awful service

Dangerjunkie · Sep 03, 2009, 11:30:12

Quote from: tpk on Sep 03, 2009, 11:03:17
Paul thanks again, I'll try turning everything off, worth a go. Would my mains electrical supply cause interference? The BT line comes in about a metre away from what looks like a very old supply board.

It is possible for interference to come in on the mains so potentially yes. It would also tie in with appearance of the problem when people come home and start turning stuff on. I would be more concerned by the line running close and parallel to electricity cables anywhere. If I was installing I probably wouldn't put them that close.

This could be an interference issue if somebody has introduced a new piece of equipment in the area or something has gone faulty but that isn't a certainty. Do you get on well with your neighbours? Could you talk to them and find out what they are syncing at and how well their broadband is going?

Cheers,
Paul.

Tacitus · Sep 03, 2009, 11:38:23

Quote from: tpk on Sep 03, 2009, 11:03:17
.... I think support should talk to me the way everyone on this thread is doing so. Honest and to the point. ......

The old adage, 'be careful what you wish for' comes to mind....

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 11:40:14

Quote from: Tacitus on Sep 03, 2009, 11:38:23
The old adage, 'be careful what you wish for' comes to mind....

I mean it. Obviously I'm a customer so should be treat in that way but if they can't do anything because BT are ignoring them, but if they are indeed trying to get something done, then say so. It would be much better. All I'm getting is "yeah it's bad" and "send us some pings" after many months of problems.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 11:41:39

The problem is probably in the 'last mile'. Unfortunately, wherever you go, BT Openreach own and maintain that bit of wire.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 11:42:59

Rik, IDNET should be telling me that. I really don't appreciate the run around.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 11:45:01

Paul, my neighbours don't even have broadband :-) Not the immediate ones anyway. Then the guy who would, two houses away is on the front street so I think he has cable. I don't know that the problem is at certain peak times.

Dangerjunkie · Sep 03, 2009, 11:46:30

Hi,

http://www.samknows.com/broadband/exchange/MYYO

The LLU providers:
Would I... AOL: probably not, BE/O2: probably would, Pipex/Tiscali: no way, TalkTalk: very unlikely, Sky: Would probably give that a go as it's free.

Quote from: tpk on Sep 02, 2009, 17:55:51
Connection Speed 715 kbps 987 kbps

York is WBC enabled and that upstream rate is too high for Max. Rik, is this a WBC issue rather than what it looks like?

Cheers,
Paul.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 11:50:20

I don't know, Paul.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 11:56:21

Paul, I was put on WBC when I signed up for IDNET.

I used to be with BE, it was flaky but as I say, better than what I have right now.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 12:01:12

Quote from: tpk on Sep 03, 2009, 11:40:14
All I'm getting is "yeah it's bad" and "send us some pings" after many months of problems.

Did you carry out the telnet test which was requested?

Dangerjunkie · Sep 03, 2009, 12:04:12

tpk,

What is the make and model of the modem, what software version is in it and when is the last time you updated the modem software please?

This may be a WBC problem and not a line fault per se. There seem to have been a number of cases where the exchange engineers haven't received adequate training and have botched WBC installs or configurations. WBC is very new and was only installed in York on 21/03/09. When was your original install date? I'm wondering if this could be a case of newbie engineer syndrome.

Thanks,
Paul.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 12:10:53

Quote from: Rik on Sep 03, 2009, 12:01:12
Did you carry out the telnet test which was requested?

Yes Rik. I've provided plenty of pings and telnets over the months. If I'm having a problem at that moment they time out, if I'm not, they work.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 12:14:33

So you're seeing packet loss?

Have you eliminated the possibility of any browser issues by trying alternatives or, if using Firefox, disabling all addons.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 12:14:50

Paul,

I'm using a netgear v4 which I'm fairly sure is up to date but will check again. I've tried other modems.

I was activated in June, which makes me realise when I'm describing my long term problems, they actually begun when I was on LLU from last October onwards. However, it's never been as bad as it has been these last few weeks.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 12:15:47

In answer to the second question Rik, absolutely, I've got 2 desktops and a laptop and have tried different browsers and OS. It's the ADSL not my systems as it's not just one PC. I only need to look at the router stats and the sudden doubling in SNR to tell that.

Re: Packet Loss, I either can ping and telnet or I can't. I try a web page and it fails completely, or works.

Also, my modem is taking much longer to sync than it used to.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 12:21:27

It's a case of eliminating all the possibilities. From what you say, your line has been degrading since LLU days and has got worse. That's one of the most difficult problems for anyone to get fixed. As I've mentioned before, BT have no obligation to deliver ADSL at all, let alone at a given speed. Their attitude is that a working service is if their engineer can connect and load the BT test site. If he can, there's no fault and they will raise the £160+VAT charge. In that respect, it can be cheaper to have a second line put in, specified as being for ADSL. With a simultaneous provide, you get an ADSL engineer doing the job, which can help tremendously. I had this done recently and, for the same line attenuation and noise margin, I gained 500k on Max, 1M on WBC.

WBC does seem to have a longer handshaking routine than Max, btw.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 13:16:55

I really don't understand that BT have no obligation to provide ADSL. Surely that's what IDNET are buying from them. I've been mis-sold ADSL if no one is obliged to give it to me for the price I pay. It's wasting my time and money. Not to mention causing lots of undue stress.

I feel it's only a most difficult problem to solve because the system doesn't oblige my ISP and BT (I don't care which as a customer!) to fix a poor line. I resent needing to know the technicalities. Take away the word oblige and even "care at all or try to genuinely help after the initial support questions/process" would be nice. The support process is to make sure it's not something on the customer's end, then .. erm.. just keep annoying them by asking the same stuff again and again and not transparently tell them the situation with BT and/or get BT to come and look.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 13:27:02

You have ADSL, it's just not as fast as you'd like it to be. BT do not, and I can't emphasise this enough, have any obligation to provide the service, they can condemn your line at any time and refuse to provide further ADSL. Their only obligation is that it works for voice and a 28.8k dial-up modem. Sorry, but much as none of us like it, those are the facts.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 13:27:40

I disagree entirely. I don't have ADSL. I have broken ADSL. I'm not complaining only about the speed. It's unusable for times each day. It is a faulty service. It's not my fault if it doesn't have a problem right at the moment they check. If they look at the history of the service and watched it, they'd know.

I'm talking about quality of service for which I pay.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 13:29:35

I can say no more. If you are certain your line is to blame, ask IDNet to get a BT engineer out to you, accepting that you will face a charge of £160+VAT if no fault is found.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 13:30:45

Do you think I'm wrong Rik?

I will not accept that there will be a charge as all I can reasonably be expected to do is try to rule out my own equipment and wiring to the best of my knowledge.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 13:34:57

I've already had an engineer here and it was a waste of time. He only did the most basic checks and it was for voice. Why would I accept a charge from what is well known to be a bad, dishonest service provider? (BT) I might agree on the basis that I've checked my own side of things, but I wouldn't pay as I'm not at fault. Shouldn't IDNET pay for it? I pay them to give me usable ADSL.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 13:37:54

Quote from: tpk on Sep 03, 2009, 13:30:45
Do you think I'm wrong Rik?

I will not accept that there will be a charge as all I can reasonably be expected to do is try to rule out my own equipment and wiring to the best of my knowledge.

I think you don't grasp the reality of a BT-based ADSL service, which is a 'best effort' product. That allows BT to set the levels as low as they want them, and ISPs can do little about it. I am aware of at least one person who had their line condemned after many years of service, because the speed had deteriorated and they tried to get BT to fix it. Unless the Govt or Ofcom set realistic performance targets, the situation will not improve.

It's no accident that there have been capacity problems on WBC, for example, which are now being addressed as BT Retail are about to enter the WBC market. The ISPs who have introduced WBC already have been used as guinea pigs by BT, and have lost customers as a result of poor performance. However, BT still determines what is acceptable, so there is no comeback.

The best we can do is bombard the BT CEO wih complaints, make a fuss in the media, or get our MPs involved. If we want real change, then the effective monopoly which BT have must be broken.

So no, I don't think you're wrong to want a better service, but I do think you have to understand how the system works with BT.

tpk · Sep 03, 2009, 13:40:25

Fair points. I think I do grasp the reality, I just don't like it. I'd give up except I am still trying to get the quality of my line addressed but I suppose I might have to just forget it. As far as I'm am concerned as a customer I shouldn't need to understand what's going on with BT and IDNET. The basic facts which matter for me are I pay for something and it is not up to standard.

"Best effort" certainly not where BT are concerned so I assume you mean from IDNET. I don't even know that I agree with that otherwise they'd be getting an engineer out on my behalf already.

Rik · Sep 03, 2009, 13:40:39

Quote from: tpk on Sep 03, 2009, 13:34:57
I've already had an engineer here and it was a waste of time. He only did the most basic checks and it was for voice. Why would I accept a charge from what is well known to be a bad, dishonest service provider? (BT) I might agree on the basis that I've checked my own side of things, but I wouldn't pay as I'm not at fault. Shouldn't IDNET pay for it? I pay them to give me usable ADSL.

As I've just said, it doesn't work that way. You could try migrating to Andrews & Arnold, who 'guarantee' to fix line problems, but the last member to do that found that they couldn't achieve any more than IDNet had. LLU is your best bet in such a situation, but remember that the 'last mile' is still over the Openreach copper pair, so still subject to the same noise and instability issues. That's why I say BT has n effective monopoly.