For god's sake BT should axed all dodgy Openreach installation! Banned them for no certified qualified.

I don't really see the issue here, plenty of us have suffered with dodgy broadband connections for extended periods of time - your problems don't seem to be a special case that warrants a warning to all FTTC users.

strictly speaking the consumer could probably leave under "unfit for purpose" trading standards protection.

But yeah the isp's in their own t&c's wouldnt allow an opt out for that.

The way things are currently with no trials, no monthly contracts etc. is pretty crazy stuff.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

strictly speaking the consumer could probably leave under "unfit for purpose" trading standards protection.

But yeah the isp's in their own t&c's wouldnt allow an opt out for that.

Fitness for purpose is a sale of goods concept, not supply of services.

The concept you're probably thinking of is s. 13 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982, which requires services to be provided with "reasonable care and skill". In practice, the test is the same as that for negligence. Though the law implies this term into all contracts for services, liability (other than for death or personal injury) can be excluded in the terms of the contract if that is reasonable (s. 2 Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, with the test for reasonableness being found in s. 11).


This does not appear to give a particularly strong platform for consumer action in most cases, especially if the terms and conditions explain the limitations of FTTC. However, there is a point where the service provided by the ISP fails to live up to the duty of care owed to the consumer, and the consumer is therefore entitled to terminate the contract under s. 13 SGSA 1982.

Aw come on Max, can we at least have a coherent non-sensical post ???????

maybe but I have successfully got out of services under "the unfit for purpose" including a broadband isp.

In reply to a post by Chrysalis:

maybe but I have successfully got out of services under "the unfit for purpose" including a broadband isp.

I'm sure most companies would exercise their discretion not to hold to contract any customer showing a demonstrable and irredeemable failure in the service they received. I flagged up the legal position for those occasions where it is necessary to resort to a rights-based approach.

I think ofcom should bring in all broadband isp's should have including 28 days cooling off period. If unhappy under 28 days can leave without being held in a long term contract for unfit purpose.

In reply to a post by adslmax:

I think ofcom should bring in all broadband isp's should have including 28 days cooling off period. If unhappy under 28 days can leave without being held in a long term contract for unfit purpose.

I proposed this to ofcom months ago, sadly I dont think they have plans to impose it tho although monthly wholesale contracts are on the way, just taking their sweet time to arrive. ~When the wholesale contracts change tho its still upto the retail isp's what durations they set although I expect zen, aaisp and other smaller isps will drop to a month as a selling point. Any other caveats? I think mrsaffron may be right when he said the monthly contracts exclude first time installs, so it might be for migrators only.

Edited by Chrysalis (Wed 04-Dec-13 01:30:37)

The majorty of the people people I know that have had FTTC, which is very few to be honest, have not had any problems with connectivity, but I don't any of them are getting the speed they thought they should get.

FTTC is not all it's cracked up to be considering how much extra some people pay compared to ADSL.

Ok if you got a 1-2 Megabit ADSL connection and FTTC giver you 20Mb/s or more, then it may be worth the extra. i still know many people who have no interest in going for FTTC, even some that got pretty slow ADSL speeds.