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.

Wouldn't this be covered by the home insurance?

In reply to a post by jelv:

Wouldn't this be covered by the home insurance?

Maybe it would,but would claiming be worth the hassle, they may say quiet rightly that it's the property of bt therefore we won't cover it,

If bt choose to supply customers via overhead cables then they should also accept that lightning can and does cause damage to their line plant upto & including the nte, there should be no charge to the customer for such damage end off, if it was me i would have told them to go.... and see them in court and then gone as public as possible about this daylight robbery by bt complain to bbc watchdog about it, it to me also sounds that the engineer put the original faceplate back on the nte and charge for a new one

It will be interesting to see what will happen regarding damage to the new external nte they tend to now fit on new builds, are they gonna charge for water ingress ect too?,

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 26-Oct-11 15:34:51)

See this

http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProduc...

Providing the service (6)

In reply to a post by systemx:

See this

http://www.productsandservices.bt.com/consumerProduc...

Providing the service (6)

You agree to look after any of our equipment. If you do not do so and the equipment is damaged other than through fair wear and tear, you will, have to pay for it to be repaired or replaced.

So how are customers supposed to protect bt cables from lighting or other acts of god or war ect? the socket was taken out by the lighting,not customers responsibly if it was then i'm sure most would be getting buried under the ground by now, and the choice of overhead or in a duct would have to be given
not only that but what about surge damage to our equipment surely that's bt's responsibility isn't it ,excess voltage ect
And according to the t&c's the main master socket is part of bt equipment not the customers

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 26-Oct-11 16:11:12)

Of course you cannot protect directly from lightening damage, but you are responsible for equipment which may be owned by BT on your property, so an insurance would be the answer.

I'm sure the same principle applies to electricity meters, in that you are responsible for any damage other than fair wear and tear, I'll try and find a link

This whole thing sounds a bit like Severn Trent Water who will repair a mains leak on one�s property up to the house stop tap for free once every two years. However if more repairs are needed during that period then they will charge or alternatively one can get a plumber to do the repair and possibly make an insurance claim.

Regarding the nt5: my insurance company does cover accidental damage to electrical equipment but as it's BT's property they may not cover any damage to it but I would imagine they would cover any damage to a filtered faceplate - but it wouldn't be worthwhile making a claim just for that alone...

Perhaps BT should have a similar policy of repairing line and equipment, from the exchange side of the master socket, within one's property and agree to a free repair once every 2 years rather like the Severn Trent's house stop tap policy.

The T&c for electricity companys are many and varied, but n-Power mention damage to meters in theirs

http://www.npower.com/Home/Electricity-and-gas/Terms...

Its under Costs to do with the meter.

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Oct-11 17:26:25)

In reply to a post by systemx:

The T&c for electricity companys are many and varied, but n-Power mention damage to meters in theirs

http://www.npower.com/Home/Electricity-and-gas/Terms...

Its under Costs to do with the meter.

their terminology to damage is i think referring to willful damage, to the meter by by passing it or other to avoid paying for the electricity, i have never heard of anyone having to pay for a new meter in the event it failed due to power surges ect,

IT says "Replacing a damaged meter or meter seals if the damage is your fault"

I agree that this more than likely refers to tampering, but it does not say that.

The point is you can be charged for the replacement of equipment owned by the supply undertaking.

When I was first married, we rented a TV set and its outside aerial, and damage to the aerial, alone with any damage the aerial may cause was covered by our insurance, so insurance then covered items which we did not own, but were our responsiblity.

I'll have to have a look and see if this principle still applies.

In reply to a post by systemx:

When I was first married, we rented a TV set and its outside aerial, and damage to the aerial, alone with any damage the aerial may cause was covered by our insurance, so insurance then covered items which we did not own, but were our responsiblity.

I'll have to have a look and see if this principle still applies.

The way i see it if bt choose to use overhead cables then they automatically take responsibility for damage resulting from lightening strikes /landslides ect ,it's no way the customers responsibility and bt are wrong to charge in this case , i bet a county court would find it in your favor,

maybe some legal advice maybe be needed if going through the normal bt channels doesn't result in them withdrawing the charge , maybe a e-mail to mr Livingston may speed up things not only should there be no charge but the amount charged is nothing short of robbery those nte's complete can be purchased for under £20.00 a new line install is only £130.00 or free it you have a calling plan, or cheaper from another provider

Openreach do take responsiblity for the repair and make no charge, however the nte-5 is fitted to your property and you (and I) accept resposblity for it.

I must admit considering the work involved in reparing a line damaged like this, the cost of fitting the new nte-5 should really be absorbed in the overall repair cost, but it does not matter what I think, and if Openreach can claim back some of the repair cost they will.

And do BT have insurance of their own?

>>so his new bottom half is a dud.

Your chum needs to check whether the bottom half is dud or the wiring away to the extensions or something plugged into them is shorting out the circuit.

If the fault is on the wiring rather than the frontplate, he'll have a brace of bills once the tech calls.

"act of god" why should openreach be responsible for a lightning strike

Having just checked with my local water agreement and apparently im ok for the water pipe comming in on my property but the sewers going out from my property to the road are my responsibility !!!!

The NTE socket belongs to BT in fact its a criminal offence to tamper with it once installed. The liability lies with BT to ensure that their equipment functions and if they didn't have the foresight to protect the equipment from lightning damage then you could argue that they were negligent.

Since science has explained lightning as a force of nature then using the defence of an act of god is ambiguous to the detriment of the customer and can't be used as a defence.

You accept that you will not cause any deliberate damage to BT's property (i.e the socket) lightning doesn't fall into this bracket as it is a force beyond your control and you therefore can't be held liable for it

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Oct-11 19:22:52)

Just check that the blockage is not to the main sewer first otherwise you may call out dyno-rod or somebody needlessly to unblock waste water on your land.

This happened to me a few months back but I took the chance believing that it was a probably a blockage to the main sewer under the road and that was obviously cleared free of charge by the water company.

In my experience lightning damage always comes from customers equipment that was plugged in to the mains and the telephone line.

The difference in earth potential between the customers local earth spike and the exchange's earth spike a mile away breaks through the circuit board and blows the equipment and the NTE. The exchange always survives, Openreach are not negligent, they protect their equipment so the rest of the townsfolk can still use the phone and the wires only broadband.

I will lay a virtual mars bar that the op's chums wiring or equipment is faulty and shorting out the circuit beyond the NTE. Rather than the NTE frontplate being faulty.

If he doesn't check that his wiring and equipment is okay, he is likely to have another bill for the tech disconnecting it over the coming days.

Edited by deleted (Wed 26-Oct-11 21:48:44)

In reply to a post by RandomJointer:

Your chum needs to check whether the bottom half is dud or the wiring away to the extensions or something plugged into them is shorting out the circuit.

OP stated no extensions or further wiring!