I decided to log this as a follow on from the numerous complaints and perplexed customers who have experienced the notion of a call out charge for a faulty line.
I currently have a faulty line highlighted by a good degree of crackling on the line.
Called BT to report the fault and almost immediately I was drawn to the fact a call out charge may be applied. On further diagnosis the fault was deemed to exist near the property, albeit this seems to be a farly basic test. While on the call I was asked to remove the cover of the master socket and test the line directly and the still the crackling was evidenced. I purchased a new phone and tested with that just to make sure the old handset was not at fault and still the same fault is experienced.
Despite the fact I have performed more detailed diagnosis of the problem myself I was shocked to discover that BT will do nothing more the resolve this issue unless I 'understand' that a charge 'may' be applied. The call centre chaps absolutely assured me that fault was down to BT because of the checks that had been performed and that I attached a brand new handset. However they could not investigate further unless I 'agree' (different word used this time) to a potential charge. I refused point blank and to cut a long story short have reached a deadlock and am waiting for a letter to progress this a formal complaint or possibly legal action if required. THIS PRACTICE MUST CHANGE !!
The crux of this issue as was explained to me by numerous BT representatives is the way the contract is structured with OpenReach. The net result to us that BT will do no more unless they have the an agreement upfront that a charge may apply. As many contributors have pointed out here what happens beyond this 'agreement' has led to a catalog of unhappy customers who have been unfairly billed regardless of the outcome.
I guess the next step is to receive the letter from BT regarding the deadlock (which has taken almost 2 weeks to receive) and proceed from there.
What is surprising is that BT are unwilling to ask the question "Are we at fault?" and fully satisfy themselves they are not or carry out detailed diagnosis of a fault. They claim that I have not allowed them to authorise an engineer to investigate further so I am at fault under the terms of their contract. Well I might be in for a long hard slog but you have to start somewhere and it appears that many of the other issues and complaints raised in this forum coulkd be eradicated if this practice is changed for the betterment of customer service.
