I'm on FTTPoD 1000/220, neighbours on FTTP WBC

Hi everyone,

I’m a long time lurker on here, and I am very grateful for all the information I have amassed in years gone by!

I would be very interested in people’s thoughts on my FTTP situation. Let me start by laying out the scenario.

My house is served by a telegraph pole on the neighbouring street which has CBTs on it and which has had lots of work at its base over the last year. Let’s call that pole A. The copper spans about 30m over two back gardens to a carrier pole - pole B, which has no CBTs on it - and and then to my house (another 10m or so). To note, pole A also serves another carrier pole - pole C, which has no CBTs on it - on the same street as pole A, about a 40m span.

The neighbouring street seemingly went live for FTTP WBC on Friday 28th June, 10 days ago. My daily checking of the BT Wholesale Checker showed properties served by both pole A directly, and also from pole A via pole C, going from FTTP On Demand 330 / 30 on Thursday 27th June to FTTP WBC 1000 / 220 on Friday 28th June. Those properties are also able to place an order on BT’s website.

At the same time, my house and the other properties served by pole B went from FTTPoD 330 / 30 on Thursday 27th June to FTTPoD 1000 / 220 on Friday 28th June. I have read on here and other forums that the shift to FTTPoD 1000 / 220 is usually a positive sign and that FTTP WBC can follow a few days later. However, my trepidation lies in the fact that a) it is close to two weeks since that shift happened, and more importantly b) that lots of other properties served by both the master pole (pole A) and other carrier pole (pole C) can already order FTTP WBC.

The only difference I can establish is that the span from pole A to pole B (my pole) is over two back gardens - is that something that would be viewed as just two hard?!

Any advice about how to proceed would be gratefully received. Is it worth a raising a query with Openreach?

Thank you in advance!

Hi everyone.

Just an update on this… it doesn’t sound promising!

In summary, at the end of June, my BT Wholesale Checker changed from FTTPoD 330 to FTTPoD 1000, so I thought I was a few days away from being able to order. However, today, the Openreach Checker changed from September 2024 to December 2026, so it feels further away than ever!

A recap of my situation…

Like a lot of people, I have been waiting for FTTP for a long time. While the Openreach Checker has been gradually moving out, it always remained relatively current; it moved from December 2023 to March 2024 to June 2024 to September 2024.

At the end of June, the telegraph pole that serves my house (via a carrier pole) went live for FTTP.

The properties connected to that pole can order FTTP. My house and the others connected to the carrier pole cannot. However, in conjunction with the main pole going live, my BT Wholesale Checker record changed from FTTPoD 330 to FTTPoD 1000, so I thought our houses would follow a few days later.

My address has stayed at FTTPoD 1000 ever since, so last week I raised a “my neighbours can get FTTP but I can’t” query through Openreach.

Today I got a response, telling me that fibre wasn’t planned for my area (despite numerous update emails over the last year telling me it was coming). The Openreach Checker has also changed from September 2024 to December 2026!

So from feeling very hopeful a few weeks ago, it now feels further away than ever!

Has anyone else had a similar experience. Is there any other route I can try to get clarity on the situation?

Thank you in advance.

What is the distance between the poles?

At least the checker doesnt state "no plans".

The distance from the main pole - which is live for FTTP and has CBTs on it (I counted about 24 ports across three CBTs) - to the carrier pole is about 30 metres. The current copper cable goes between two houses and over two back gardnes, and through one sparse tree, so it is over private property.

The distance from the carrier pole to my house is another 10 metres or so. The carrier pole is on my next door neighbour’s driveway.

Seems a mess, and the FTTP pole is further away than the copper pole right?

Correct. My copper starts at the pole which is live for FTTP (for my neighbours at least!) - let’s call that pole A - runs 30m over two back gardens to the carrier pole - pole B - and then another 10m to my house.

Ok that makes things clearer. Also makes more sense why they havent activated your pole, as there is private property in between.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

Ok that makes things clearer. Also makes more sense why they havent activated your pole, as there is private property in between.

Why should that matter? As long as the line is 3m above the ground they have statutory powers to pass over private land without needing a wayleave

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/schedul...

It's what's often referred to as "the flying wires act".

Edited by j0hn83 (Thu 18-Jul-24 02:15:36)

In reply to a post by adamgilbride:

Correct. My copper starts at the pole which is live for FTTP (for my neighbours at least!) - let’s call that pole A - runs 30m over two back gardens to the carrier pole - pole B - and then another 10m to my house.

How many properties are served by the activated pole?
How many ports are on the black plastic CBT fitted at the top of this pole? It will be 4, 8 or 12, unless there's more than 1 CBT fitted.

Hi John,

There are three CBTs on the pole - it is a bit difficult to see but there are either 2 x 12 ports and 1 x 4 port (so 28 ports in total), or 1 x 12, 1 x 8 and 1 x 4 ports (so 24 in total).

I will need to count how many properties are served by the connected pole, but I think it is easily 20.

There are four properties served by the carrier pole, including mine.

The way the CBT’s are provisioned is based on the existing ‘demand’ and that typically ( but not always ) is the same as the existing copper demand , the guiding principle is at least one more port than the demand , ( with an exception ) ….if the demand were 8 properties, it’s a 12 port CBT ( 8 port wouldn’t have a spare ) , if 15 properties, a 12 port and 4 port ( 1 spare ) , the exception is 12 properties, it’s acceptable for a 12 port CBT ( no spare ) similarly a demand of 24 it’s acceptable to have 2x12 port CBT

….however , it’s possible, to rationalise CBT’s ( so you don’t have lots of 12 ports with 8 properties or 4 ports with 1 property ) , by slightly shifting demand around , so if a property were equidistant from two poles , and more than 1 spare existed on a CBT , even though the copper pair doesn’t originate from that pole ,and an extra CBT were needed just for 1 property on the pole it is served by copper from , it makes sense to shift the point at which FTTP is provided, obviously taking other conditions into account, like no dropwires crossing over each other , so generally that would only be a property on the boundary of two DP’s , and both CBT need to be designed to be on the same splitter.

If liberties were taken when copper pair was provided, ( or a way to repair service ) a property was served from a pole that was never intended ( designed) to supply service, but as used as an expedited way to give service, the ‘wrong’ pole were used ( imagine drops strung between many poles ) or an underground service area where the DIG cable is faulty , but a neighbouring area has poles , and a ( somewhat tortuous) line of sight existed , then the ‘wrong’ DP could be used , but when FTTP is designed, the address is re allocated to its correct DP location .

Edited by Iniltous (Thu 18-Jul-24 09:39:44)

I wasnt aware of the act, and also upon reading it, they dont have complete freedom, if they need to set foot on the land to carry out what they need to do, then they need permission of the land occupier. (3D). Even if there is no legal obstacles it still makes works some what more awkrawd I would have thought.

This seems to confirm it, no wayleave required as long as they dont need to set foot on the property.

https://d2haref.openreach.co.uk/orpg/home/contactus/...

Just my opinion.

Edited by Chrysalis (Thu 18-Jul-24 10:11:01)

There are three CBTs on the pole - it is a bit difficult to see but there are either 2 x 12 ports and 1 x 4 port (so 28 ports in total), or 1 x 12, 1 x 8 and 1 x 4 ports (so 24 in total).

Out of interest, are these CBTs definitely all Openreach, or is there a chance that you've got alt-net kit on the pole too?

Round here, quite a few poles have a right mess of CBTs on the top, but this is mostly because there's several alt-nets building out here, all throwing their own kit on the poles. Personally speaking, I can't tell one from another, but I'm sure there are other people more experienced on here who can give you some tips!

Alt Nets do , often before OR , put their CBT’s on Openreach poles and that can cause OR issues, ( there is a finite amount of space at pole tops and in jointboxes ) and although Alt Nets don’t necessarily use the same criteria for network design, if they use up all the space on the pole or in a jointbox, that can complicate issues for OR , to the extent that OR have to build new infrastructure , poles , joint boxes etc as they can’t ‘evict’ Alt Nets that get in first , or of course they could just ‘skip’ relatively small areas that need too much expenditure to get the OR network in place .

As far as recognising who a particular CBT belongs to , the only 100% reliable way would be to look at the label on the CBT cable tails…..although the ones I’ve seen (Netomnia ) use a different manufacturer of their CBT’s ( so are visually different) there is no rule that states they can’t use the same manufacturer ( Corning Optisheath for example ) that Openreach use , so simply looking from ground level isn’t a reliable method of judging who the kit belongs to

Edited by Iniltous (Thu 18-Jul-24 11:24:41)

although Alt Nets don’t necessarily use the same criteria for network design, if they use up all the space on the pole or in a jointbox, that can complicate issues for OR , to the extent that OR have to build new infrastructure , poles , joint boxes etc as they can’t ‘evict’ Alt Nets that get in first

Having waited 5 years from first "coming soon!" message from Openreach, with endless poor communication and pushed-back delivery dates, I cannot express just how little I care that the alt-net that came up my street first might have made any future OR deployment more difficult