User comments on ISPs
  >> Demon Internet


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.


  Print Thread
Standard User andew
(regular) Sat 11-Jun-11 08:17:21
Print Post

Master socket fault, customer being charged for the fault


[link to this post]
 
A customer of my works had a problem with their broadband, turns out there was a fault with the master socket, apparently the engineer replaced it. Now according to demons less than helpful customer service department they have to pay for the engineer turning up. I certainly thought that BT wouldnt charge if a fault was found before the socket on the front of the master socket. This line has no extensions on it so it was line coming in, master socket, filter, router.

Am I correct in my belief that the customer shouldnt be charged for this fault??

Andrew
Standard User systemx
(experienced) Sat 11-Jun-11 09:17:52
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: andew] [link to this post]
 
There could be a charge if the socket had been damaged by the householder.
Standard User andew
(regular) Mon 13-Jun-11 23:42:26
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: systemx] [link to this post]
 
Definately not damaged by the owner, mastet socket is in a cupboard that needs 4 screws to be removed before you can access it.

Andrew


Register (or login) on our website and you will not see this ad.

Standard User ukhardy07
(member) Tue 14-Jun-11 00:56:04
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: andew] [link to this post]
 
The master socket is BT's property, not the homeowners. BT are responsible for maintaining this. If there's obvious damage by the homeowner BT can charge although it's hard to proove the homeowner did the damage. A previous owner may have botched it up etc.

I would definitely appeal the charges and ask for the case to be escalated.

Any internal wiring, ie wiring beyond the master is chargable.

If you don't have anything plugged into the master. For example if everything plugs into an extension. If that extension failed as the extension cabling had become loose inside the master... BT could charge for this, as the extension caused the fault, not the master.

BUT in this case - I'd say no charge.

You say the master isn't accessable, assuming there's no extensions as stated, how do they connect their devices if they can't access the master?

Edited by ukhardy07 (Tue 14-Jun-11 00:58:38)

ISP Representative DemonBroadband
(isp) Fri 17-Jun-11 09:34:02
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: ukhardy07] [link to this post]
 
Hi there,

We're happy to look into this further. We do need to get to the bottom of this and will need your customer to contact us via the Demon website. Could your collegue take a photo of the master socket in order for us to have a proper look at it?

Demon.

0845 272 2666

Demon Customer Service
The above post has been made by an ISP REPRESENTATIVE (although not necessarily the ISP being discussed in the post).
Standard User Adam3k
(knowledge is power) Fri 17-Jun-11 09:46:08
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: andew] [link to this post]
 
Was it the entire NTE that was at fault or the removable front cover?

Ive heard before that the removeable front part is EU responsible.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FirstGroupDynamics Bonded WBC 22.7Mbps Download & 2.2Mbps Upload. Transit provided by Level3
Standard User andew
(regular) Mon 20-Jun-11 21:32:56
Print Post

Re: Master socket fault, customer being charged for the faul


[re: DemonBroadband] [link to this post]
 
I've spoken to the customer, she's going to take a picture of the replaced master socket. According to her they replaced the whole master socket, back and front parts. If she shows that both parts were replaced, will she end up having to pay the sfi charge as BT are the only people that are suppose to replace that part?

Regards

Andrew
  Print Thread

Jump to