BT Charge for new NTE5 !!

A friend just told me this evening that a couple of months lightning struck his overhead BT line and damaged the bottom removable half of the NTE5. BT came out and fitted a complete new NTE5.

However, he has now been told that the bottom half of the NTE5 is his responsibility and therefore he has been charged just over £200 (he will check his bill again and confirm to me).

Just to rub salt into his wound, earlier today his phone went dead, he removed the bottom half and plugged his filter with phone and router into the 'test' socket and both working, so his new bottom half is a dud.

What do you think about his being charged? I always thought that the complete NTE5 was BT's.

He only has one phone, plugged into a filter with his router. No other internal wiring or extensions, bells, Redcare or Sky.

I think he has been done...

Cheers!

BT responsibility stops at the test socket...

If it was lightning damage then not sure where they stand with regards to getting charged. It is not unusual for cost codes to be reaised incorrectly. Time for them to appeal the charge, particularly as it seems a component has already failed.

BT Engineer call-out charge. So he shouldn't have been charged more than £130 all told.

£5 off Ebay and just two wires to A & B, simpler than a 13A plug. Yes, I know it's against the rules, but I wont be screwed.

I think they should argue that what BT should have done was just replace the back part of the socket (which is their responsibility) and give the customer the choice of either being provided with a new bottom half for £200 or sourcing their own.

If they weren't informed of the charges for the additional work above BT's responsibility then they should not be charged for it.

What was damaged in the bottom half?

If it was a lightening strike I would have expected the component in the master being damaged first especially the surge arrestor. Certainly if damage has occurred further down then that should have been replaced too.

As for the charge - can he claim on insurance if BT will not waive it?

While the arrestor in the master can help, it is unlikely to help with a direct strike to overhead wiring

Remember any gap created by a component fail is small compared to distance the bolt just travelled

I know, the point being that the gap is likely to have been ruined by the strike and thus need replacement anyway so the technician should have replaced the master at no cost and as they come with new lower halves, left that attached at no cost.

I agree with the above, any work that needs to be done on the line apart from the E-side/D-side I do my self.

Unless things have changed in the past 2 years since I retired, lightning damage to any part of the NTE5 IS chargeable.

I used to hate to charge, & if could avoid it, I would.

I know it's not fair, but that's life.