Believe in Better? Avoid Sky!

This is a heads-up and eye-opener for anyone out there who is tempted to switch to Sky by their low-price offers and slick sales patter. Don't do it. You'll regret it and end up out of pocket.

*long rant alert*

I've dealt with some bad ISP companies in my time (BT, Telewest, Virgin Media) but Sky stands out as the worst of the worst by far. Some of their business practices are blatantly unethical and in my opinion, OfCom should be all over that company with fines.

Just like other individuals on this forum have posted, Sky sales are LIARS and will say ANYTHING to hook you into a contract. I strongly suspect by the language and tactics they use, that Sky sales operate on a commission basis. They really try hard to get new customers, like their earnings depend on it.

I had a very bad vibe about Sky right from the start when they bought O2 Broadband who I happened to be with and at the end of my 12 month contract with them (as luck would have it). Sky were so arrogant they just wrote to all O2 customers announcing they had bought O2 Broadband and we were now *their* customers and would eventually be transistioned to Sky Broadband. Didn't even bother to ask if we *wanted* to be their customers. Just assumed everyone would. Well I was determined that I would not be entering into a 12 month contract with Sky. I telephoned them to let them know, so that they didn't automatically roll my O2 contact into another 12 months contract (under the Sky brand). That is a common tactic unethical broadband providers do, rolling 12 month contracts without consulting customers or giving them a proper cooling off period.

So, I call up Sky on their freephone sales number to inform them I won't be renewing my 12 months contract now Sky has acquired O2. (as it happened, I already made the decision not to renew with O2 regardless of Sky's acquiring it, since the service although great for the first 8-9 months, went down hill fast during the last few months.

I made it crystal clear I was not at all interested in any offer, any deal, and no sales pitch would work on me. I would NOT be having broadband with O2 and definitely not with Sky I informed them.

The Sky sales woman would not take NO for answer. First she suggested I remain with O2 and assured me that O2 would be managed as a separate business, with all the existing staff and infrastructure and no interference from Sky (for those O2 customers who prefer that, which seems rather dubious considering their literature and letters suggested the opposite). No I said. So then she suggested I move across to Sky and give them a try. Absolutely NO WAY I said.

She laughed and quizzed me about why I disliked Sky so much. I answered with "Rupert Murdock, major shareholder?" She then spent a good 5 minutes assuring me Mr Murdock would not be taking over or running Sky and had nothing to do with the business or its business strategy. She asked if I had any other reasons that would at prevent me trying Sky?.

I said, yeah plenty, but here's the main ones:

1) No static IP address (which I absolutely need as I run a business and servers from home).

2) No experience or knowledge of your ability to operate a broadband service, and since I need a reliable connection and can't risk frequent disconnections being a forex-trader and hosting websites, I'm not prepared to take a gamble on an unknown.

3) I need the freedom to move ISP at will. I don't want to be locked into a 12-month contract and have to pay a huge penalty to exit if I find your service isn't up to scratch.

She went through each of my concerns as follows:

1) Static IP addresses is something a lot of O2 customers have been requesting and it's something we're "actively working on providing". I pushed her for a time scale, but all I could get was "very soon hopefully", indicating it wouldn't be long. That sounded promising so thinking I could wait a month or two, I asked her if their dynamic IP addresses changed often, "no, not to my knowledge she assured me"

(first two lies)

2) She told me she had used Sky herself for many years, and had very rarely been disconnected, and that hardly any Sky users she heard of complained of being frequented disconnected.

(third lie)

3) She understood my concern about being locked into a 12 month contract and needing the freedom to exit if the service went downhill so offered a compromise. Sky would offer me a "unique deal" of unlimited broadband for just £2.50 a month for a full 12 months, with no router charge or even a delivery charge. And if I wanted to leave, all I had to do was pay the remaining months off. This peaked my interest, with the service offered so cheap (substantially cheaper than the £10.50/month half price deal I had previously with O2's unlimited broadband)

(fourth lie)

To sweeten the deal further and reassure beyond any doubt I was making a wise and safe decision switching over to Sky, she made me another "unique deal" and invited me to try the service for 30 days, "with absolutely no cost or obligation whatsoever". They would set everything up free of charge, supply a router free of charge, and if any time during, or at the end of the trial, I wasn't happy with the service and found it disconnected or changed IP etc, I could simply cancel the service, not enter into any contract and walk away. The only cost I'd have is returning the router.

(fifth lie and biggest lie of all)

The only condition was, I had to transfer my phone service to Sky Talk else I couldn't use their broadband, it won't work on normal BT lines she explained.

At this point she had me. It would seem silly to turn down her offer, since I had nothing to lose and I quickly needed to make a decision on my broadband and telephone service, since my O2 contract had ended. Sky assured me, they could transfer it very quickly in a few days without stopping my O2 service (which in fairness they did).

After trying the service for 10-12 days, I soon realised I'd be conned and the service was everything I thought it would be, appalling. Not only did the connection constantly drop (sometimes several times a day), but the IP address also changed. Often the router would just reboot itself randomly.

I went onto the Sky support forum (Sky is another big ISP like Virgin that shunts its support out to a forum for its users to deal with the problems rather than actually answering the telephone, or providing a decent service) to find out the situation about the frequent disconnections and constantly changing IP address, and also to query Sky sales' pledge of "static IP addresses coming very soon". The Sky forum technical staff were singing a totally different tune to the sales staff. There would be no static IP addresses they informed me. Not now, nor in the future likely. It was not something Sky was looking at offering. I looked at the Sky router Web admin interface and noticed it had ONE dynamic IP updating service built into it (conveniently it's a monthly-fee pay for service. Presumably Sky has some commercial relationship with them, since when I posted about other Dynamic IP address updating services and queried why Sky doesn't release newer router firmer with free DNS updating services, those posts were promptly removed by Sky Staff for being "against house rules" due to mentioning third party services (Youtube, Google, Skype etc is fine it seems, but DNS provider services are a no no).

I'm only a light broadband user but the download speed I experienced from Sky Broadband was also slow with a weird "caching" message whenever I accessed websites that normally loaded instantly on O2. Also lots of "buffering" whenever watching streaming video on Lovefilm or 4oD that previously worked fine on O2.

Then the phone line fun. As mentioned, the catch in the excellent broadband deal was that Sky insisted I could only have unlimited Sky broadband for £2.50 if I moved my phone service over to Sky Talk. I was reluctant to do, but since it's just a phone line, I figured what can go wrong and trusted Sky. Sky also offered me a line rental discount if I paid annually in advance making it competitively priced.

Here's where the phone line catch turned out to be the major con:

I've always used the service 18185 which for anyone who doesn't know, is a superb FREE VOIP service which lets you make unlimited any-time of the day UK landline calls free, plus HUGE savings on international calls (US just 1/2p a min for example, and 1p a minute to India). Since I make a lot of calls, especially overseas for business, I have come to rely on 18185 and use it daily. Whenever I tried to use it on my new Sky Talk service, I got an engaged/busy signal. At first I thought it was 18185, but on testing it on my mobile and (dialling numbers directly), I got connected instantly. I contacted 18185 and they informed me Sky blocks their service with a "busy" signal. I phoned up Sky customer services and they TOTALLY DENIED blocking 18185 with a busy signal, but said it was "not supported" and calls were "chargeable". Now 18185 have a way of dealing with this. They also offer a FREEPHONE number you can call, before dialling your number, and they route the call that way instead. A call to a freephone number, should be free on ANY phone network, right? Not on Sky Talk it isn't. Yep, you guessed it, Sky CHARGED for all the calls I made to 18185's freephone number. Unbeknown to me, I was running up an ENORMOUS phone bill. When I complained and suggested it can't be fair charging customers for calls to a freephone service (and not at least advising them with a recorded announcement or something) they disagreed and suggested I change my Sky Talk package to one with free talk mins.

That for me, was the final straw and I made up my mind right then, I would not be entering into a contract with Sky for broadband and that I would exercise my right (under the 30 day trial offer) to terminate my Sky Talk phone and Sky broadband, and would get a refund on the remainder of the line rental I had paid up front, cut my losses on the phone bill and move elsewhere.

It's at this point, Sky sales lies and unethical business practices started to become abundantly clear.

My first call to Sky's dedicated cancellation line went rather smoothly. Although they did try and persuade me to stay and asked what problems I had experienced, I replied "your service is unfit for purpose, and nothing you can say or do, will change that, so let's just get on with the cancellation" They accepted that and informed me the "cancellation order" was placed, and since I was still within my 30 day trial (by a week) they would cancel it within 3 days before the end. I'd owe nothing, except my call charges they told me. They offered (under protest) to not charge for the calls I made to the 18185 freephone 0808 number (one call was for £15), but said that the other 18185 prefixed calls would be charged. I decided to just wait for the final bill, and agreed, glad to be free of Sky.

Three days later, and nothing. Then I get an e-mail saying I need to call Sky cancellations team to "undergo some security questions" before they can action my request to cancel services. Since it was a chargeable number, I responded by e-mail saying any security questions they wanted answering, they could either ask by e-mail, or call me on my mobile. I didn't see why I should call them, when they had already assured me it would be cancelled.

Several days pass, and no response or call. As the 30 day trial is drawing to an end, I suspect what they're up to. They would no doubt claim I never formally cancelled the service and probably deny the phone conservation took place (which I foolishly didn't record) and then say I'm now in a 12 month contract. So I e-mailed a cancellation notice and followed up with a call, repeating what they said before about cancelling in 3 days and asked them to proceed with their security checks. Which they did. They assured me again, that the service would be cancelled and I'd receive a final bill shortly.

FINALLY I believed the matter was settled and proceeded to start looking for a new telecom provider and new broadband provider. I decided to go back to Primus Saver (the cheapest landline provider and a straightforward company to deal with whom I wish I'd never left). I also wanted to try Xilo/Uno for broadband who offer some very good deals, with static IP address from £12.50/month.

Anyways, when I entered my telephone number into Xilo's website (as I had done previously with Primus and been offered the full range of services) to my shock and horror it came up with a big red message "This number is no longer on the BT network and we cannot provide any broadband services to it".

I figured this must be because I was using Sky Talk and that a simple switch to a new telecom provider on the BT exchange would solve it. Wrong. I called Primus Saver/Newcall Telecom to switch my phone service, they informed it wasn't that simple. My phone line couldn't be taken over by them as it was no longer on the BT network and was now wired onto Sky's network. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. At no time had Sky explained to me that switching to Sky Talk would permanently lock my phone service to Sky and render it useless for broadband, other than theirs. I asked what could be done. Primus said the only thing they I could do, would be to switch my line back BT's network which would be like having a line-reconnection by BT. That would cost them £58 from BT engineers who would need to visit. The £58 charge they would have to pass to me, since their line rental is so cheap (£6.50/month) they couldn't afford to absorb the cost. So much for Sky's "oh you can leave at any time during or after 30 days trial, walk away and not pay anything". Seems they forgot to include that walking away would mean leaving my telephone line behind.

And to add insult to injury, I was told I would not be able to keep my phone number, which was now on the Sky network AND it would take at least 3 WEEKS before the transfer back to BT's network could be done according to Primus's checks on the line.
They said the delay was solely down to Sky, not them.

Absolutely furious, I called up Sky and put all this to them. Questioning why I should be out of pocket £58 just to get my phone line back to how it was before I accepted Sky's "30 day no risk trial". Sky acted all innocent and said "that doesn't sound right or fair" and suggested I call BT to confirm it was a BT charge (no apologies for hijacking my phone line and nor explaining to me the implications of switching to Sky Talk). I hung up and called BT, and they confirmed that they do charge to reinstate phone lines from Sky back to BT because it requires engineers work. Incidentally, BT also had nothing good to say about Sky or their business practices and seemed to be inundated with complaints over phone line switch problems. When I explained to BT that I needed my phone line back on the BT network in DAYS, not weeks, so I could switch broadband provider, they suggested I have a new line installed which could be done in 3-4 days, thus by-passing the whole Sky mess. There would however, be a £40 charge. The alternative they said, was I could ask Sky to completely deactivate my phone line, and BT would reconnect it on their network, free of charge (if I agreed to pay 12 months line rental with BT).

Since the cost saving with Primus Saver was lost (due to the £58 charge) and it would take 3 WEEKS to get my line back with Primus, going with BT and a new line seemed the only sensible option, as there was only £5 price difference and BT claimed it would be done in a matter of days. The BT chap was very friendly, and suggested I could avoid the £40 charge and a new line, if I just switched my existing line to BT which wouldn't take more than a week.

However, more dubious business practices and lies from Sky would scupper this. On placing my order with BT for a reactivation, they informed me that Sky would had not scheduled the termination of the line until 17th September. Two weeks after their original "within 3 days" and well beyond their 30 day trial period. BT said their hands were tied until Sky terminated service. They suggested I call Sky and vent my anger on them!

I called up Sky today even more furious than ever. I was absolutely livid and gave it them with both barrels. I asked why they had lied, not once, but twice, over the cancellation schedule and why they were dragging their feet. All I got was a patronising "cancellation and termination are different things" and "you're required to give 30 days notice before you can terminate services, and that 30 days ends on 17th September". I told them, that was utter [censored] since I was not in a legal contract with them, and thus, had no such "30 days" notice" legal obligation. In fact the opposite was true. They had offered ME a 30 day no obligation trial, assuring me I could cancel at ANY time. I screamed blue murder at them down the phone, demanded they cease service to my line in 3 days or face OfCom and legal action/costs for a new landline installation. All to no avail. I even threatened to utterly destroy their reputation online whenever the opportunity arose. They just couldn't care less and stood firm. 17th September they repeated. I asked them where they were getting this "30 days notice" stuff from, since I hadn't entered into a contract with them and had no obligation to them. That was met with a long silence. Finally they suggested it was "on their website". I informed them that they can put whatever they liked on their website. It doesn't constitute a legally binding contract and that I would challenge them via OfCom. They then bizarrely claimed it was OfCom who required ISPs customers to give 30 days notice (including those who aren't even in a contract yet and were offered a "30 day no obligation trial?!) which just seems absurd and an outright lie to me. I gave them one last chance to cancel the service within 3 days, as originally promised, or it would be all-out war on their company. They stood firm, and said they wouldn't cancel until 17th September. Presumeably they think I'm then liable for more line rental for September and a months broadband (when I actually cancelled in August).

Conclusion: Sky lies to get new customers. They're dishonest in their business practices, not open or forthcoming about the costs involved in leaving Sky and outright obstructive. And their only interest is, new customers and contracts, which they will say virtually anything to secure. Sky does not care about customers at all and certainly doesn't have their best interests at heart when it says "believe in better". It clearly doesn't care about its reputation or is just extremely arrogant. Which is clearly apparent by the way they treat exiting customers with utter contempt while milking them as far as they can possible. I wouldn't last 5 minutes if I conducted my business like Sky does theirs and treated my customers as they do theirs. Because they're big, they think they can get away with it.

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Sep-13 00:13:28)

Edited by deleted (Tue 03-Sep-13 23:18:06)

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

In reply to a post by morphix:

I wouldn't last 5 minutes if I conducted my business like Sky does theirs and treated my customers as they do theirs.

I know you did a long rant and I read and appreciate it but wouldn't you?

Sky have always been like this even in the early days - yet they have been around 23 years and last year made £6.791 billion and over a billion in profit.

We live in a world where no one cares aslong as they get things as cheaply as possible - so whatever Sky are doing and have always done it's always seem to be right.

Sky's business only is so big because it doesn't rely on ONE service and they have the resources from the successful media/Sky TV side to continually advertise and replace the disgruntled broadband customers.

You cannot treat customers like [censored] and not expect it to have an impact on your business somewhere down the line. Tesco have learned that lesson and now are in financial trouble with their fortunes declining. Big businesses need to learn, that size is nothing now. Reputations are made and destroyed online by social media. Glossy adverts on TV won't paper over the cracks of a shoddy company and shoddy practices.

And OfCom will be on their case soon. Look at Ofcom and the number of complaints against ISPs and that gives you a fair idea of who is good and who is bad.

At the end of the day, lying and deceit is wrong. There's no place for that in business. and if a business builds its growth on that, its setting itself up to fail.

I have a simple policy and approach for dealing with companies like Sky. And it works like this. If they end up costing me money or grief, I'll cost them 100 times the amount they cost me in money and grief in repayment. And I'll encourage and give others the means to do likewise. Call it karma.

Edited by deleted (Tue 03-Sep-13 23:55:17)

In reply to a post by morphix:

We live in a world where no one cares aslong as they get things as cheaply as possible - so whatever Sky are doing and have always done it's always seem to be right.

Here's the thing though, Newcall Telecom and their Primus Saver is the cheapest telephone line provider ANYWHERE in the UK. You can't get cheaper than £6.50 a month. Despite being so cheap, the company is really honest and straightforward, from the point of sales, to customers service, to leaving them. No problems at all and no double-talking nonsense like with Sky. They don't block 18185 diverted calls or charge for calls to freephone numbers. They don't conceal costs or try to trick customers into contracts, nor throw up delays and obstacles if you want to leave them. They offer a freephone number for both sales AND support, answered by people in the UK. There's no shunting of problems, if something is wrong with your phone line or billing, they're onto it and BT is out within hours or few days at most.

Primus know how to run a business honesty and look after customers by treating them fairly and treating them well. Yet at the same time, they're offering a budget-priced service. Being cheap, doesn't have to follow that you rip-off people and use dishonest business practices to grow your business.

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Sep-13 00:22:22)

mate I've done the long rants on Virgins Forums just ask pcoventry76, It don't get you no where tbh but at the same time I have to agree with pcoventry76 where he said,

"We live in a world where no one cares as long as they get things as cheaply as possible"

and he's right about Sky too:

"so whatever Sky are doing and have always done it's always seem to be right."

the motto is give someone something cheap and if they are an existing customer keep them by giving them a little discount or something that sounds great but might not be.

The problem is that yes it has been going on for a very long time and the reason is because not many people are like us and pay attention, they just here unlimited internet connection, free install, free wireless router.... they say ..... Yay!

Some of my family are the same but after you point out the flaws they say how can i sort it, I say subscribe to Fibre from BT they say no not paying anymore money.... So dead end!

Sheeple sheeple everywhere. Whilst there are sheeple, there will be corporations who scoop them up and later spit them back out, without a care in the world. Such is the capitalist machine we are all part of, turning the cogs of profiteering and consumerism.

I note you gave in to their £2.50 a month 30 day trial offering, even though earlier in your post you were absolutely adamant that your decision was NO. The child catcher got you, and got you bad. I would have said "Really? What possible quality of broadband connection can you offer for that amount? It must be rubbish?" Talk to them in the patronizing way they talk to you.

Anyway, pay cheap pay twice. I've learnt this many times in past purchases, and it has mostly held true. I wouldn't touch Sky at all, nor any of the other sheeple providers. I had my line break a few months ago when new flooring was being put down (break in the installed phone line cable) and AAISP somehow managed to have a BT Openreach engineer out within 4 hours of it happening, and service restored within a quarter of a day. I'm not even paying as a "business" customer, though I suspect the line is a "business grade line" (per what their portal is telling me) so that's probably how they were able to pull that off. Never ever experienced that before, and would never in a million years get that kind of support from a sheeple ISP.

Hope BT deliver for you. I suppose that's a one year contract with them, but you should be fine. In a year, you can shop around again and move to a provider which more closely matches what you were seeking in the first place.

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Sep-13 12:42:49)

In reply to a post by mixt:

I wouldn't touch Sky at all, nor any of the other sheeple providers.

I suppose you feel that paying a lot for an ISP gives you the right to be patronising towards customers of other providers.

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Sep-13 13:33:53)

Freedom of speech is a right. So is "paying a lot" for a service. Entirely my choice. And yours.

Do I see my post as patronising? No, not really, and I'm sorry if you do, as it obviously touched a nerve. It's not even about comparing Sky to AAISP - some people (like pcoventry76) believe AAISP are a rip off. That's fine, that's his view point. No big deal, but I'm happy. And according pcoventry's posts here, so is he (with Sky).

There is a market place for companies like Sky, and they sit in that place very well. If they didn't, they wouldn't be in business. It is up to consumers to choose if they opt to go with such companies, and be tempted by their offers (and, according to the OP, lies) or to try elsewhere.

Not being patronising, just being a realist and saying it as it is. I'm sure for the most part, Sky provides excellent service to their customers, a service which they can find no faults with, as it is geared towards "regular" customers wanting a cheap, reasonable deal. In this case, we have the OP who was attempting to use the service not quite as Sky intended him to (compared with their "regular" type of customer) and subsequently finds out he can't dial his alternative rate phone number, and also, gets charged for dialing an 0800 free phone number. Which, personally, seems completely morally wrong to me, and I'm in agreemenet with the OP on that. But evidently doesn't bother some people, because they don't use their phone line in that manner.

No offense meant in my post, though I admit, sometimes I can come across a bit condescending. Apologies up front for that.

Edited by deleted (Wed 04-Sep-13 13:43:46)

The offer by Sky to the OP looked pretty good especially as there was a 30 day no obligation free trial - just a shame that he encountered problems with the line rental

!'m sure many folks would be willing to accept Sky full LLU if such an offer was made...

In reply to a post by mixt:

Do I see my post as patronising?

Yes, because you describe customers of Sky and other such ISPs as sheep. That's patronising in my book.

I've sometimes wondered about 30 day trials on full LLU and how easy or difficult it is to have the line returned to WLR if one wishes to migrate to another ISP before the end of the trial period...

That is a common tactic unethical broadband providers do, rolling 12 month contracts without consulting customers or giving them a proper cooling off period.

If you had done nothing it would have transferred over to Sky without a contract.

Static IP addresses is something a lot of O2 customers have been requesting and it's something we're "actively working on providing". I pushed her for a time scale, but all I could get was "very soon hopefully", indicating it wouldn't be long. That sounded promising so thinking I could wait a month or two, I asked her if their dynamic IP addresses changed often, "no, not to my knowledge she assured me"

Firstly Sky ARE working on providing static IP address. It is likely to only be offered to o2 customers at first however. You moved over to Sky, so it's unlikely you will see it quicker. BE and o2 customers who do not move over to Sky themselves, but move across with the move when everybody else gets moved over automatically, these people are likely to be able to get a static IP as well as using their own routers.

The IP doesn't change really unless you reboot the router & even then mine stays 50% of the time. It's definitely NOT static though and you were aware of this at sign up. They said they were 'actively working on it' not that you were getting it.

2) She told me she had used Sky herself for many years, and had very rarely been disconnected, and that hardly any Sky users she heard of complained of being frequented disconnected.

Sky DLM is much stricter than other ISPs, the result is usually a slightly slower connection but very little drop outs. During the first 10 days (but in practice I found it's upto 20) DLM runs and it can cause numerous drop outs as the speed changes. Also firmware upgrades are issued to the router which causes it to reboot randomly during this time. As long as you do not touch the router during the first 2 or 3 weeks you are unlikely to see any further drop outs or issues or slowdowns. I think you've mistaken this for how the service always will be. Usually DLM isn't bad enough to anger customer so perhaps something else was going wrong too, although with the IP changing numerous times a day when DLM worked, this possibly angered you.

The only condition was, I had to transfer my phone service to Sky Talk else I couldn't use their broadband, it won't work on normal BT lines she explained.

That's not a lie it's how all of the major LLU providers work nowadays. TalkTalk Sky and BT all use different systems. TalkTalk and Sky use their own LLU which moves you away from a BT line.

After trying the service for 10-12 days, I soon realised I'd be conned and the service was everything I thought it would be, appalling. Not only did the connection constantly drop (sometimes several times a day), but the IP address also changed. Often the router would just reboot itself randomly.

Connection dropping: that's DLM running for the first couple of weeks
IP address changing - it will do that every few router reboots as you do not have static IP
Router rebooting - new firmware coming to the router, also only occurs the first couple of weeks. There can be 4+ updates to come through and Sky don't seem to upgrade to the newest first, they seem to upgrade one at a time.
After this it's stable.

I'm only a light broadband user but the download speed I experienced from Sky Broadband was also slow with a weird "caching" message whenever I accessed websites that normally loaded instantly on O2. Also lots of "buffering" whenever watching streaming video on Lovefilm or 4oD that previously worked fine on O2.

Were you constantly turning the router on and off during the first few weeks, it cannot be unplugged at all during DLM really, otherwise speeds suffer.

I've always used the service 18185 which for anyone who doesn't know

Since 2010 Sky have blocked calls using prefix numbers and indirect access calls. Other providers also block it so be careful when choosing a voice provider.

They assured me again, that the service would be cancelled and I'd receive a final bill shortly.

You need to be careful here as cancelling a service will put a cease order on the line and until the Sky tag is removed you MAY have issues getting another provider put in, also another provider will be installed as a new line so there will be a new line charge & potential downtime. This is just how LLU providers work, so Post Office, TalktTalk, Sky etc.

I figured this must be because I was using Sky Talk and that a simple switch to a new telecom provider on the BT exchange would solve it. Wrong. I called Primus Saver/Newcall Telecom to switch my phone service, they informed it wasn't that simple. My phone line couldn't be taken over by them as it was no longer on the BT network and was now wired onto Sky's network. I couldn't believe what I was hearing. At no time had Sky explained to me that switching to Sky Talk would permanently lock my phone service to Sky and render it useless for broadband, other than theirs. I asked what could be done. Primus said the only thing they I could do, would be to switch my line back BT's network which would be like having a line-reconnection by BT. That would cost them £58 from BT engineers who would need to visit. The £58 charge they would have to pass to me, since their line rental is so cheap (£6.50/month) they couldn't afford to absorb the cost. So much for Sky's "oh you can leave at any time during or after 30 days trial, walk away and not pay anything". Seems they forgot to include that walking away would mean leaving my telephone line behind.

Your lines no longer with BT, it went over to Sky LLU. This is the same as if you had gone with Post Office, TalkTalk or Sky. Sky haven't rendered the line useless or stuck with them BUT you do have to pay a reconnection to go back to a BT line service. BT will swallow the cost of this, much like Sky swallow the cost of moving you onto their network. Primus however will not swallow the cost as they are cheap and do not have the profits to do so. A better option may be to look at an ISP with free new line installs (as that's essentially what you're getting).

And to add insult to injury, I was told I would not be able to keep my phone number, which was now on the Sky network AND it would take at least 3 WEEKS before the transfer back to BT's network could be done according to Primus's checks on the line.

It's probably a combination of things, firstly you cancelled Sky fully which ceases the line, this is the slowest way of doing things. Secondly you need a BT engineer to reconnect the line to BT. These guys are busy at the moment due to students all getting broadband so that's delaying orders.

I hung up and called BT, and they confirmed that they do charge to reinstate phone lines from Sky back to BT because it requires engineers work. Incidentally, BT also had nothing good to say about Sky or their business practices and seemed to be inundated with complaints over phone line switch problems. When I explained to BT that I needed my phone line back on the BT network in DAYS, not weeks, so I could switch broadband provider, they suggested I have a new line installed which could be done in 3-4 days, thus by-passing the whole Sky mess. There would however, be a £40 charge.

Whatever Sky do, you are basically getting a new line install on Primus or BT. Switching from LLU on TalkTalk, Sky or any other LLU ISP back to BT is the same costs as getting a new line.

However, more dubious business practices and lies from Sky would scupper this. On placing my order with BT for a reactivation, they informed me that Sky would had not scheduled the termination of the line until 17th September. Two weeks after their original "within 3 days" and well beyond their 30 day trial period. BT said their hands were tied until Sky terminated service. They suggested I call Sky and vent my anger on them!

When you cancel a service Sky has to order a cease order via BT, this takes time. Most ISPs will pass on this cease charge to the consumer but Sky are doing it for free. They can 'cancel' the order on the system in 3 days but the cease order may take much longer to go through. They should have explained all of this really. Also theres 30 days notice so anything before that is a bonus.

I told them, that was utter [censored] since I was not in a legal contract with them, and thus, had no such "30 days" notice" legal obligation. In fact the opposite was true. They had offered ME a 30 day no obligation trial, assuring me I could cancel at ANY time. I screamed blue murder at them down the phone, demanded they cease service to my line in 3 days or face OfCom and legal action/costs for a new landline installation.

You are not in a contract with them, in terms of you can leave whenever. Nonetheless you do have to abide to their terms & conditions. These are such that you cannot for instance access illegal material on their network but also their T&C state a 30 days cancellation. Here you would come unstuck. Also Ofcom will not do anything regarding new line charges as all LLU providers move you away from BT. It's the done thing. It does suck in situations like this one.

I think ultimately Sky and all LLU providers should be making it clearer that the lines are going away from BT and that the lines will undergo a charge to be reconnected to BT in future. This isn't made clear and there's no legal obligation for it to be made clear. So many people get stuck in this kind of trap as most major ISPs move you away from BT line rental.

Luckily most major players will pay for the connections between ISP. Say you move from Sky back to BT. BT usually pay the reconnection. Say you move Sky to TalkTalk, TT usually pay the reconnection. It's only when you start using smaller providers like Primus etc that the charge becomes apparent. I think this is why Ofcom are not overly interested as most people end up moving for free.

The static IP is frustrating but Sky do not offer this.

The 3 days to leave really was a misrepresentation, it is 30 days notice and you are liable for the costs until you leave. You definitely have some grounds here.

The disconnections and slow internet was probably DLM. DLM starts you off on either 1Mbps or 4Mbps day one and very very slowly increases your speed over around 2 weeks. If you manually unplug the router a few times the speeds wont go up. Again Sky really need to make it much clearer that the router shouldn't be turned off.

The 18185 number is blocked by Sky. With this you really need to make sure the voice provider you choose does not block it. As far as I'm aware BT doesn't.

It does seem like ultimately Sky have misrepresented the truth to make you a customer. Not been truthful with you and tried to sugarcoat some of the negativities with lies. I think you will be better elsewhere especially as Sky will leave a sour taste in your mouth now. I got to a point with Virgin like yourself and I'm dubious to switch back.

"Really? What possible quality of broadband connection can you offer for that amount? It must be rubbish?"

I do have to say my Sky Fibre connection is much better than my BT infinity and my sky free connection at another address has never let me down. I've had over 3 months without a single drop out and I'm extremely happy. I've had line rental for £1 for around 2 years, I had broadband for free for a year, I got TV half price, free movies for 6 months, all kinds of great offers with Sky. It might be cheaper but it's still working fine.

I understand I will be charged for moving back to a BT line but for me it does not bother me. I have no plans of ever going back and if I do I'm sure I will find a deal with a free install.

I had virginmedia and I paid £46 for packet loss, a constantly crashing superhub, inability to stream YouTube due to terrible peering even at 60Mbps etc. Sky's never let me down in this regard.

Cheaper isn't always worse.

I've never been lied to by Sky and what they have told me has always been the case. The OP here claims they were lied to, I don't disbelieve them but I don't believe it's representative of Sky overall. That said I have to accept where mistakes occur.

Edited by ukhardy07 (Wed 04-Sep-13 14:25:40)

Thanks for the info But I didn't really mean the practical aspect rather it's administration, e.g. potential hazards of a broadband cease, phone number change, delays, etc.

Think I would rather pay a bit more for partial LLU and stay on WLR rather than go for the lower cost of full LLU - although that low price offer by Sky would of course be hard to resist

OP was offered a no obligation 30 day free trial for Sky full LLU and because he wanted to leave before the end of the trial he seems to have suffered difficulties with the line rental, possibly through no fault of his own?

Yep, FTTC and self install of a vdsl modem/router would suit me also - might happen around here also, possibly in the summer of 2014

It would have to be a broadband only deal though - maybe from Plusnet, Xilo, etc.

In reply to a post by pcoventry76:

Plusnet is one I would go for. Never used Xilo

Yes with Plusnet would have the option of broadband and phone for a lower cost - uno would be more expensive for BB only http://www.xilo.net/adsl_broadband/#home

I might have had the pleasure of talking to you a few years back when I was with PN

What a diatribe! Where did you find the time to compose that? Doesn't anybody work anymore? (Applies to most of the respondents as well).

I have been on Sky LLU for a number of years now. I did have problems with my ADSL service, which, once I got in contact with their second and third level of support, got me three OR Engineer visits and a Sky engineer visit, (called off a Gb/s installation in London), all to no avail and so I was given a 3G mobile dongle for three months - all at no charge to myself.

I subsequently upgraded to their Fibre service, and as my SamKnows box records, I have had an uninterrupted 37.6/8.6 service for the past 12 months.

I guess you just need to speak to the right people politely.

The SR101 is an ADSL modem with Ethernet WAN port.

A new model with built in VDSL modem is on the way, so update the rumour factory please

A cease only happens if you don't use a MAC code - you should always get one even if one is not needed.

The original poster rang Sky and cancelled. They did not follow the standard procedure of getting a MAC hence why a new line would be required as the line on sky will be ceased. This is where all of the complications stem from - the poster not getting a mac as normal.

And no doubt it will be locked down , although it probably won't stop someone coming up with a way around that ,Thing is How well will these non openreach modems actually work with FTTC ? Will ISP's choose a quality product or will they go for the cheapest solution that they can get away with ?

If the OP was Full LLU then the MAC code system does not apply Sky will not issue a MAC code to Fully LLU'd customers the only time they will use/issue a MAC is if the customer is only SMPF with them

From what the OP has said RE this 30 day trial : IMO sky should agree to pay the charges for RTD order or at least make this known before the customer agrees to a 30day no quibble trial , failing this i can't see why sky couldn't just do a trial on SMPF instead apart from greed that is

Best advice would be don't belive the sales hype , do your research first

Edited by tommy45 (Wed 04-Sep-13 17:55:08)

How will it work? Urm, the same way as they got ADSL modems to work, by sourcing devices from the many countries that are decades ahead of us and have had VDSL modems for years.

If you are going to source your own, then make sure it supports vectoring.

BT have test labs so manufacturers and providers can test the kit even before trialing it.

NOTE: You cannot get a MAC from Sky Full LLU

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/guide/migration.html#s...

The cost mentioned is old, but some providers did charge that for a while even after cost was significantly reduced at the wholesale level.

he seems to have suffered difficulties with the line rental, possibly through no fault of his own?

The main issues stemmed from them closing the Sky account, causing a cease of the line, delaying the transfer back to BT and possibly costing more. Although I'm not sure if a mac can work.

Edited by ukhardy07 (Wed 04-Sep-13 17:56:26)

No not how will they work, but how well they will work compared to the BT openreach branded modems, and even they are know to perform differently depending on the DSLAM in the FTTC cab your connected to

As for lab tests, all well and good but how something will perform in the real world can be totally different as im sure you are already know

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

he seems to have suffered difficulties with the line rental, possibly through no fault of his own?

The main issues stemmed from them closing the Sky account, causing a cease of the line, delaying the transfer back to BT and possibly costing more. Although I'm not sure if a mac can work.

Are you saying that there was possibly a cease and reprovide on the voice service and this may happen if one takes a 30 day, in this case Sky, no obligation free trial on full LLU?

And the answer is we will need to wait and see until a few 100,000 are running each model

It is not that they won't issue a MAC, there is no way to generate a valid MAC for full LLU. Hence why Ofcom has been taking a few years to come up with a new migration system

Sky provided the services

As the account was closed I am assuming sky have put in an order to cease the line.

So yes even on the trial I believe a cease has occurred.
As far as I'm aware there's no better method however.

So, for example, if one was 3 weeks into a full LLU 30 day trial offer and at that point gave notice to terminate then one would hope that the line could be returned to WLR before the end of the 30 days in order that one could migrate the BB to another provider.

I took an O2 free trial BB offer myself a few years ago, but that was ADSL MAX and I had the line rental with BT Retail so with a MAC it was no problem to migrate to another ISP before the end of the 30 days...

So, for example, if one was 3 weeks into a full LLU 30 day trial offer and at that point gave notice to terminate then one would hope that the line could be returned to WLR before the end of the 30 days in order that one could migrate the BB to another provider.

They just require notice before 30 days, so you can give it day 29 - although actually migrating back will take much longer.

It's a strange one because Sky are offering a 30 day trial. They are letting the op leave as long as they give notice in that 30 day period. Whether Sky should pay associated costs to move to another ISP is debatable, afterall if they go to TalkTalk it would be a free transfer, if they go to BT - chances are it's a free transfer. If they go to someone smaller that's not mass market chances are it's not free. Sky didn't choose to pass on the charges to the end user, the receiving ISP did. Sky let the customer leave in 30 days as agreed - they didn't promise to use WLR.

Most people switching between a mass market ISP will find they are not using WLR. The big players are really BT, TalkTalk, Sky & C&W providers definitely have a market. If I move from BT for calls, line rental and broadband to TalkTalk, AOL, Sky or Post Office I lose WLR. It's almost a standard part of switching now if you require the best deals. There's only a narrow few providers who keep you with BT line rental, we're talking BT and Plusnet as the major players. I cannot think of any others - perhaps EE?

I took an O2 free trial BB offer myself a few years ago, but that was ADSL MAX and I had the line rental with BT Retail so with a MAC it was no problem to migrate to another ISP before the end of the 30 days...

For most people the Sky 30 day trial works out because most people choosing Sky are looking at mass market providers. So those unhappy with Sky will simply switch to BT or TT and will get a free install. Very few use Sky and then think 'this doesn't work too well, best give UKFSN a go.' They say 'should have gone with BT' or 'TalkTalk works well for my friend.'

In experience BT definitely have a way of lying about the disadvantages of moving to LLU. When my mother moved from BT to Sky they told her that her telephone number would never work on BT again and would be stuck on Sky forever. They told her Sky cannot beat BTs speed as BT has the monopoly on the market. They also told her Sky would charge her so much more per call that she would regret moving. She almost didn't switch. Ironically she moved houses out of a Sky LLU area and has her old number back with BT.

I think there needs to be a better method of switching between ISPs than currently.

In reply to a post by morphix:

1) No static IP address (which I absolutely need as I run a business and servers from home).

2) ..... can't risk frequent disconnections being a forex-trader and hosting websites, I'm not prepared to take a gamble on an unknown.

I've always used the service 18185 which for anyone who doesn't know, is a superb FREE VOIP service which lets you make unlimited any-time of the day UK landline calls free, plus HUGE savings on international calls (US just 1/2p a min for example, and 1p a minute to India). Since I make a lot of calls, especially overseas for business, I have come to rely on 18185 and use it daily.

I decided to go back to Primus Saver (the cheapest landline provider and a straightforward company to deal with whom I wish I'd never left). I also wanted to try Xilo/Uno for broadband who offer some very good deals, with static IP address from £12.50/month.

I called Primus Saver/Newcall Telecom to switch my phone service, they informed it wasn't that simple.

Conculsion - apparently connectivity is vital to you because you host websites and trade forex, running a business from home, but you list cheap residential services and free VoIP options as your tools of choice and price seems your main driver however you expect a high quality service.

It's hard to have sympathy though I appreciate you've had a bad experience. Pay more and get a home worker package, invest in your own VoIP service rather than using a free one as it's clearly so vital to the revenue of your business, have dedicated business level support, an SLA on your phone line, and the other safety nets that come with spending the extra.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

They just require notice before 30 days, so you can give it day 29.

OP said when he went to terminate during the 30 day trial Sky said he needed to give 30 days notice. However that is dubious as you'd expect a 30 day trial to be just that; give it a try for no more than 30 days. No doubt the CS saying this was confused with users on normal T&Cs. Like 4M2 I once took the O2 30 day Happiness offer with their LLU ADSL2+ on a BT landline and as long as you told them within the 30 days they released you immediately. Luckily it was on a 2nd line so I did not have any migration to be performed.

BTW: EE don't now sell BB only. I'm on it as a legacy cust, but can't upgrade to fibre with them w/out surrendering BT line rental (but would be WLR still).

Yep. I'm mixed on this one because even during the 30 day trial presumably you agree to Sky T&C. In these T&C the 30 days notice is probably mentioned.

It is likely that Sky cancellations are not aware of the 30 day trial as it's not standard practice to offer it. Even with the 30 days notice Sky almost always cease a line far before it.

E.g. I cancelled my Sky line in my old house on the last day of June. On the 12th of July it was disconnected (so 12 days later). Around one month later on the August bill it had a refund for 12th July onwards.
They did nonetheless charge me the full month on Sky TV.

Interesting, so the only provider keeping you on WLR is PlusNet. Boy - that's a lot of people not on WLR then! It's not until this conversation that it dawned on me really how many providers move you away from the classic wholesale line rental.

I must say that anyone who runs a business and uses a residential broadband service is just plain stupid.

In reply to a post by ukhardy07:

Interesting, so the only provider keeping you on WLR is PlusNet.

Perhaps I did not make myself clear. EE do keep you on WLR, but insist now in collecting the line rental.

Most resellers allow you to stay on WLR, even when reselling TT Wholesale Partial LLU BB.

Gotcha, that makes a lot of sense. That's interesting about resellers. Most mass market providers at least move you away from WLR though.

Among major providers it is now a dichotomy between BTw based, BTr, PN & EE, keeping WLR or Full LLU, TT & Sky, losing WLR.

With the demise of O2/Be there are no Partial LLU ISPs except resellers. Altho' legacy O2/Be BB only custs now with Sky will keep WLR and and BT, or PO & others, line rental

Yep. Overall the op would have been better staying with O2 and awaiting the mass sky move. This way they would have been kept on WLR & could have moved easier. Plus perhaps with their O2 equipment and setup it would have remained more stable.

Funny business though with Sky offering to allow O2 customers to stay on WLR for 12 months: one chap was offered it if he continued to pay £9.50 per month for BB only and another person was told that to stay on it they would have to pay an increased price from the end of September - approx £4.50 up to about £7.50, I think.

Yet the OP was offered £2.50 for BB if he took Sky full LLU. However if he had stayed with broadband only he may have had to pay £10.50 per month.

So perhaps a minimum of £7.50 for BB only or a minimum of £2.50 for BB on full LLU?

I write this lot for a reason

http://www.thinkbroadband.com/news/5984-ofcom-picks-...

BT Retail is still WLR

Only Talktalk and Sky in the large providers use full LLU