In reply to a post by beardedwonder:

Is the SNRM being larger better?

It should improve stability but not speed.

Possibly time to get back to Orange about this since your downstream sync is very poor with a 34dB attenuation and an adsl2+ connection.

Just spoken to them on the phone, they said that there was a problem with the line test (an exclamation mark) which meant it could be a problem with the line or something in the house. The fault has been escalated to another team who can get in touch with Openreach, so now i have to wait to see if I will get a call.

In reply to a post by beardedwonder:

Just spoken to them on the phone, they said that there was a problem with the line test (an exclamation mark) which meant it could be a problem with the line or something in the house. The fault has been escalated to another team who can get in touch with Openreach, so now i have to wait to see if I will get a call.

I guess you still have the router connected to the NTE5 test socket?

The router is still in the test socket.

In reply to a post by 4M2:

In reply to a post by beardedwonder:

As far as I can tell there are no extensions in the house, there's only one telephone socket.

This is the inside of the socket:

Socket

I'll post back in this thread in a couple of days with any changes.

Looks like everythings OK at the back of the NTE5 - have you also tried different filters and/or filtered faceplate?

Are you insane? Thats not even got a test socket inside it... its empty just a front plate on with no SPLIT faceplate. This is an obsolette master socket, likely one with a T in a circle or a non-split BT socket with the piper man logo. I can't quite tell from the angles there but it looks like an LJU (just an extention plate as its quite thin and the socket itself recesses into the wall).

Whats more it looks like theres a lot of matter inside the socket walling (dead insects flies or dust etc) which have caused issues before especially if they are in contact with any of the wiring or circuitry. Whats more is if this is indeed the master socket or only socket in the property it still probably has a functional ringer wire, these are no longer needed as they used to work with older phones to make them ring now all they are useful for is sending interference down your telephone line into your modem.

Basically that socket needs replacing with either a modern openreach socket or an already filtered faceplate - this will require a broadband engineer from your provider.

It is you who is mad, if you insist on rudeness !

That is the backplate of a NTE5 Master with the faceplate removed and out of sight.

It is the top one of these: http://www.kitz.co.uk/adsl/btsockets.htm with the guts in green instead of white.

The only part you are allowed to remove as a customer is the bottom faceplate cover, not anything else otherwise BT can and will charge for a replacement due to tampering.

It should still not have that level of matter inside the socket therefore further compounding the tampering theory.

Apologise if it sounded rude however what I believed I was looking at was not a master due to the thickness of the plate hanging down and the backplatings position inside the wall.

Regardless the first two observations in this post stand, if a BT engineer comes out and sees that muck and that hanging off he will have to charge for a replacement due to suspected tampering.

Which is something to avoid!

In reply to a post by Kaytfoh:

The only part you are allowed to remove as a customer is the bottom faceplate cover, not anything else otherwise BT can and will charge for a replacement due to tampering.

So what! I removed nothing and it's already been done! My observation still stand regardless.

EDIT: There is still no reason to be rude even when you think you disagree with a post

Edited by XRaySpeX (Wed 19-Sep-12 14:54:09)

In reply to a post by XRaySpeX:

In reply to a post by Kaytfoh:

The only part you are allowed to remove as a customer is the bottom faceplate cover, not anything else otherwise BT can and will charge for a replacement due to tampering.

So what! I removed nothing and it's already been done! My observation still stand regardless.

Never said you did remove it, but that should have been pointed out to the original poster incase he's arranged an engineer in the interim so he can avoid being charged!

I'm not going to argue with you on an internet thread, I apologise for being rude however what I was looking at looked incredulous to me. I'm not going to debate this with you so if you want to carry this into other threads I will no longer be replying to it and will continue to assist other users.

Then learn to press the correct Reply button.