which they pay. Please can
anyone detail, reference and confirm details concerning these areas?

Many thanks in advance.


Best wishes,




News Reader


P.s. Cross-posted to voip to provide exposure to another or alternative
audience that may be able to be additionally help in replying and equally
may be additionally knowledgeable. Further, it is also interesting to
understand how or if the same can be said to apply to VoIP services
(naturally, respecting where as applicable to a given service emergency
service either is or isn't supported and their is or isn't a line rental or
service package fee payable). (I.e. particularly if one was paying for
example to a VoIP operator a fee for provision of a PSTN number and that
facility is not working for a period or a customer is paying for an
unlimited calls package and due to a fault is not able to use it for a
period of days out of their months subscription [should a pro-rata refund,
more, or equivalent, etc. be payable?]?). And any and all other interesting
considerations, comments, permutations, etc.

"News Reader" <no@email.invalid> wrote in message
news:f452ph$ng4$1@inews.gazeta.pl...[color=blue]
>
>
> [ Cross-posted ]
>
>[/color]
Rubbish snipped![color=blue]
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone please advise what requirements, regulations, etc. actually
> exist that apply to publicly licensed telecommunications providers /
> operators (e.g. / i.e. BT, Virgin Media, Talk Talk, etc.)?
>
> Particularly, requirements on timeframes for repair and compensation for
> time out of service.
>[/color]

I can tell you where to find the information - BT, Virgin Media, Talk Talk
etc.
[color=blue]
> I think or thought one of the reasons for stern requirements in these
> areas were that customers were supposed to have the ability to call
> emergency services and hence when their phone service is not working it is
> a (very) high priority to restore that service.[/color]

Think or thought? OMG, which is it! No requirement for a company to
suddenly turn up and fix something if threatened with that excuse. They set
out their guidelines clearly for anyone who cares to look.
[color=blue]
>And... secondarily,[/color]

Or even secondly
[color=blue]
> that a customer cannot be expected to pay line rental for that period of
> service when in fact they are not receiving that service for which they
> pay.[/color]

Again, all companies are different and have their own terms and conditions
to which you agree.
[color=blue]
>Please can anyone detail, reference and confirm details concerning these
>areas?
>[/color]

Yes, the companies concerned can - *YOU* need to contact them. How else
will you confirm answers given here are correct?

[color=blue]
>
> P.s. Cross-posted to voip , etc.
>[/color]
More rubbish snipped. Structure a message properly - in a few lines, make
it straight to the point. Don't relay a conversation you are having with
yourself in your own mind!
[color=blue]
>[/color]

News Reader formulated the question :[color=blue]
>
> [ Cross-posted to uk.telecom.voip, etc. to provide exposure to another or
> alternative audience that may be equally and maybe additionally able to help
> in replying and may be additionally knowledgeable. {And equally for comment
> regarding applicability to other permutations of below enquiry - e.g. to
> broadband services, mobile service, etc.} See P.s. below for more. ]
>[/color]

<Snip Snip Snip>

You've slipped back to your old ways News Reader. This post was bloody
excruciating to read.

"Jono" <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid> wrote in message
news:mn.34d37d7635de4976.48968@blueyonder.invalid...[color=blue]
> News Reader formulated the question :[color=green]
>>
>> [ Cross-posted to uk.telecom.voip, etc. to provide exposure to another or
>> alternative audience that may be equally and maybe additionally able to
>> help in replying and may be additionally knowledgeable. {And equally for
>> comment regarding applicability to other permutations of below enquiry -
>> e.g. to broadband services, mobile service, etc.} See P.s. below for
>> more. ]
>>[/color]
>
> <Snip Snip Snip>
>
> You've slipped back to your old ways News Reader. This post was bloody
> excruciating to read.
>
>[/color]

.... cough ... lol...


Sorry. :)


As to the other poster... trying to find accurate versions of that
information from anyone other than BT (and then by being prepared to
personally and thoroughly review their official service view pricing and
conditions document) can be very difficult (in terms of ascertaining
confirmed, validated, accurate rather than scant, surface, contradictory
messages, etc.).


Best wishes,



News Reader


P.s Believe it or not, I was hoping to serve one of the purposes of this
newsgroup and mediums like it - save some time, duplication, etc. Naturally,
on qualified information I would use this as a place or base upon which to
try and confirm the same. Etc., etc., (share information, help others,
inform others, stimulate discussion, generate an archive document, etc.)

P.p.s. I agree with you in essence - that this is a function of a businesses
chosen terms, method and model of operation. I thought or hoped that their
was Ofcom oversight and possibly regulation and enforcement in this area.

"Dave P" <nospam@spamhouse.org.uk> wrote in message
news:4666f427$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...[color=blue]
>
> "News Reader" <no@email.invalid> wrote in message
> news:f452ph$ng4$1@inews.gazeta.pl...[color=green]
>>
>>
>> [ Cross-posted ]
>>
>>[/color]
> Rubbish snipped![color=green]
>>
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Can anyone please advise what requirements, regulations, etc. actually
>> exist that apply to publicly licensed telecommunications providers /
>> operators (e.g. / i.e. BT, Virgin Media, Talk Talk, etc.)?
>>
>> Particularly, requirements on timeframes for repair and compensation for
>> time out of service.
>>[/color]
>
> I can tell you where to find the information - BT, Virgin Media, Talk Talk
> etc.
>[color=green]
>> I think or thought one of the reasons for stern requirements in these
>> areas were that customers were supposed to have the ability to call
>> emergency services and hence when their phone service is not working it
>> is a (very) high priority to restore that service.[/color]
>
> Think or thought? OMG, which is it! No requirement for a company to
> suddenly turn up and fix something if threatened with that excuse. They
> set out their guidelines clearly for anyone who cares to look.
>[color=green]
>>And... secondarily,[/color]
>
> Or even secondly
>[color=green]
>> that a customer cannot be expected to pay line rental for that period of
>> service when in fact they are not receiving that service for which they
>> pay.[/color]
>
> Again, all companies are different and have their own terms and conditions
> to which you agree.
>[color=green]
>>Please can anyone detail, reference and confirm details concerning these
>>areas?
>>[/color]
>
> Yes, the companies concerned can - *YOU* need to contact them. How else
> will you confirm answers given here are correct?
>
>[color=green]
>>
>> P.s. Cross-posted to voip , etc.
>>[/color]
> More rubbish snipped. Structure a message properly - in a few lines, make
> it straight to the point. Don't relay a conversation you are having with
> yourself in your own mind!
>[color=green]
>>[/color]
>
>[/color]


Hi Dave,


In addition to my earlier post partially relating to your post (in response
to Jono @ 21:17 - 06/06/07), I think the reality is too short and concise =
to much mis-interpretation, etc. and complaints; too long and complete = to
much complaint about that!

It is a tough call - but in this sort of medium I tend to prefer "put it all
up there" (explanations, qualifications, etc.) so that those that need it
don't post pre-resolved responses.

In any event, please see my other post, as I essentially agree with you -
and thanks for your input.


Best wishes,




News Reader

"News Reader" <some@where.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:1DE9i.1841$uU4.1268@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...[color=blue]
>
> "Jono" <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid> wrote in message
> news:mn.34d37d7635de4976.48968@blueyonder.invalid...[color=green]
>> News Reader formulated the question :[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> [ Cross-posted to uk.telecom.voip, etc. to provide exposure to another
>>> or alternative audience that may be equally and maybe additionally able
>>> to help in replying and may be additionally knowledgeable. {And equally
>>> for comment regarding applicability to other permutations of below
>>> enquiry - e.g. to broadband services, mobile service, etc.} See P.s.
>>> below for more. ]
>>>[/color]
>>
>> <Snip Snip Snip>
>>
>> You've slipped back to your old ways News Reader. This post was bloody
>> excruciating to read.
>>
>>[/color]
>
> ... cough ... lol...
>
>
> Sorry. :)
>
>
> As to the other poster... trying to find accurate versions of that
> information from anyone other than BT (and then by being prepared to
> personally and thoroughly review their official service view pricing and
> conditions document) can be very difficult (in terms of ascertaining
> confirmed, validated, accurate rather than scant, surface, contradictory
> messages, etc.).
>
>
> Best wishes,
>
>
>
> News Reader
>
>
> P.s Believe it or not, I was hoping to serve one of the purposes of this
> newsgroup and mediums like it - save some time, duplication, etc.
> Naturally, on qualified information I would use this as a place or base
> upon which to try and confirm the same. Etc., etc., (share information,
> help others, inform others, stimulate discussion, generate an archive
> document, etc.)
>
> P.p.s. I agree with you in essence - that this is a function of a
> businesses chosen terms, method and model of operation. I thought or hoped
> that their was Ofcom oversight and possibly regulation and enforcement in
> this area.[/color]

BT, being a company with a quality management system (ISO 9001), is obliged
to publish its obligations re service targets, compensation arrangements
etc.
Other telcos may or may not be under those obligations - you'd have to
check/ask them individually.
If you want cheap, go cheap but expect there to be no such thing as a free
lunch.
If you want a quality-assured service, get your telephone service from BT
but expect to pay more.
Having said all that, BT's fault repair response times - at least in my
area - have worsened over the years.
When my phone goes faulty, the usual initial reply from BT nowadays is that
my fault has been scheduled for repair about 6 or 7 working days in the
future.
It was never as bad as this years ago.

George

"George Weston" <geoweston@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:5cq4mnF31o0olU1@mid.individual.net...[color=blue]
>
> "News Reader" <some@where.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:1DE9i.1841$uU4.1268@newsfe1-win.ntli.net...[color=green]
>>
>> "Jono" <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:mn.34d37d7635de4976.48968@blueyonder.invalid...[color=darkred]
>>> News Reader formulated the question :
>>>>
>>>> [ Cross-posted to uk.telecom.voip, etc. to provide exposure to another
>>>> or alternative audience that may be equally and maybe additionally able
>>>> to help in replying and may be additionally knowledgeable. {And equally
>>>> for comment regarding applicability to other permutations of below
>>>> enquiry - e.g. to broadband services, mobile service, etc.} See P.s.
>>>> below for more. ]
>>>>
>>>
>>> <Snip Snip Snip>
>>>
>>> You've slipped back to your old ways News Reader. This post was bloody
>>> excruciating to read.
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>> ... cough ... lol...
>>
>>
>> Sorry. :)
>>
>>
>> As to the other poster... trying to find accurate versions of that
>> information from anyone other than BT (and then by being prepared to
>> personally and thoroughly review their official service view pricing and
>> conditions document) can be very difficult (in terms of ascertaining
>> confirmed, validated, accurate rather than scant, surface, contradictory
>> messages, etc.).
>>
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>>
>>
>> News Reader
>>
>>
>> P.s Believe it or not, I was hoping to serve one of the purposes of this
>> newsgroup and mediums like it - save some time, duplication, etc.
>> Naturally, on qualified information I would use this as a place or base
>> upon which to try and confirm the same. Etc., etc., (share information,
>> help others, inform others, stimulate discussion, generate an archive
>> document, etc.)
>>
>> P.p.s. I agree with you in essence - that this is a function of a
>> businesses chosen terms, method and model of operation. I thought or
>> hoped that their was Ofcom oversight and possibly regulation and
>> enforcement in this area.[/color]
>
> BT, being a company with a quality management system (ISO 9001), is
> obliged to publish its obligations re service targets, compensation
> arrangements etc.
> Other telcos may or may not be under those obligations - you'd have to
> check/ask them individually.
> If you want cheap, go cheap but expect there to be no such thing as a free
> lunch.
> If you want a quality-assured service, get your telephone service from BT
> but expect to pay more.
> Having said all that, BT's fault repair response times - at least in my
> area - have worsened over the years.
> When my phone goes faulty, the usual initial reply from BT nowadays is
> that my fault has been scheduled for repair about 6 or 7 working days in
> the future.
> It was never as bad as this years ago.
>
> George
>
>[/color]

Hi,


Thanks George.

As you say in terms of BT performance that is very much what I expected. I
hadn't realised they had slipped to 6/7 days now.

One key difference might be in compensation - I know BT have a clear and
published (if largely unclear and / or unknown to many of their "staff" now)
refund policy - I.e. set a particular daily rate relative to the line
rental, etc. I believe it has, or used to, penalty escalators in, so after 7
days it kicked a higher rebate in to the customer (hence penalising
themselves and so incentivising them getting things fixed quicker); and
possibly another jump at 14 or 21 days. I guess if most people now accept
their "kind invitation" of redirection to a mobile they are not so troubled
by these real financial loses or costs (of the set rental rebates).

It is interesting that the requirement to specify / publish as part of
ISO9001 is the case. Great - and thanks for informing me.

Further, I guess some of this is legacy, from when they were required to do
this by the regulator or as the monopoly operator / government dictat.
Whether their is still any "obligation" would be interesting to know - or as
is suspected that it is pure legacy hangover and being retained as sensible
/ prudent business practise. In which case I would expect it will go or be
reshaped soon enough.

Anyhow all input welcomed and many thanks for your input George.


Best wishes,



News Reader

News Reader brought next idea :
[color=blue]
> Hi,
>
>
> Thanks George.
>
> As you say in terms of BT performance that is very much what I expected. I
> hadn't realised they had slipped to 6/7 days now.
>
> One key difference might be in compensation - I know BT have a clear and
> published (if largely unclear and / or unknown to many of their "staff" now)
> refund policy - I.e. set a particular daily rate relative to the line rental,
> etc. I believe it has, or used to, penalty escalators in, so after 7 days it
> kicked a higher rebate in to the customer (hence penalising themselves and so
> incentivising them getting things fixed quicker); and possibly another jump
> at 14 or 21 days. I guess if most people now accept their "kind invitation"
> of redirection to a mobile they are not so troubled by these real financial
> loses or costs (of the set rental rebates).
>
> It is interesting that the requirement to specify / publish as part of
> ISO9001 is the case. Great - and thanks for informing me.
>
> Further, I guess some of this is legacy, from when they were required to do
> this by the regulator or as the monopoly operator / government dictat.
> Whether their is still any "obligation" would be interesting to know - or as
> is suspected that it is pure legacy hangover and being retained as sensible /
> prudent business practise. In which case I would expect it will go or be
> reshaped soon enough.
>
> Anyhow all input welcomed and many thanks for your input George.
>[/color]

Things have changed somewhat.
<http://www.bt.com/customerservices/downloads/OurConsumerService.pdf>

For every day they were late, in the past, you used to get paid a full
month's rental. Now you can elect to have a day's rental for every day
they're late, or free call diversion & a call credit until the line's
fixed.

"Jono" <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid> wrote in message
news:mn.3c9e7d766ea63d1e.48968@blueyonder.invalid...[color=blue]
> News Reader brought next idea :
>[color=green]
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Thanks George.
>>
>> As you say in terms of BT performance that is very much what I expected.
>> I hadn't realised they had slipped to 6/7 days now.
>>
>> One key difference might be in compensation - I know BT have a clear and
>> published (if largely unclear and / or unknown to many of their "staff"
>> now) refund policy - I.e. set a particular daily rate relative to the
>> line rental, etc. I believe it has, or used to, penalty escalators in, so
>> after 7 days it kicked a higher rebate in to the customer (hence
>> penalising themselves and so incentivising them getting things fixed
>> quicker); and possibly another jump at 14 or 21 days. I guess if most
>> people now accept their "kind invitation" of redirection to a mobile they
>> are not so troubled by these real financial loses or costs (of the set
>> rental rebates).
>>
>> It is interesting that the requirement to specify / publish as part of
>> ISO9001 is the case. Great - and thanks for informing me.
>>
>> Further, I guess some of this is legacy, from when they were required to
>> do this by the regulator or as the monopoly operator / government dictat.
>> Whether their is still any "obligation" would be interesting to know - or
>> as is suspected that it is pure legacy hangover and being retained as
>> sensible / prudent business practise. In which case I would expect it
>> will go or be reshaped soon enough.
>>
>> Anyhow all input welcomed and many thanks for your input George.
>>[/color]
>
> Things have changed somewhat.
> <http://www.bt.com/customerservices/downloads/OurConsumerService.pdf>
>
> For every day they were late, in the past, you used to get paid a full
> month's rental. Now you can elect to have a day's rental for every day
> they're late, or free call diversion & a call credit until the line's
> fixed.[/color]

Which in practice is fine by me.
When my (rural) line goes down - as it does whenever BT Openreach engineers
visit our village and "steal" my pair of wires to provide someone else with
service (yes, it happens with monotonous regularity!), I opt for call
diversion to my mobile. I prefer staying in contact rather than a few quid
back.
Others may disagree.
Mind you, I'd much prefer a same-day fault-fixing target...

George

"George Weston" <geoweston@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:5cr2qeF2savrcU1@mid.individual.net...[color=blue]
>
> "Jono" <nothanks@blueyonder.invalid> wrote in message
> news:mn.3c9e7d766ea63d1e.48968@blueyonder.invalid...[color=green]
>> News Reader brought next idea :
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks George.
>>>
>>> As you say in terms of BT performance that is very much what I expected.
>>> I hadn't realised they had slipped to 6/7 days now.
>>>
>>> One key difference might be in compensation - I know BT have a clear and
>>> published (if largely unclear and / or unknown to many of their "staff"
>>> now) refund policy - I.e. set a particular daily rate relative to the
>>> line rental, etc. I believe it has, or used to, penalty escalators in,
>>> so after 7 days it kicked a higher rebate in to the customer (hence
>>> penalising themselves and so incentivising them getting things fixed
>>> quicker); and possibly another jump at 14 or 21 days. I guess if most
>>> people now accept their "kind invitation" of redirection to a mobile
>>> they are not so troubled by these real financial loses or costs (of the
>>> set rental rebates).
>>>
>>> It is interesting that the requirement to specify / publish as part of
>>> ISO9001 is the case. Great - and thanks for informing me.
>>>
>>> Further, I guess some of this is legacy, from when they were required to
>>> do this by the regulator or as the monopoly operator / government
>>> dictat. Whether their is still any "obligation" would be interesting to
>>> know - or as is suspected that it is pure legacy hangover and being
>>> retained as sensible / prudent business practise. In which case I would
>>> expect it will go or be reshaped soon enough.
>>>
>>> Anyhow all input welcomed and many thanks for your input George.
>>>[/color]
>>
>> Things have changed somewhat.
>> <http://www.bt.com/customerservices/downloads/OurConsumerService.pdf>
>>
>> For every day they were late, in the past, you used to get paid a full
>> month's rental. Now you can elect to have a day's rental for every day
>> they're late, or free call diversion & a call credit until the line's
>> fixed.[/color]
>
> Which in practice is fine by me.
> When my (rural) line goes down - as it does whenever BT Openreach
> engineers visit our village and "steal" my pair of wires to provide
> someone else with service (yes, it happens with monotonous regularity!), I
> opt for call diversion to my mobile. I prefer staying in contact rather
> than a few quid back.
> Others may disagree.
> Mind you, I'd much prefer a same-day fault-fixing target...
>
> George
>
>[/color]


Hi,


Thanks George


Best wishes,



News Reader