Advice: Exchange Upgraded, but not individual cabinets

Hi,

I'm looking for some advice please.

My local exchange was recently upgraded by BT for FTTC. As part of this work BT has deployed FTTC cabinets alongside the majority of it's existing PCPs.

However, the PCP that I'm connected to was not included in this deployment. When I contacted BT to enquire on it's plans regarding the PCP it replied that:

"The rollout is based on the commercial criteria for each cabinet. Unfortunately when assessed cabinet did not met these and is not included in the rollout programme. Whilst we monitor cabinet situations, even where numbers have increased there is no guarantee that a cabinet would be reassessed for inclusion in the commercial project. Where cabinets are not included in the commercial rollout Government funding (via BDUK) is available to Borough and County councils to improve fibre coverage and it is worth contacting your Council in relation to this."

As indicated I connected "Connecting Devon and Somerset" (the local BDUK scheme) but they replied that they wouldn't be looking to upgrade the PCP as they can't invest in areas where there is already a NGA (ie BT) due to EU State Aid regulation.

So it would seem that BT has no plans and think that BDUK should fill the gap, and BDUK say they can't because BT has invested in the area. By my calculations there are about 200 homes connected to the PCP

I don't live anywhere difficult/strange (ie I'm not in the middle of a field, middle of nowhere). I live on a 1990 housing estate which is surrounded by other estates of a simillar area, near to a large town. The surrounding estates have received FTTC. Additional to cable up the other PCPs in the surround area it was necessary for BT contractors to pull it via the manhole in front of "my" PCP.

Just curious to understand from others whether this is a toughluck situation or whether there are other avenues that I should be making a noise to?.

Thank you

Iain

Did you contact Openreach?

Do you have Virgin cable available?

As that would stop BDUK upgrading your cabinet, having surrounding cabinets upgraded to FTTC shouldn't make any difference to BDUK.

If you don't have Vigin cable available, and you don't have FTTC or FFTP, then you don't have NGA and you need to go back to Connecting Devon and Somerset.

BatBoy,

Yes, the section in bold in my original post was the reply from Openreach (sorry I said BT) obtained by contacting the [email protected] email address.

Thanks

Iain

Hi R0NSKI,

Thanks for the reply. No, there is no Virgin Cable available in the area.

Iain.

Send both replies to both. What's your exchange and cabinet number?

Hi Iain, I'm in the same boat as you, most parts of the town have sprouted FTTC cabinets but there are pockets of people on cabinets that aren't being upgrade for the same reason, I'm also in Devon and I'm also keeping an eye on the usually-outdated CD&S website for any hint of new information and signs of an upgrade, but alas, no joy yet. I imagine we're in for a few more years in the slow lane yet

Do let me know which town you are in, either here or via PM if more comfortable.
Cheers!
-Dave

You and others from the area affected should contact your local councillor(s) about this as well as the chairman of the committee which oversees CDS and even your MP. As noted, you have been given incorrect information about the eligibility of your cabinet to be upgraded under the BDUK program. It seems that the person at CDS who responded to your query simply does understand the state aid provisions.

The only circumstances under which there could be any doubt would be if a part of your postcode was covered by an upgraded cabinet and a part not, but even then the uncovered part would not be debarred by state aid rules. None of this will guarantee that your cabinet passes the CDS threshold for spending money on upgrades. Still, at least they ought to assess the cost and give you a proper justification as to whether it is economic to upgrade your cabinet rather than making spurious claims about state aid.

Hello Iain,

I am also in Devon and my experience mirrors yours. In short my cabinet was on the FTTC enable list as confirmed twice in emails from BT, with dates "...in the area of third quarter of 2012 ....". I produced business expansion plans on that basis ( Home based media business). Before accessing business loans I made a final check with BT as many cabs surrounding mine (urban area, seaside town) were having work done but nothing on mine. They told me it was now off the list - same copy and paste reason "commercial viability". Discussions with BT managers ensued, they told me to access CDS (BDUK), they told me that subject to their survey process etc etc I could hold out hope for their programme of infill to get FTTC on my cabinet. I hold off on the expansion and start to miss out on work as I can't shift the large files fast enough.

No news on infill since the initial CDS comment in March 2013 so I recently spoke to them again and lo and behold the same reply as you, incomprehensible State Aid EU legislation. Lost main contract, gone to a freelancer elsewhere with I assume FTTC/P. I cannot afford bonded lines and the like, nor office premises, satellite not feasible, no cable here.

Bitter? Oh yes. Thanks EU and thanks Devon LG/Central Government/BT for a great stitch-up, what a farce.

If you wish feel free to PM me Iain, maybe we can scratch heads together.

....so going back to that good 'ole subject of moving house then! It's interesting that CD&S hadn't told me about these funding restrictions in previous correspondence.

One option I've looked at is to find someone across the road from me, who's house I can see (plenty of them) who can get fibre, pay for it at their property along with paying their line rental as a gesture of good will, and Wi-Fi it back to my house, possibly sharing with other neighbours are in the same boat.

Unfortunately out of the 6 people I've spoken to, one of which already has FTTC - none of them were even prepared to hear what I had to say - I suspect most of them deemed it "jargon" as soon as you said the words "superfast" and "broadband".

Ho hum!

In reply to a post by gah789:

You and others from the area affected should contact your local councillor(s) about this as well as the chairman of the committee which oversees CDS and even your MP. As noted, you have been given incorrect information about the eligibility of your cabinet to be upgraded under the BDUK program. It seems that the person at CDS who responded to your query simply does understand the state aid provisions.

The only circumstances under which there could be any doubt would be if a part of your postcode was covered by an upgraded cabinet and a part not, but even then the uncovered part would not be debarred by state aid rules. None of this will guarantee that your cabinet passes the CDS threshold for spending money on upgrades. Still, at least they ought to assess the cost and give you a proper justification as to whether it is economic to upgrade your cabinet rather than making spurious claims about state aid.

gah789 please can you point me to your references regarding the State Aid provisions, you seem to suggest that BDUK is wrong. I am unable to find anything comprehensible and directly relevant. Thanks!

I did not intend to suggest that BDUK was wrong. They are not directly concerned with implementation. My point concerned the interpretation of state aid provisions on the ground. The rules are abstruse at best and the interpretation tends to change over time as well as differing across authorities.

Nonetheless, the essential idea is simple: public money should not be provided to fund non-commercial development of broadband infrastructure when and where there is an operator who is committed to providing equivalent infrastructure on a purely commercial basis. This requires that an authority must assess whether, for any given area, there is a commercial operator willing to provide superfast broadband on a non-subsidised basis. This assessment is carried out at postcode - not exchange - level and gives rise to the terminology of black, grey & white areas.

There is also a separate concern, which is that there should be only one allocation of public money to fund infrastructure in a specific area - i.e. money should not be given to both BT and some alternative provider to improve services in area X.

The mistake on the part of Connecting Devon & Somerset (CDS) was an assumption that because some cabinets connected to a particular exchange had been upgraded by BT on a commercial basis then other cabinets connected to the same exchange (but not upgraded) were excluded from being upgraded using BDUK money. This is inconsistent with the use of postcodes rather than exchanges as the basic unit of assessment for applying state aid restrictions.

The whole state aid exercise may be implemented in a bureaucratic and sometimes foolish manner, but the basic principles are reasonable. Hence, if local officials are implementing the rules in a way that is not reasonable and coherent, it is the job of your public representatives to ensure that common sense prevails as far as possible. Excluding people in an area that BT has clearly & publicly announced will not be upgraded on a commercial basis from the BDUK program certainly does not meet the standard for being reasonable and coherent - hence my comment.

Hi,

As I seem to have posted this information to another thread on this forum in the past, I will repeat it here.

The exchange is BARNSTAPLE, North Devon (WWBARN), and PCP 62.

Regards

Iain

I have raised this issue with my local County Councillor and MP for there input/advice.

The local councillor has already responded that he will "try and find out" more.

Thanks

Iain

In reply to a post by Iain_Chapman:

I have raised this issue with my local County Councillor and MP for there input/advice.

The local councillor has already responded that he will "try and find out" more.

Thanks

Iain

CDS say 'Additional areas will shortly be fibre-enabled under the Connecting Devon and Somerset Programme and service is likely to be available from June '14.'

Thanks gah for the detailed clarification. I am in Teignmouth, lots of cabs being missed out here. I will approach a manager at CDS and battle with them - if one can be found....

Somerset,

Yes, I've also now seen that (the page seems to be dated 26th July).

It's a shame that CDS didn't perhaps provide a link to the new map, rather suggest (along with an older map) that it wouldn't/couldn't invest where there is already an investment by BT (which was the indication on there older map and from CDS).

Still I'll be interested to see what response comes from the councillor and/or MP.

Thanks

Iain

Hi All,

To follow up on this thread. I had a response from the office of my local MP.

They had connected Openreach, and the reply back indicated that now that they have CDS money they aim to have my cabinet connected by March 2014.

Regards

Iain

Good result, I've tried my local council to see if they have similar funding in Birmingham - seems as if we don't

Oh well

Hi everyone,

I've set up a couple of petitions on the government's e-petition site that you might be interested in. If so, can you publicise them as much as possible around your networks? BT really are taking the mick. Let me know if you have a better worded petition and I'll sign and distribute them.

The petitions are:
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/56926 and
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/59168

Ummm. The one about ISP fees is in my opinion badly worded, (as in I don't think you mean "connection fees"), and factually incorrect in that most of the cost of rolling out FTTx has been nothing whatsever to do with the taxpayer.

The one about contracts to BT could make all government IT systems unusable in a very short period.

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 13-Jan-14 16:23:04)

I would also challenge 'The government promised us that we would have the fastest broadband in the world'

The best and most reliable quote was one from Jeremy Hunt http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5389-jeremy-hunt-...

Fastest and best of the major countries in Europe - which means UK, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. If any of those five have plans to offer 150 Mbps to 90% of premises (which is what up to 5 times implies) then it would be interesting.

The lower ISP fees is interesting particularly given the already announced intentions to go to 95% by 2017, so a subsidy would be a short term thing and probably not that simple to administer. An Ofcom market review has taken ages to come up with market definitions that satisfy all the players.

The BDUK process is meant to be a gap funding model too, so the government money is only part of the cost involved, and this subsidy level varies from County to County making any lower fee difficult.

Also given 96% of the UK have access to TalkTalk unlimited ADSL2+ at £2.50 per month, how much cheaper do people want it?

Edited by MrSaffron (Mon 13-Jan-14 16:26:27)

Commercial programme iwill complete 2.5bn of BT own money (no public Money)
BDUK will look at areas identified as not commercial - suggest you see if your cab is covered under the BDUK

each cab is subject to strict cost and commercial criteria as has to be proven

Edited by deleted (Mon 13-Jan-14 17:03:22)

this cab (Barnstaple PCP 62) was built under BDUK as was stood on 27 november and is so probably live now and orderable-- --

Edited by deleted (Mon 13-Jan-14 17:14:05)

Thanks RobertoS. Do you think it would be worth setting up a petition at all, and if so, what wording would be best?

Does anybody else have any input?

Since it's badly worded, I'll see if I can cancel that petition.

Thanks Fastman2,

So, if I understand this correctly, BT is investing £2.5b of its own money to upgrade those cabs it deems commercially viable and BDUK is the half billion or so of public money for those that aren't commercially viable. But as you say "each cab is subject to strict cost and commercial criteria as has to be proven" it seems that some cabs are less viable than others?

I still think that a decent broadband speed should be available for everybody and the money awarded to BT/Openreach should be to upgrade all properties, not 90%.

What do you and any other forum members think about starting a petition? With better wording!

I know it has to be annoying if you are one of the unlucky ones, but feel that wrt broadband coverage the petition route is doomed to failure.

I just had a quick look at 2-3 pages of the 83 closed petitions and 3 open ones to do with broadband. (Not just fibre provision). The response rate is hardly encouraging. Tabs on there also show the current and rejected ones.

Some are basically similar to yours.

Local activity drumming up support and badgering your council I feel stands more chance. Several people on these forums have succeeded that way.

Edited by RobertoS (Mon 13-Jan-14 18:27:54)

In reply to a post by HarryAdney:

So, if I understand this correctly, BT is investing £2.5b of its own money to upgrade those cabs it deems commercially viable and BDUK is the half billion or so of public money for those that aren't commercially viable.

Nearly.

Phase 1 of BDUK has £530mn of money from central government, plus a similar amount from local government (which may source the money itself, or get it from EU funds), plus some from BT. Last time I looked, BT's contribution was around 40% of the total, so the overall project is worth over £1.5bn. Phase 1 had the 90% target for 2015, but some counties have gone higher.

Phase 2 of BDUK is due to use £250bn of central-government money, but plans have gone no further yet. This has a target of 95% coverage by 2017, and 99% by 2018. The first target seems to be a fixed-wire target, while the second seems to allow wireless technologies.

But as you say "each cab is subject to strict cost and commercial criteria as has to be proven" it seems that some cabs are less viable than others?

Very true. The least-viable areas seem to be those who don't even have PCP cabinets, and need one adding, or those who are too far away from their cabinet for them to benefit from NGA speeds even when the cabinet is upgraded.

But even then, BT seem to be coming up with new deployment strategies to be able to cope. I mention the "hints" we are starting to see in this post a few days ago.

I still think that a decent broadband speed should be available for everybody and the money awarded to BT/Openreach should be to upgrade all properties, not 90%.

I think you are right - decent broadband speed should be for everyone, but you might be better campaigning from a different perspective than trying to get existing contracts torn up - especially as the government already have it in mind to reach 99%, and have additional funds available for that.

The final 1% can probably get NGA speeds from satellite, and are probably a manageably-small-enough group that the satellite wouldn't be overwhelmed.

What would you then like to campaign for? Getting NGA speeds to the final 1%? Getting wired NGA speeds to the final 5%? A long-term plan for proper FTTP to rural areas? Getting government to put in place a proper USO that rises over time?

Myself, I'd like someone to bite the bullet, and start on a proper long-term plan for fibre that doesn't just shove the final 5% off until the end of the project. Getting state-aid approval for that might be a bit tricky!

BT is also investing match funding in the BDUK and local aothority monies as well (that bit tends to be overlooked and is a substantal amount ont op of the 2.5 in the commercial ) -- FYI there is no USO (Universal Service Obligation to provide broadband ) only voice up to a cost of 30k

the coverage is complicated but each Local authority will work out what coverage it can get for what money it has avaiable -

Hi,

Yes, an FTTC was installed at the beginning of December 2013, and seems to have gone live towards the end of the month.

Just waiting on my ISP to accept orders from it.

THanks

Iain

Phase 2 of BDUK is due to use £250bn of central-government money

Think you'll find that is £250million not billion. Otherwise I suspect FTTP would have been viable to all

Whoops

What's a few zero's here and there, anyway?

A lot of fuss about nothing?