Had an email from Openreach

Openreach are now telling me Full Fibre is available to me and gave me a list of suppliers to get quotes. I have seen a couple of OR vans but when looking at certain planning apps it appears to be copper work.

Indeed they were working on the pavement outside my house digging up the pavement and I think more copper work as my line dropped (FTTC) once when an OR engineer was in a pit near me.

Do they get orders in first for the area then roll out the fibre network or is it on an adhoc basis where fibre is laid per order.

I cant order yet as I still have til Oct 26 under contract with TTB. I did enquire if TTB could upgrade me in the meantime and got some prices but the sales agent said he hadn't got a price for installation and would email OR as I wasn't on the system but heard nothing since and it has been a few weeks now.

What's the procedure? All the copper round here is underground and my property had a duct put in too to replace an aerial cable incorrectly put underground in the 1980s.

I believe they install fibre to the local nodes and then do the final section when an order is placed. Ours went live and I hadn't really noticed any OR engineers around before hand.

Put your address in here and post the results.
https://www.broadbandchecker.btwholesale.com/#/ADSL/...

In reply to a post by Banger:

Do they get orders in first for the area then roll out the fibre network or is it on an adhoc basis where fibre is laid per order.

From our experience the fibre is laid along street first, it's only when that is up and running that orders are taken and the final bit of fibre run from CBT to house.

OR will typically enable an area and either durring ready for service commisioning or shortly after going live you get an email saying your post is live (can sadly mean your post code is live but not your property)

Our rollout was mostly overhead, so one team did the whole work, with some extra teams here and there. Typically you get different teams doing exchange work, blowing of fibre if needed, and then the cbt guys and overhead work.

Team availability can mean cbts are done first, in the middle or at the end. From my experience, the cbt that serves me was put on the pole opposite me (and it was in the wrong place on the pole) four years later it was fianlly enabled.

So don't thing the cbts are the last thing to be done. @Iniltous brilliantly gave the link to find out if its live or not.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Do they get orders in first for the area then roll out the fibre network

No, they build the network out to the final distribution points - Connectorized Block Terminals - where each CBT is has enough ports to serve a group of properties (4, 8 or 12 are the common sizes). At that point, the network build is considered complete and those properties are "passed" by the network, i.e. ready to connect, and orders are accepted.

Then when you place your order with your Communication Service Provider (CSP), an engineer will run a fibre from the CBT to the outside of your house at a Customer Splice Point (CSP) and from there through the wall to the inside, where they install the Optical Network Termination (ONT), a small powered device which your router connects to.

In reply to a post by Banger:

All the copper round here is underground and my property had a duct put in too to replace an aerial cable incorrectly put underground in the 1980s.

That will likely be why you haven't seen any signs of fibre network rollout - it's all underground in your area.

The CBT will likely be in a nearby footway box, like this one:
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/assets/images/news-20...

Full article:
https://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/8620-a-walk-in-a...
(although formatting has been broken by TBB's site redesign)

https://ibb.co/TqPWtq1h

Here's a screenshot of the checker.

So you can order it.

Yes but stuck in a contract.

Ah well … look on the bright side, this is a ‘first world problem’.
I can’t get FTTP from any one on my 90’s estate. All fully ducted, ducted lead ins to every property ….
Oh, and it exists at lots of locations off the same exchange, damned if I haven’t installed it for some. Och well.

Edited by Zarjaz (Wed 16-Jul-25 17:46:04)

I had both FTTP & FTTC for a period, as it was effectively a different line into property and didn't need to transfer existing one. Once I was happy I could setup VOIP on the FTTP and everything was stable I transferred number to a VOIP provider which cancelled the phone & FTTC. If it is still the same, your only issue is do you want to pay for two providers for a few months.

Contract is due to end Oct 23 2026 so more than a few months. I am prepared to wait it out or might have to chase up TTB on a possible upgrade.

What options does the TalkTalk checker show if you go through it as if you was a 'new customer' just moving in to your property? I know you're not but just pretend and see what it says

Edited by PCJM40 (Wed 16-Jul-25 23:01:14)

Yes I tried that and both TT and TTB checkers show just FTTC available so maybe OR hasn't updated them. Heard rumours BT was going to take over TT and TTB has now spun off into it's own entity. Aquiss got straight back to me and told me everything was in order and I could proceed with an order until I told Martin I was stuck in a contract.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Yes I tried that and both TT and TTB checkers show just FTTC available so maybe OR hasn't updated them.

More likely TT's backend isn't being updated as regularly as you'd hope by TT from OR's data - ie. a TT issue.

Openreach are mad keen to get as many people on fibre as possible becasue at the end of the day it saves OR money.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Yes I tried that and both TT and TTB checkers show just FTTC available so maybe OR hasn't updated them.

If TT use their own backhaul then with all the finance issues they have they may not be funding new cable links, if you know other streets around you that have been live for a few months now check to see if they can get TT FTTP as that may give you an indication.

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

In reply to a post by Banger:

Yes I tried that and both TT and TTB checkers show just FTTC available so maybe OR hasn't updated them.

If TT use their own backhaul then with all the finance issues they have they may not be funding new cable links, if you know other streets around you that have been live for a few months now check to see if they can get TT FTTP as that may give you an indication.

Tried the local High street and FTTP is available there but not sure how long that has been on the TT checker. Mine still says 65mbps.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Tried the local High street and FTTP is available there but not sure how long that has been on the TT checker. Mine still says 65mbps.

Hopefully it will show soon on the TT checker and you can then go for an in-contract upgrade.

Just keep checking

Is your long-term plan to migrate away from TT anyway? If so:

- think about what ways your life would be improved by FTTP
- work out the cost of running 15 months of FTTC in parallel with FTTP
- decide if it's worth the cost. You won't get to live those 15 months of your life a second time!

In other words: bring in FTTP as a second line, from a provider of your choice, and keep TT FTTC. The extra cost is spread over 15 months, and you gain the benefit of additional redundancy/failover.

You could choose a slower speed for FTTP (say 150M or 300M instead of gigabit+) to partly offset the cost. And you might find in the long run you're happy with that anyway.

If you have a voice number with the TT service that you want to keep, then migrate it to a VOIP provider a month or so before the end of contract, and that will cause the copper line and FTTC to be ceased.

I've always liked the TTB network as never any slowdowns. It is under used in my area. Don't think I could afford the two lines at once and I was only planning on 300/500mb/s from TTB anyway which would be enough for my needs.

Had a leaflet through the post today from EE for full fibre at my address so another confirmation.

In reply to a post by Banger:

Had a leaflet through the post today from EE for full fibre at my address so another confirmation.

So BTW have cable links in and EE have updated their DB for your property, lets hope TT have cable links in and will update their DB soon.

So finally got a call from TTB today saying they cannot supply. I wonder if I can get a release from contract to go somewhere else?

In reply to a post by Banger:

So finally got a call from TTB today saying they cannot supply. I wonder if I can get a release from contract to go somewhere else?

Will be interesting to see. From a contract perspective as long as they can continue to provide what they sold you then it doesn't seem like a way to get out of a contract that they can't supply something that wasn't available when you started the contract.

If TTB let you out of contract it would be a goodwill gesture as far as I can see.

Post deleted by DFScale

Edited by DFScale (Thu 31-Jul-25 11:16:54)

In reply to a post by ian72:

If TTB let you out of contract it would be a goodwill gesture as far as I can see.

OP could start thinking along the lines of putting in a formal complaint making clear it will be escalated to the ombudsman if it is rejected. That would give the ISP a complaint investigation fee to pay and move this on from being considered in the ISP's goodwill frame into the ISP's self interest frame

What is the complaint? That TT are not providing something that they aren't contracted to supply? The original contract is still being delivered, there is no complaint against the original contract. It is like saying if an altnet turns up then you should be able to get out of your contract with Virgin Media. The contract is not impacted by the fact something else turns up that you would like to go to.

I am not a big TT fan but I don't see how there is a complaint here against the original contract. The ombudsman would I believe just throw this out straight away as TT are delivering the contract.

In reply to a post by Banger:

So finally got a call from TTB today saying they cannot supply. I wonder if I can get a release from contract to go somewhere else?

Thats not good, did they say why? I would speak to them again and try to be a bit pushy and ask about being released. To go to the ombudsman I think you would need a deadlock letter which I can't see TTB supplying.

In reply to a post by ian72:

What is the complaint? That TT are not providing something that they aren't contracted to supply? The original contract is still being delivered, there is no complaint against the original contract. It is like saying if an altnet turns up then you should be able to get out of your contract with Virgin Media. The contract is not impacted by the fact something else turns up that you would like to go to.

I am not a big TT fan but I don't see how there is a complaint here against the original contract. The ombudsman would I believe just throw this out straight away as TT are delivering the contract.

The case only has to be arguable for reference to the ombudsman. But if you think that this is about winning at the ombudsman stage, then you have completely missed the point.

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

To go to the ombudsman I think you would need a deadlock letter which I can't see TTB supplying.

AIUI you can go to the ombudsman after 8 weeks. The deadlock letter allows you to go sooner. The hope would actually be to get this to whoever authorises deadlock letters so that they can decide whether it is better to let OP proceed with a complaint [at cost to TT] or for TT to back down.

To me it is a vexatious complaint - the OP themselves has said the service is good. There is no complaint about the contract/service to make. I am all for complaining when there is something to complain about but when the OP has entered into a contract and the company have entered with good faith then it seems unfair to raise a complaint for a good service. The complaint is they can't buy a different service which is completely unrelated to their current contract.

In reply to a post by ian72:

To me it is a vexatious complaint - the OP themselves has said the service is good. There is no complaint about the contract/service to make. I am all for complaining when there is something to complain about but when the OP has entered into a contract and the company have entered with good faith then it seems unfair to raise a complaint for a good service. The complaint is they can't buy a different service which is completely unrelated to their current contract.

Quite. Fttp internet is a different product to fttc internet ...... And the OPs fttc service is working fine.

The OP wants to change to a better service with the same supplier, who could probably lock him in for longer. As I see it, TT are being obstructive although within the letter of their rights. Vexatious or not, you are still completely missing the point of making the complaint and how it could work to produce the right outcome.

How are they being obstructive? They presumably don't have links in his area so cannot provide the service. It is a commercial decision as to whether they provide to an area.

Edited by ian72 (Fri 01-Aug-25 08:31:23)

I’m not sure it would work , but the ‘put in a complaint’ as a strategy is not because it’s a bona fide case , it’s because often a complaint to the official body costs the company money even if a vexatious claim was dismissed, the threat to go down this route may get the company to consider that the penalty free release will be cheaper than a successful but expensive trip to the dispute resolution company….different industry, but my wife works in insurance, often unwarranted payments, refunds etc are granted as a formal dispute made to the official body is £400-£600 to ‘fight’ , its cost effective to ‘give’ the customer what they want , as even if ultimately the decision from the arbiter is in your favour , it still costs you (the company) money to defend , probably a lot more than the amount the customer wants .

Personally, I think it’s something of an indictment of the financial health of TT if they are unable to offer services in situations like this , presumably simply because they don’t have the budget or will to interconnect with Openreach

Edited by Iniltous (Fri 01-Aug-25 11:06:34)

They may have an investment freeze due to potential takeover. If that is the case then I really can't see a complaint doing anything.

On the flipside though if word got around that you could push a complaint to the ombudsman and get released from a TalkTalk contract if FTTP was in the area but they weren't selling on it, it would cost them more money than fighting the complaint.

There is no legitimate complaint here, and the ADR provider should dismiss it.

Someone being in contract for a service that is being delivered according to the terms of that contract and feeling they should be released from that contract because something better is now available that their ISP doesn't offer shows a borderline obscene level of entitlement, and I don't see why other TalkTalk customers should have to subsidise those preferences.

In reply to a post by ian72:

How are they being obstructive? They presumably don't have links in his area so cannot provide the service. It is a commercial decision as to whether they provide to an area.

That is not what TT are telling OP. OR is in the area, which prompted OP to ask for the upgrade.

Assuming the upgrade is available, if TT won't give it - ie won't rather than can't, I would class that as obstructive.

Certainly, if an ISP did that to me, I would be away at the end of contract and not deal with them again. So, what you seem adamant is a vexatious complaint, I regard as giving TT a chance to get their act together and keep me as a customer.

In reply to a post by jpm:

On the flipside though if word got around that you could push a complaint to the ombudsman and get released from a TalkTalk contract if FTTP was in the area but they weren't selling on it, it would cost them more money than fighting the complaint.

There is no legitimate complaint here, and the ADR provider should dismiss it.

Someone being in contract for a service that is being delivered according to the terms of that contract and feeling they should be released from that contract because something better is now available that their ISP doesn't offer shows a borderline obscene level of entitlement, and I don't see why other TalkTalk customers should have to subsidise those preferences.

We are not talking about a release from contract.. Release from contract would be OP leaving TT and going to another ISP for FTTP. What this would be is a variation to contract.

As I understand it, this is not a case of a service that the isp can't offer, it is one that they have chosen to not to offer to OP. As such, it is appears hysterical to call this an obscene level of entitlement.

Without more info my suspicion would be that TT either don't have links to the exchange or they are saturated. If it is either of those then TT can't offer unless they do infrastructure upgrades which they are not obliged to do.

In reply to a post by ian72:

Without more info my suspicion would be that TT either don't have links to the exchange or they are saturated. If it is either of those then TT can't offer unless they do infrastructure upgrades which they are not obliged to do.

But TT have not said that and don't seem to have offered any explanation. Besides which FTTP is not constrained by exchange capacity in the way that ADSL was. Don't they use BTW? Who surely could shift traffic from any customer to TT?

Couple of things of note, op is with ttb, they are not governed but same rules as residential. Ttb is now a totally separate company and not part of TT group

Edited by burble (Fri 01-Aug-25 18:45:40)

In reply to a post by burble:

Ttb is now a totally separate company and not part of TT group

Narrator - TalkTalk Business and PXC are part of TalkTalk Group.

In reply to a post by FibreBubble:

In reply to a post by burble:

Ttb is now a totally separate company and not part of TT group

Narrator - TalkTalk Business and PXC are part of TalkTalk Group.

They are now talktalk business direct ltd

In reply to a post by burble:

In reply to a post by FibreBubble:

In reply to a post by burble:

Ttb is now a totally separate company and not part of TT group

Narrator - TalkTalk Business and PXC are part of TalkTalk Group.

They are now talktalk business direct ltd

Indeed my Direct Debit name has changed to TalkTalk Business Direct Ltd. I got an email about the name chage.

To update the customer service rep said it is now with a specialist department to see what can be done. I asked if it was cable links to the exchange but the rep didn't know. TTB is available locally in the High street to exchange presence must be available as the TTB checker has fibre option to sign up for.

My apologies. Looks like I am wrong on this.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

But TT have not said that and don't seem to have offered any explanation. Besides which FTTP is not constrained by exchange capacity in the way that ADSL was. Don't they use BTW? Who surely could shift traffic from any customer to TT?

They don't use BTW for FTTP or FTTC, no. They don't even for ADSL as far as I know: they got rid of all of those customers. To sell to an area they need to have fibre to the OLT serving it. If it's a new OLT a delay isn't uncommon. With that in mind they don't offer FTTP to OP and will make it available in due time. Quoting OP they said they couldn't supply when they called and supply they cannot right now.

Either way they aren't obliged to sell anyone anything. The ombudsman can and should refuse to consider frivolous or vexatious complaints.

Edited by XGS_Is_On (Sat 02-Aug-25 14:23:48)

In reply to a post by FibreBubble:

My apologies. Looks like I am wrong on this.

It's a recent change and I've seen no 'press' announcements, I would have thought thinkbroadband or ispreview might have had a story, but I've not seen one.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

They don't use BTW for FTTP or FTTC, no. They don't even for ADSL as far as I know: they got rid of all of those customers. To sell to an area they need to have fibre to the OLT serving it. If it's a new OLT a delay isn't uncommon. With that in mind they don't offer FTTP to OP and will make it available in due time. Quoting OP they said they couldn't supply when they called and supply they cannot right now.

Either way they aren't obliged to sell anyone anything. The ombudsman can and should refuse to consider frivolous or vexatious complaints.

Perhaps a complaint will elicit the information on which you are speculating. Or if they can actually do it, it might spur them to do it. Either outcome would be more than OP seems to have at the moment, so I would not consider it frivolous or vexatious.

Edited by DFScale (Sat 02-Aug-25 17:41:05)

I think that any such complaint would pretty much fit the definition of frivolous and vexatious.. IANAL though.

In reply to a post by Rhynchelma:

I think that any such complaint would pretty much fit the definition of frivolous and vexatious.. IANAL though.

Strangely, the intent would not be to cause cost and the complaint would have a serious purpose. So therefore it would not be frivolous or vexatious. If you think it is, then you have misunderstood.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by Rhynchelma:

I think that any such complaint would pretty much fit the definition of frivolous and vexatious.. IANAL though.

Strangely, the intent would not be to cause cost and the complaint would have a serious purpose. So therefore it would not be frivolous or vexatious. If you think it is, then you have misunderstood.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

OP could start thinking along the lines of putting in a formal complaint making clear it will be escalated to the ombudsman if it is rejected. That would give the ISP a complaint investigation fee to pay and move this on from being considered in the ISP's goodwill frame into the ISP's self interest frame

In reply to a post by DFScale:

The case only has to be arguable for reference to the ombudsman. But if you think that this is about winning at the ombudsman stage, then you have completely missed the point.

AIUI you can go to the ombudsman after 8 weeks. The deadlock letter allows you to go sooner. The hope would actually be to get this to whoever authorises deadlock letters so that they can decide whether it is better to let OP proceed with a complaint [at cost to TT] or for TT to back down.

Edited by XGS_Is_On (Sun 03-Aug-25 19:32:30)

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

They don't use BTW for FTTP or FTTC, no. They don't even for ADSL as far as I know: they got rid of all of those customers. To sell to an area they need to have fibre to the OLT serving it. If it's a new OLT a delay isn't uncommon. With that in mind they don't offer FTTP to OP and will make it available in due time. Quoting OP they said they couldn't supply when they called and supply they cannot right now.

Either way they aren't obliged to sell anyone anything. The ombudsman can and should refuse to consider frivolous or vexatious complaints.

Perhaps a complaint will elicit the information on which you are speculating. Or if they can actually do it, it might spur them to do it. Either outcome would be more than OP seems to have at the moment, so I would not consider it frivolous or vexatious.

If you think 'My service is working fine but you don't offer a service I want to upgrade to in my area and want to hold me to the contract I agreed' is a valid reason for an escalated complaint that's your call. Your earlier comment about trying to blackmail the company using the costs of the ombudsman undermines somewhat.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

If you think 'My service is working fine but you don't offer a service I want to upgrade to in my area and want to hold me to the contract I agreed' is a valid reason for an escalated complaint that's your call. Your earlier comment about trying to blackmail the company using the costs of the ombudsman undermines somewhat.

Are we dealing with "won't" or "can't"? I may have missed it, but OP doesn't really know at this stage. I think OP deserves to know and if it takes the complaint process to get to that stage, I think that is fair use of the complaints process. If it turns out to be "won't", I think pressuring with the complaints process is also fair, although I would not push al the way if it is "can't"

I am not sure if it is cant or wont. Rep said it was with a specialist department but didn't elaborate. I am prepared to wait til Oct 26 when contract runs out.

I have already had an escalated complaint about billing which took months to resolve satisfactorily so wasn't planning a complaint at this stage rather wait it out.

Out of interest who would you switch to if you left TTB? Mark Jackson from ISPReview is on the Sky News Money Blog today and suggests some providers (EE, Sky, Vodafone) may pay towards the early termination fees.

Yes I have heard the EE advert offering 300 quid credit but I think it says 50% availability. I have asked for a quote of early termination fee. My preferred ISP was Plusnet or EE or Zen.

I want an OpenReach supplier to connect me to full fibre. Can I sue OR as there is no such service to my property?

One can only complain about what is supplied.

You are the only one thinking your way. Plenty of others see it differently. I wonder who will be correct?

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I want an OpenReach supplier to connect me to full fibre. Can I sue OR as there is no such service to my property?

One can only complain about what is supplied.

Of course you can sue them for that. But we are not talking about suing.

We still don't know whether this is can't or won't, but in terms of what is supplied, not supplying the best which is available is a valid complaint.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

You are the only one thinking your way. Plenty of others see it differently. I wonder who will be correct?

Ah, the Argumentum ad populum fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum refers

Regardless of who is correct, your argument is fallacious.

What are some examples of an invitation to treat?
Some examples of an invitation to treat include advertisements, the display of goods for sale in shops, and auctions. Goods on display in a shop mean the retailer is willing to enter into a ‘bi-lateral’ contract with the consumer.

In other words, there’s no obligation for the advertiser or retailer to sell the goods. Likewise, just because an auction advertises a ‘lot’ as available for sale, the bidder makes an offer that may or may not be accepted by the auctioneer.

I want an OpenReach supplier to connect me to full fibre. Can I sue OR as there is no such service to my property?

… will you be suing all the Altnets who haven’t provided you service either ?

So TTB has informed me early termination of contract is £300 so I think I will wait til next October. Cant find the EE offer for the contract buyout online might have expired now.

According to DF I should be complaining to all, and probably the FBI as well!!!!

Buyout was advertised by Kevin Bacon only yesterday evening on ITV.

Unfortunately with a little research the EE offer doesn't apply to Business Broadband which I guess TTB would be classed as.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by broadband66:

I want an OpenReach supplier to connect me to full fibre. Can I sue OR as there is no such service to my property?

One can only complain about what is supplied.

Of course you can sue them for that. But we are not talking about suing.

We still don't know whether this is can't or won't, but in terms of what is supplied, not supplying the best which is available is a valid complaint.

Given your liking for quoting fallacies at people I'm starting to wonder if you genuinely believe what you're writing or having been mistaken regarding TTB being able to supply the area via BT Wholesale and being unaware of how provisioning new OLTs works alongside being challenged over blatant misuse of the ombudsman to blackmail the operator are engaging in a sunk cost fallacy trying to find a legitimate avenue for such a complaint.

I genuinely can't understand your stubborn insistence on thinking TTB are intentionally being awkward rather than the obvious Occam's razor explanation given multiple times that to provide service to OP they need fibre to a new OLT and are likely waiting on that fibre being provisioned exactly as it has been for thousands of other OLTs nationwide. Openreach are making ports on new OLTs live faster than before and on a number of occasions some providers are available on them after others where before they were all on them before any of the ports went live so we didn't see the discrepancy. I'm pretty sure there was a story about it on this site.

If it worked how you seem to think it should contracts would be worthless: even on FTTP as soon as an altnet rocked up offering 'the best' someone on Openreach would be able to leave their contract. The ombudsman can't oblige ISPs to sell products else you could legitimately complain any time an ISP doesn't offer the maximum speed their wholesaler could provide. On AAISP, Zen, whomever on CityFibre? Go complain to the ombudsman that they don't offer 5G over CityFibre as they're obliged to offer 'the best'.

Edited by XGS_Is_On (Wed 06-Aug-25 21:15:59)

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

Given your liking for quoting fallacies at people

That is misleading to the point that it is a bit rich. What fallacies have I quoted other than to identify them as fallacies? You need to identify more than 1 as you have claimed fallacies plural.

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

I genuinely can't understand your stubborn insistence on thinking TTB are intentionally being awkward rather than the obvious Occam's razor explanation given multiple times that to provide service to OP they need fibre to a new OLT and are likely waiting on that fibre being provisioned exactly as it has been for thousands of other OLTs nationwide. Openreach are making ports on new OLTs live faster than before and on a number of occasions some providers are available on them after others where before they were all on them before any of the ports went live so we didn't see the discrepancy. I'm pretty sure there was a story about it on this site.

Your failure to understand is your shortcoming, which I can't answer to. It might have been explained on here 100 times, but what we are looking for is the explanation from the ISP who still have not clarified if they can't or if they won't. Your explanation is only why they MIGHT not be able to. There is no argument you can bring to make up for the lack of fact on whether the ISP can't or won't

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

If it worked how you seem to think it should contracts would be worthless: even on FTTP as soon as an altnet rocked up offering 'the best' someone on Openreach would be able to leave their contract. The ombudsman can't oblige ISPs to sell products else you could legitimately complain any time an ISP doesn't offer the maximum speed their wholesaler could provide. On AAISP, Zen, whomever on CityFibre? Go complain to the ombudsman that they don't offer 5G over CityFibre as they're obliged to offer 'the best'.

I don't think that about contracts at all. I do think an ISP should offer to renegotiate a contract to the best they are able to offer and that they should be transparent about what they can offer.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

what we are looking for is the explanation from the ISP who still have not clarified if they can't or if they won't

But what difference does it make? A contract is a contract. Once signed, it can only be varied by mutual agreement.

They may be technically unable to offer what you want, or they may be unwilling to vary the contract, or the people you are talking to may not have authority to vary contracts, and/or they may not have the deep technical knowledge to be able to explain why "system says no". But for all of these cases, the outcome is the same: you are not *entitled* to a variation in the contract, and the other party is not obliged to tell you *why* they are unwilling to vary it.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

But what difference does it make? A contract is a contract. Once signed, it can only be varied by mutual agreement.

They may be technically unable to offer what you want, or they may be unwilling to vary the contract, or the people you are talking to may not have authority to vary contracts, and/or they may not have the deep technical knowledge to be able to explain why "system says no". But for all of these cases, the outcome is the same: you are not *entitled* to a variation in the contract, and the other party is not obliged to tell you *why* they are unwilling to vary it.

Absolutely correct. But why not prod them a bit to find out if they will be open with you about what their problem is? They could potentially negotiate themselves a contract extension. Or the customer could decide that if getting info out of them is harder than getting blood from a stone, it would be better to move at the earliest. Making a complaint adds to the information available, even if they tell you nothing.

You've just answered your own question and agreed with everyone that has an issue with your complaint.

At last! Common sense prevails.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by candlerb:

But what difference does it make? A contract is a contract. Once signed, it can only be varied by mutual agreement.

They may be technically unable to offer what you want, or they may be unwilling to vary the contract, or the people you are talking to may not have authority to vary contracts, and/or they may not have the deep technical knowledge to be able to explain why "system says no". But for all of these cases, the outcome is the same: you are not *entitled* to a variation in the contract, and the other party is not obliged to tell you *why* they are unwilling to vary it.

Absolutely correct. But why not prod them a bit to find out if they will be open with you about what their problem is? They could potentially negotiate themselves a contract extension. Or the customer could decide that if getting info out of them is harder than getting blood from a stone, it would be better to move at the earliest. Making a complaint adds to the information available, even if they tell you nothing.

After all that we're back to the basics: suggesting a frivolous complaint threatening to escalate to the ombudsman to 'prod them a bit'. Or, if you prefer, blackmail with the administration costs and ADR fee to try and get the desired outcome. Exactly as mentioned originally before the contortions to try and justify it as a legitimate complaint.

Anyway with that had a half hour power cut earlier, off to the energy ombudsman to add to the information available. Fixed and running normally now but that's what they're there for, right?

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

Anyway with that had a half hour power cut earlier, off to the energy ombudsman to add to the information available. Fixed and running normally now but that's what they're there for, right?

That would be an ecumenical matter.

In reply to a post by DFScale:

In reply to a post by XGS_Is_On:

Anyway with that had a half hour power cut earlier, off to the energy ombudsman to add to the information available. Fixed and running normally now but that's what they're there for, right?

That would be an ecumenical matter.

Ahh, Father Jack!!! As long as no nuns enter the discussion.

I have a legitimate complaint. Twice they have overcharged me does this count as breaking the contract? I've sent an email asking for refund and price adjustment against their published price.

In reply to a post by Banger:

So TTB has informed me early termination of contract is £300 so I think I will wait til next October. Cant find the EE offer for the contract buyout online might have expired now.

Looking at the Official Price list the final 12 months of 24 month contract the leaving fee is £125 and I see plusnet offering £100 cashback so this could be a way come October or Sky if I want to keep my phone going.

In reply to a post by Banger:

In reply to a post by Banger:

So TTB has informed me early termination of contract is £300 so I think I will wait til next October. Cant find the EE offer for the contract buyout online might have expired now.

Looking at the Official Price list the final 12 months of 24 month contract the leaving fee is £125 and I see plusnet offering £100 cashback so this could be a way come October or Sky if I want to keep my phone going.

If moving provider it would be a good time to separate them out if you want to keep the phone going. Have been on both Sky and Plusnet and my preferred is Plusnet, although I would use Sky again if I need a price reset.

In reply to a post by Banger:

I have a legitimate complaint. Twice they have overcharged me does this count as breaking the contract? I've sent an email asking for refund and price adjustment against their published price.

No, it's not breach of contract if it's simply a mistake they can correct. However, the "published price" doesn't come into it; what matters is the price you agreed to when you signed the contract.

In reply to a post by Banger:

So TTB has informed me early termination of contract is £300 so I think I will wait til next October. Cant find the EE offer for the contract buyout online might have expired now.

Sounds like a bargain!
During my conversations yesterday with TT Res they offered to correct their mistake by me cancelling my contract with a fee of £380, then a 14 to 20 day lapse of service before a new service would take effect, when I told them this was totally unacceptable they made the 'most generous' offer of halving the cancelation fee to £190!
In return I gave two counter offers, both which involved no cost to me, no break in service, and compensation for the additional costs I have incurred, and a nominal amount for the hours I have spent trying to sort this out.
They should be coming back to me tomorrow with an answer, I fully expect to have to take this to arbitration.

Is this an upgrade from FTTC to FTTP? TTB price list indicates last 12 months of 24 month contract the cancellation fee is £125 which I could possibly offset with a cashback offer.

In reply to a post by Kenneth:

I had both FTTP & FTTC for a period, as it was effectively a different line into property and didn't need to transfer existing one. Once I was happy I could setup VOIP on the FTTP and everything was stable I transferred number to a VOIP provider which cancelled the phone & FTTC. If it is still the same, your only issue is do you want to pay for two providers for a few months.

I had a very similar situation myself. I didn't want to stick with my FTTC provider for FTTP, so I had the FTTP installed as a stand alone connection, and once I was sure it was working fine, ported the number from the FTTC service to VoIP thereby cancelling the FTTC service.

In reply to a post by Kenneth:

I had both FTTP & FTTC for a period, as it was effectively a different line into property and didn't need to transfer existing one. Once I was happy I could setup VOIP on the FTTP and everything was stable I transferred number to a VOIP provider which cancelled the phone & FTTC. If it is still the same, your only issue is do you want to pay for two providers for a few months.

Seems this is not possible now with BT EE or Plusnet. They all say the current broadband will be disconnected at the last page in the ordering process. A&A seem to be able but expensive and I am waiting for Zen to see if its possible with them.

Switching seems to be the default. Who did you have FTTP and FTTC with Ken?