Re: Failure to Deliver - What Options Do I Have? - Page 2

briesmith · ‎01-07-2012

I had to close my offices last June and switch to working from home. This was a difficult time but I managed it OK except for one small detail concerning internet access.

My previous offices had high speed connectivity while my home has only 20Mbs (and that's a laugh) ADSL2 which is extremely variable and offers only a maximum (on a good day) of about 9Mbs anyway (ie less than 50% of what I am paying for - what other business would be allowed to do this?).

I put up with that - remaining with external hosting services in the interim - because BT promised BT Infinity availability for end of March 2012.

I registered my interest and waited for the months to roll by. 31 March came and went but without any contact from BT about how to switch to the new service. I therefore contacted the sales office only to be told that the delivery date was now end of June.

Today, 1 July, I repeated the process only to find that it is now 30 September 2012 and I am a) absolutely furious and b) at my wits end as to what I can do about it.

I know we are insignificant and no one gives a toss about us but as small businessses we must have someone whose job it is to speak up on our behalf? BT are the monopoly supplier; no other company can offer high speed broadband access until BT do the necessary engineering work from their exchange to their cabinet in the street.

Given that, I find it teeth grindingly unacceptable that they can simply put key, vital dates back with no obligation on them, firstly, not to and, secondly, without having to consult with their frustrated clients if and when they (rarely) have to.

As it is I am buggered; up the Swanee with no canoe and only totally incompetent paddlers.

And in case you are wondering I live in Radlett, a largish town less than 20 miles from the centre of London.

Where do I go to complain and to see whether there is, in fact, anything I can do about it?

DaveA · ‎16-07-2012

@briesmith wrote:

Dave

While I appreciate your reply none of what you say changes anything.

If your university project management course suggested a doubling of time estimates then I am sure the courses the BT planners went on made the same recommendation.

Delays in projects do happen (I have worked in IT all my adult life) but twice? And without any contact or consultation?

This demonstrates a Barclays/Ryanair like disdain for the customer. These dates are important and it shouldn't be open to companies like BT to simply and unilaterally change them without any regard for the businesses which have incorporated them into their own planning.

That it can and does happen shows only that the BT culture hasn't really moved on from the bad old pre-privatisation days.

Turning to the ADSL quoted speed issue; I repeat that I continue to be amazed that the regulator/advertising standards people allow BT to get away with these claims.

It would be fairer to quote minimum speeds with an assurance that most users will get better.

It would be just as fair to quote average speeds.

It would also be appropriate to use the same physics they use to calculate the maximum theoretical speed to work out the most likely speed. (BT knows how far everyone is from their exchange after all).

The only thing that isn't fair, that is dishonest, is to quote the maximum theoretical speed when the only subscriber who could get that performance would be a squatter in the telephone exchange.

Hi,

In my opinion, rather than anything to do with BT, quoting the maximum possible speed as an 'up to' is the only fair way of doing it.

Let's look at the two other ways you suggest.

1. Quote minumum speed.

Well than that would be a case of saying "Hi, buy our broadband. You can get at least 256 Kb per second, possibly more!!"

For the purposes of what counts as broadband you would have to go that low, because there is no way of guaranteeing a minimum speed.

2. Quote the average speed.

Firstly, let me ask you this - the average of what and where? The UK average, where anyone who is in a population centre will get above this, and everyone in the sticks will get below it, and still complain anyway? Or the average of an area, where it might be a tiny bit more accurate, but probably not.

Also how would you suggest that this information is gathered and maintained? Parts of the network in the sticks would grind to a halt if ISPs had to check every day, or possibly even more often, to see what every single phone line in the country should be getting as a speed.

And who would be the arbiter of this information? Who would gather it? Who would collate it? Who would store it?

As you can see you started off with Mission Impossible, and ended up with Mission Impossible stuck in Pandora's Box, with Doctor Who tagging along for good measure. I'm not trying to be flippant by the way, just finding an easy way of analogising this.

And finally I'd like to answer your quote:

"Delays in projects do happen (I have worked in IT all my adult life) but twice?"

Is there some sort of limit of the number of delays that can happen? Life isn't like that, and neither is project management. Delays, hiccups, accidents, changes of plan, lack of funding, changes of budgetary needs, changes of business needs, lack of staff, lack of resources... need I go on? Any and all of these can and do happen in any project, and none of them are mutually exclusive or unique in occurrence, whether it be one run by BT or anyone else.

I am really sorry that this has caused you bother, but BT does try very hard, despite the statements otherwise by people who don't like BT, and sometimes it goes wrong and sometimes more than once for the same group of people.

Hopefully at some stage it will go right, and everyone will be happy.

Dave

gouledw · ‎16-07-2012

If I may add my pennies worth. the 'up to' speed, is possibly the best thing to describe it as. I mean my line for example, you would expect at 9km long not to be even able to recieve broadband. and the speed estimate for our line is only 1mb, whereas we can happily run at just about 3meg on a 3dB margin and a stable connection. i call that brilliant. thats why its brilliant at 'up to'. if you were to say that your line could support no more than 1meg, then bt would have to cap it at 1mb, whats the point in that when you have plenty of scope for excess speeds? by giving it as 'up to' it gives both cp and consumer a level playing field to be disappointed or happy.

firionicable · ‎17-07-2012

I agree with that. Better yet, if you are giving details which includes up to, you may want to provide the maximum capacity you want with your connection. This way, you won't going to be disappointed with the outcome if they manage to make it to its maximum level.

briesmith · ‎17-07-2012

No one gets the quoted speed. That is the top and bottom of it and my entire reason for banging on about it.

If a sizable minority did, or 1 in 2 people, or a majority even, then it could be a defensible position to quote theoretical maximums. But, I repeat, no one gets this speed. It isn't theoretical so much as mythical.

As for how BT would get the statistics necessary to be honest with their speed predictions; are you saying [Dave] that they aren't collecting the data you list?

Turning back to the failure to deliver Infinity on time - twice - I find it incredible that any reasonable person would advance the excuses for project failure I read in some of the replies to my post.

We are not talking about the local operatic society, or the WRVS. We are talking about a massive company that makes its living from planning and delivering infrastructure and associated services. Planning and delivery capabilities it tries to sell to other companies; incredibly.

They should not fail and they definitely shouldn't fail twice. If and when they do there should be penalties - financial and in terms of careers for those responsible - to be paid.

BT are the only game in town. The UK's monopoly supplier; there isn't anyone else. They should be forced to do better. As it is they are just like the banks; arrogant, oblivious to criticism and totally impervious to market forces.

Individual consumers like me suffer because of this but more importantly, BT condemns the UK and its entire economy to additonal costs and failure in the race to be competitive internationally.

Their failure to support a micro business in Radlett is a motif for what they are doing to the country as a whole.

MHC · ‎17-07-2012

@briesmith wrote:
No one gets the quoted speed. That is the top and bottom of it and my entire reason for banging on about it.

I am on an 40/2 service which is advertised as UPTO 38 Mbps service and I get that speed.

I have colleagues and friends on an upto 78Mbps service and they achieve 77 to 79 Mbps.

QED

DaveA · ‎18-07-2012

Hi,

There is an entire system devoted to determining line speeds, but my point is that using this system to try and gather hour by hour data of things like the average speed for the entire country would be ludicrous and pointless. Each line has its own characteristics, and no two physical lines are the same.

I would be curious to know where the information for your comment comes from:

"No one gets the quoted speed. That is the top and bottom of it and my entire reason for banging on about it."

Also you do know that BT is actually heavily regulated, and has been for many years? I admit that BT isn't perfect (no-one is), but many decisions about what it can and can't do are made by the regulators, which counters your statement:

"BT are the only game in town. The UK's monopoly supplier; there isn't anyone else. They should be forced to do better. As it is they are just like the banks; arrogant, oblivious to criticism and totally impervious to market forces.

Individual consumers like me suffer because of this but more importantly, BT condemns the UK and its entire economy to additional costs and failure in the race to be competitive internationally.

Their failure to support a micro business in Radlett is a motif for what they are doing to the country as a whole."

The fact is that the 'BT monopoly' only exists in part these days, and only because it takes vast sums of money and resources for other companies to create new infrastructure. Take a look at Virgin for example. They have taken over every cable compant iin the country, barring Hull, and are now the biggest supplier of fibre broadband in certain areas.

They have, however, (as far as I'm aware, and as a normal member of the public here) not dug a single trench since they finished their acquisitions. A friend of mine used to live 10 yards from the end of a fibre cable in his street. He was told by Virgin that he simply wouldn't get it. Ever.

BT is spending 2.5 billion pounds on the current network upgrades, and will probably end up spending a lot more. Because of this the whole country (or just about) will eventually be on the 21st Century Network. But this takes time and money, and there will be delays.

It is entirely possible that someone has been punished for delays in provision, but that is something neither you nor I will ever find out about.

As far as the issue of your broadband provision is concerned, on behalf of BT all I can do is apologise for the delay, and advise you to keep an eye out for updates, bearing in mind that any date given is an estimate.

Dave