I have opened a new thread (as advised by legapickle) under the heading "BT Calamity" where I 'ramble on' detailing my problems with BT which beggar belief. I have not received any replies yet, probably due to the fact that people are so peed-off with BT and can only think about their own problem.The older Openreach crews or gangs are competent and well-equipped but the younger chaps attending faults 'raised ' (BT speak) by householders appear to be inadequately trained and unqualified to climb a pole!. By the way - it is quicker and easier to find a thread than through CAG search if you simply Google the title.

To Whom it May Concern. . ABOUT ME. I am a qualified electrician, having served an indentured apprenticeship, working on MOD technical sites and equipment, covering fault location and repairs on power systems (including overhead pole lines), generator controls and RAF communication systems. In my 75th year. Living since 1967 in remote rural rented accommodation with wife who suffers from heart disease. Self employed since circa. 1960. Fellow of the Institution of Diagnostic Engineers. Still working part time as hands-on consultant and troubleshooter possessing full kit of 17th Edition test equipment and instrumentation. BT CALAMITY. WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Early in 2008. At about this time, I noticed intermittent ‘crackling’ noises on our BT telephone handset. This did not interfere with our use of the ‘phone to any great extent. But to make sure I looked in the Telephone Directory and found their instructions for DIY fault diagnosis on domestic equipment before contacting them; to this end I bought from my electrical wholesalers a new handset. The tests and inspections specified were applied and no fault was indicated on our domestic internal service. As time went on, we became aware that the ‘crackling’ and intermittent service occurred during (and for a day or so after) periods of high rainfall combined with strong winds. 6th August 2008 Finally the line stopped working altogether and so I took our telephone instruments and equipment to a neighbour with a separate overhead cable line and tested them there, where they worked perfectly. This indicated that the fault was on the external BT overhead line leading to our dwelling. 9th August 2008. I inspected the BT overhead pole line and discovered that an overhanging branch growing on a tree on the opposite side of the access road had been chafing the thin cable suspended between two poles about 100 metres from the terminal pole. My diagnosis therefore was that the compounded effects of stormy weather and the unchecked growth of tree branches in contact with the line had caused the normal catenary characteristics to be altered so that the line was weakened by wave oscillation imposing strains beyond the designed strength of the cable. Because of this a communication circuit had become faulty. 10th August 2008. Accordingly, by mobile ‘phone, I then reported the fault to BT on the faults number given in the BT ‘phone book with the specific request that a LINESMAN BE SENT to repair the fault. The BT receptionist said that BT had applied a remote line check and that this indicated that the problem was internal and not on the BT external system and that a ‘telephone engineer’ would attend on the following day. No mention was made of callout charges at this time. Thinking that the ‘telephone engineer’ would be professionally qualified and in charge of linesmen, I agreed to the visit. . 11th August 2008 By this time the weather was calm and dry so with no movement on the suspended cable the telephone became more usable. A young man in a BT van arrived and applied exactly the same internal tests that I had previously applied to my telephone instrument and the incoming service box. When I informed him of my findings and asked that he check the external line, he insisted that the problem was with my equipment and that he was not allowed to climb a pole or ascend a ladder because of BT’s Health and Safety policy. This was the point at which he said that a callout charge would be made. I said that in the circumstances I do not intend to pay for these because the overhead line had not been inspected and tested by an appropriate authorised technician between the terminal pole joint and a ladder accessible joint mounted on the 4th pole away from the terminal pole. 7th October 2008. After a windy night the telephone service broke down completely. Once again, I ‘phoned BT,who again applied what they called a ‘line check’ and again said the line was OK. Again I requested that a LINESMAN should attend. The conversation followed exactly the same pattern as before with the receptionist saying that a ‘telephone engineer’ would call on the following day. 8th October 2008. Young man duly arrived, on his own, started to apply the same tests as before. Ignored requests to stop doing this and to test the overhead line, and doggedly continued despite being asked to leave and get on with inspecting the overhead line and the pole box connections. Once again I was told that he was not authorised to climb poles and that there would be a callout charge applied to my account. After I protested he eventually pulled out a mobile ‘phone and after a while managed to contact a colleague working some 18 miles away to come to the site with a van mounted mobile access platform. An older man who behaved more like an experienced and qualified technician arrived with this vehicle. Advising and instructing the younger man, the line was inspected, tested and repaired between the second and third poles by means of a straight joint fixed to the cable in the middle of the catenary span, with self tightening wire binders relieving strain in the damaged section. After shortening the tree branches and testing the service was returned to normal. Callout Charges. I have since received BT bills for £174.28 over and above the legitimate charges for calls and line rental and an exorbitant ‘handling charge’ for having the nerve to pay bills by cheque. I do not like doing business through Direct Debit. I have always paid for calls made by cheque. In November 2008 I wrote to BT asking for a breakdown of costs for the £174.28 demanded and a description of work carried out. BT have never replied to my letter. I have repeatedly ‘phoned BT to enquire about the situation only to be told that ‘investigations are being made’ and ‘full service will be maintained’ and that we ‘will not be disconnected without prior notification’. At no time did I speak to the same person more than once, with one exception as follows: A man who, when asked for his name replied indistinctly ‘Sandie’? (Sandys, Sandy, Saundry, Sandeep, if forename or surname I do not know). This person was adamant, politely, but slightly aggressively insisting that I have to pay the charge and subsequently ‘phoned to say that I have not been billed for the second visit, only for the first visit. Disconnection. Our facility for dialling out has been disconnected without prior notification for about three weeks now. Our ‘phone line is now configured to receive calls but not enabled to make outgoing calls. I am informed that this function has been disconnected at the exchange. OPINION. At the beginning of 2008, during a season of high rainfall, high winds, thunderstorms and wide variations in ambient temperatures, the combined catenary and conductor cable was subjected to stresses and conditions beyond it’s designed mechanical insulation and expansion-contraction limits. By the beginning of 2008, deterioration of the integrity of the cable at one point had already caused interference to audible reception in telephone ear pieces. In October 2008, annual changes from the prevailing westerly wind direction and the beginning of equinoctial south-easterly gales finally imposed further stresses that caused the cable to fail due to increasing deterioration. In August 2008 therefore, at the time of the first visit by an inappropriately qualified BT repair man, the damaged and deteriorating cable was causing the problems reported to BT at that time. In that case, the callout charges ostensibly and unfairly levied by BT to the customer for the first visit in August 2008 should be cancelled and full service reinstated at no extra charge to the BT customer. Signed 24th March 2009 COMMENT. Repairs and maintenance costs of external public service systems are the responsibility of the providers and these costs should not be born by individual subscribers. DWG. cc.

Hi legal pickle. Will you please explain how you consider I have 'hijacked' this thread, since my last post is consequent to my other earlier posts in this thread? I am informed by OTELO that BT Retail IS my service provider, comment please. I have notified, consulted and corresponded with ALL the telecoms bodies and organisation you mention. My complaint was investigated by OTELO as a result of a 'Deadlock' letter from BT, my service provider. I have complied with the complaints process in great detail being asked to provide all of them with multiple copies (ad infinitum) describing the circumstances of my complaint. Are you involved in the administration of these forums and in what capacity? Having exhausted all avenues I have now decided to agree to OTELO's unsatisfactory Final Decision to avoid further distress and so that we can 'phone out again from our currently restricted service. Regards and best wishes, swindoed.

Landline Phones - Customer service issues, quality of service and phone repairs Openreach is a new part of BT which has been created to install and maintain phone and internet connections to Britain’s homes and businesses on behalf of most telephone and internet service providers. You will notice that if an engineer needs to visit your home to fix any wiring he or she will be an Openreach engineer, whether or not you are a BT phone or internet customer. All Openreach engineers will carry identification. If you are in any doubt about an Openreach engineer visiting your home, please contact your phone company. For more information on Openreach please click here. Link to www.openreach.co.uk Openreach was created to form a BT company over which OTELO has NO JURISDICTION OR AUTHORITY. If You report a faulty telephone to the 'service provider' ie BT Retail.they (Openreach) may send a young partly qualified person who is not qualified to climb a pole or mount a ladder! and you will be charged a call-out fee and a charge for imaginary 'repairs' indoors which, if you dispute it will result in your phone being disconnected or the service restricted and you wont be able to phone out. Openreach will send an invoice to BT Retail who will send you a bill for uneccessary repairs. Complaints to OTELO therefore are a complete waste of time since they will uphold the interests of BT rather than the complainant. Compensation usually termed 'a gesture of goodwill' is niggardly and does not adequately represent the expenses incurred in making a claim. OTELO's powers should be extended to encompass the activities of ALL BT GROUP COMPANIES AND ORGANISATIONS concerned with telephone service. I am extremely disappointed with the result of my claim having been electronically shunted between BT call centres from Durham via Cairo, Bangladesh, The Phillipines and probably Timbuctu and Newcastle. It has taken a year for the ombudsman or ombudswoman to wade through all all the other BT customers who have complained and I have had enough. I am going to agree to his/her terms just to get rid of it!.

My bank has replaced the money fraudulently taken from my debit card a/c by rewardsnow. From what you say, it would appear that the OFT were unable to close them down (or couldn't be bothered to do so!). Stay cool .

I also have had problems with BT fault repair charges and my complaint has been accepted by OTELO for investigation. The situation detailing the problem as sent to OTEL is summarised below:- To Whom it May Concern. . ABOUT ME. I am a qualified electrician, having served an indentured apprenticeship, working on MOD technical sites and equipment, covering fault location and repairs on power systems (including overhead pole lines), generator controls and RAF communication systems. In my 75th year. Living since 1967 in remote rural rented accommodation with wife who suffers from heart disease. Self employed since circa. 1960. Fellow of the Institution of Diagnostic Engineers. Still working part time as hands-on consultant and troubleshooter possessing full kit of 17th Edition test equipment and instrumentation. BT CALAMITY. WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Early in 2008. At about this time, I noticed intermittent ‘crackling’ noises on our BT telephone handset. This did not interfere with our use of the ‘phone to any great extent. But to make sure I looked in the Telephone Directory and found their instructions for DIY fault diagnosis on domestic equipment before contacting them; to this end I bought from my electrical wholesalers a new handset. The tests and inspections specified were applied and no fault was indicated on our domestic internal service. As time went on, we became aware that the ‘crackling’ and intermittent service occurred during (and for a day or so after) periods of high rainfall combined with strong winds. 6th August 2008 Finally the line stopped working altogether and so I took our telephone instruments and equipment to a neighbour with a separate overhead cable line and tested them there, where they worked perfectly. This indicated that the fault was on the external BT overhead line leading to our dwelling. 9th August 2008. I inspected the BT overhead pole line and discovered that an overhanging branch growing on a tree on the opposite side of the access road had been chafing the thin cable suspended between two poles about 100 metres from the terminal pole. My diagnosis therefore was that the compounded effects of stormy weather and the unchecked growth of tree branches in contact with the line had caused the normal catenary characteristics to be altered so that the line was weakened by wave oscillation imposing strains beyond the designed strength of the cable. Because of this a communication circuit had become faulty. 10th August 2008. Accordingly, by mobile ‘phone, I then reported the fault to BT on the faults number given in the BT ‘phone book with the specific request that a LINESMAN BE SENT to repair the fault. The BT receptionist said that BT had applied a remote line check and that this indicated that the problem was internal and not on the BT external system and that a ‘telephone engineer’ would attend on the following day. No mention was made of callout charges at this time. Thinking that the ‘telephone engineer’ would be professionally qualified and in charge of linesmen, I agreed to the visit. . 11th August 2008 By this time the weather was calm and dry so with no movement on the suspended cable the telephone became more usable. A young man in a BT van arrived and applied exactly the same internal tests that I had previously applied to my telephone instrument and the incoming service box. When I informed him of my findings and asked that he check the external line, he insisted that the problem was with my equipment and that he was not allowed to climb a pole or ascend a ladder because of BT’s Health and Safety policy. This was the point at which he said that a callout charge would be made. I said that in the circumstances I do not intend to pay for these because the overhead line had not been inspected and tested by an appropriate authorised technician between the terminal pole joint and a ladder accessible joint mounted on the 4th pole away from the terminal pole. 7th October 2008. After a windy night the telephone service broke down completely. Once again, I ‘phoned BT,who again applied what they called a ‘line check’ and again said the line was OK. Again I requested that a LINESMAN should attend. The conversation followed exactly the same pattern as before with the receptionist saying that a ‘telephone engineer’ would call on the following day. 8th October 2008. Young man duly arrived, on his own, started to apply the same tests as before. Ignored requests to stop doing this and to test the overhead line, and doggedly continued despite being asked to leave and get on with inspecting the overhead line and the pole box connections. Once again I was told that he was not authorised to climb poles and that there would be a callout charge applied to my account. After I protested he eventually pulled out a mobile ‘phone and after a while managed to contact a colleague working some 18 miles away to come to the site with a van mounted mobile access platform. An older man who behaved more like an experienced and qualified technician arrived with this vehicle. Advising and instructing the younger man, the line was inspected, tested and repaired between the second and third poles by means of a straight joint fixed to the cable in the middle of the catenary span, with self tightening wire binders relieving strain in the damaged section. After shortening the tree branches and testing the service was returned to normal. Callout Charges. I have since received BT bills for £174.28 over and above the legitimate charges for calls and line rental and an exorbitant ‘handling charge’ for having the nerve to pay bills by cheque. I do not like doing business through Direct Debit. I have always paid for calls made by cheque. In November 2008 I wrote to BT asking for a breakdown of costs for the £174.28 demanded and a description of work carried out. BT have never replied to my letter. I have repeatedly ‘phoned BT to enquire about the situation only to be told that ‘investigations are being made’ and ‘full service will be maintained’ and that we ‘will not be disconnected without prior notification’. At no time did I speak to the same person more than once, with one exception as follows: A man who, when asked for his name replied indistinctly ‘Sandie’? (Sandys, Sandy, Saundry, Sandeep, if forename or surname I do not know). This person was adamant, politely, but slightly aggressively insisting that I have to pay the charge and subsequently ‘phoned to say that I have not been billed for the second visit, only for the first visit. Disconnection. Our facility for dialling out has been disconnected without prior notification for about three weeks now. Our ‘phone line is now configured to receive calls but not enabled to make outgoing calls. I am informed that this function has been disconnected at the exchange. OPINION. At the beginning of 2008, during a season of high rainfall, high winds, thunderstorms and wide variations in ambient temperatures, the combined catenary and conductor cable was subjected to stresses and conditions beyond it’s designed mechanical, insulation and expansion-contraction limits. By the beginning of 2008, deterioration of the integrity of the cable at one point had already caused interference to audible reception in telephone ear pieces. In October 2008, annual changes from the prevailing westerly wind direction and the beginning of equinoctial south-easterly gales finally imposed further stresses that caused the cable to fail due to increasing deterioration. In August 2008 therefore, at the time of the first visit by an inappropriately qualified BT repair man, the damaged and deteriorating cable was causing the problems reported to BT at that time. In that case, the callout charges ostensibly and unfairly levied by BT to the customer for the first visit in August 2008 should be cancelled and full service reinstated at no extra charge to the BT customer. Signed 24th March 2009 COMMENT. Repairs and maintenance costs of external public service systems are the responsibility of the providers and these costs should not be born by individual subscribers. DWG. cc.

I have just discovered that my current a/c card has been debited £ 14.95 for four months now by rewardsnow.co.uk so I have ordered a new card from the bank, who say they can get the money back. I have never heard of or noticed this company on the internet and I have now reported the fraud to OFT. I am informed it may be a couple of weeks before results, also that many victims have complained. Watch this space.

Still not resolved prob wth BT (see my post 26 Mar 2009). Do I detect a certain ennui and dissatisfaction amongst BT subscribers?. More and more have been badly served by BT's non-technical staff. This includes incompetent "engineers" who are sent in response to a fault report and log in an imaginary diagnosis which results in overcharge for unneccessary repairs being added to the bill.

Hi Iaint... BT High Level complaints 0800 731 2762. I got through to this number. which got me more information on an ongoing prob. with BT. They wanted to know where I got their number because they said it can only be divulged by OFCOM Reference Team (0300 123 3333) & (0807 312 762 762) where I was treated with the greatest of respect and efficiency. I did not tell them where I got the contact details. Many thanks for your post. At last somebody was prepared to listen and engage in sensible discussion and advice!.