Digital voice and power cuts.

[Stevek1311]

---

@garybs29wrote:

You would think the journalist's would know how to do some research & have a go at who's actually instgating all this......

---

They are.  This is all the doing of BT and their wholly owned Openreach.  BT were pushing for this change even before they had to make OpenReach a separate division.

And it was they that lobbied OfCom to get a concession against OfComs's own rules on emergency organisation access

[licquorice]

Of course all the other telcos aren't rubbing their hands because they can get rid of their expensive PSTN kit as well I don't suppose.

[Stevek1311]

---

@Keith_Beddoewrote:

 . . .Just as a side issue, for all these years, people have been getting free electricity down their phone lines. All it means now is it has to be supplied by the customer, like any other appliance. . .

---

 Nope we were and are paying for it in the line rental charge.  

[Keith_Beddoe]

The real issue is the age of the exchange PSTN equipment, which is way beyond its design life. Plus the valuable building space it occupies.

Closing down one exchange and going digital, saves a lot of money, as some of these buildings are massive, as they used to house Strowger exchange equipment which needed a lot of space, and are now mostly empty. Lots of land to sell off.

Also the copper "E-side" cables can be recovered and sold off.

[Stevek1311]

Of course it saves money and there's nothing wrong with that per se

But forcing material changes on people mid contract is wrong

Misleading and misrepresenting people is wrong

Not even meeting OfCom's concession on rules is wrong 

Not providing a proper transition for the elderly and vulnerable is wrong

[Andy005]

---

@Stevek1311wrote:

Of course it saves money and there's nothing wrong with that per se

But forcing material changes on people mid contract is wrong

Misleading and misrepresenting people is wrong

Not even meeting OfCom's concession on rules is wrong 

Not providing a proper transition for the elderly and vulnerable is wrong

---

It's your view @Stevek1311 but it isn't going to change anything. I have an elderly Mother with dementia and no internet, but I have no concerns at all. As I'll be able to plug her existing base station into the SH2 she won't notice any difference. As for power cuts, I can't remember the last time she had one so a ups is irrelevant based upon her geographical location.

I wonder how many elderly relatives tried to contact family members in the days of dial up and would constantly get the engaged tone. That would have been fairly common I would of thought, power cuts for most of us are probably insignificant. 

I don't know much about telecoms but I found those two newspaper articles to be laughable to be honest, they'll already have been forgotten about and would have had no impact at all. It's time to move on I think.

[iniltous]

So what’s the alternative ?, for the Luddites , or those with faux outrage , not for themselves, but others they feel would be harmed by this technological advance….run two networks , one copper legacy network  for those that consider it’s essential that they have a phone line that is powered from the exchange so that in the event of a power outage at the consumers address , service is maintained ( overlooking the fact that a cable pair fault or an outage at the exchange could result in the consumer losing service anyway  ) while the overwhelming majority are happy to move onto a system that hardly anyone uses for telephony anyway, but will improve their on line experience and enable new data intensive applications to be introduced …or put another way , are you prepared to pay to keep the copper network going just for yourself, or do you think everyone else should subsidise it so that you get to stay on a copper network….what do you think the ‘line rental’ would be if you and a small number or like minded refuseniks demanded the legacy network were maintained, what would you individually be prepared to pay £100 a month, £200 a month ?, if you say you shouldn’t have to pay more, Why ?, why should everyone else have to pay more than necessary just so you can keep your security blanket ?

Some moaned when leaded petrol was removed from sale, probably using the same arguments , ‘oh it’s not me I’m concerned for, but that old couple who run a car that won’t work on unleaded and they cannot afford a different car or a modification to the one they have’ , they got over it, and you will also get over it.

How is your legal challenge coming along ?

[Stevek1311]

---

@iniltouswrote:

So what’s the alternative ?, for the Luddites , or those with faux outrage , not for themselves, but others they feel would be harmed by this technological advance….run two networks , one copper legacy network  for those that consider it’s essential that they have a phone line that is powered from the exchange so that in the event of a power outage at the consumers address , service is maintained ( overlooking the fact that a cable pair fault or an outage at the exchange could result in the consumer losing service anyway  . . .

---

So let's try to deal with that point by point

No faux outrage on behalf of others here, they really annoyed me big time.  At the start of this BT decided to 

• Impose moving my main telephone point from my living room to the far wall of the garage 
• Disable my 3 ifurther n house telephone extension points I paid BT for
• Not be able to give any evidence their Digital Voice Adaptor would actually work from a location the WiFi hadn't worked from without BT Discs (the Adapter doesn't link to discs)
• Not comply with OfCom's (still extant) rules on emergency access having obtained a sus concession
• Continually misinform and fail to meet OfCom's requirements on checking the subscriber's needs

They then went on to

• Fail to comply even with that concession by deleting their UPS solution
• Hide the ability to get that Digital Voice Adapter from their shop (maybe accidentally)
• Falsely assert I had ordered this 'upgrade' 
• Promise an OpenReach survey that never happened

You ask about my legal challenge - presented with the legal realities they settled out of court but I won't detail how other than to say it will cost them more than the resolution I proposed.  Their choice.  

Your post infers no one should worry about the elderly on their behalf.   Well I know several that will find this whole situation utterly confusing and it's wrong that BT is forcing this change on them and many many more elderly 

You ask what they should have done.  Well in no particular order

• Not force this change on anyone mid contract
• Continue to have a BY endorsed UPS dolution available
• Provide their support staff with the key facts and train them that just saying 'I don't know' and 'we're going to force this change' really is neither good PR nor acceptable
• Have tested the Digital Voice Adapter to be able to provide key facts like range and Ringer load capability 
• Don't assume everyone is on the web and has a mobile phone
• Have a proper information pack instead of a FAQ that avoids all the questions they can't or don't want to answer
• For those that wish to change accept change mid contract: 
• Provide a BT endorsed UPS for the hub
• Provide one free Digital Voice Adapter for every extension point in the house
• Provide an additional UPS for one Digital Voice Adapter if the hub isn't in the main living area

The key here is don't force material services changes on people mid contract.  It is, as I pointed out to them, breach of contract giving me the freedom to immediately change to Sky or anyone I chose.   

Of course when contracts are up for renewal BT would be forced to make a competitive offer compared to Sky, Talk Talk, Virgin etc.  That of course might effectively force them to make those offers free of charge as part of the renewal.

Sort of explains why they're trying to force changes on people mid contract doesn't it.

But I have some good news - see next post

[Stevek1311]

So seeing as how as part of my agreement with BT they did change me to Digital Voice yesterday here are the actual outcomes good and not so good

Good

• If you know how, you can still find out how to get a Digital Voice Adapter (DVA)from their shop https://shop.bt.com/products/bt-digital-voice-adapter-100121-G4Z7.html  
• That DVA does work over a distance
• My cordless hub (although now relocated to the far wall of the garage) does appear to work across the whole house

But not so good/needlessly irritating

• I'm £93 out of pocket
• getting a DVA isn't easy (why they've removed it from their search engine and placed it under Gaming - Gifts is just stupid)
• When they change you, they force BT1571 on you whether you wanted it or not and they default force it to pick up at 7 rings which default disabled my actual answering machine
• I'm a cordless phone charging point down
• They tell you to plug a phone into the back of the hub but actually cover that socket up with a black sticker.  Yes I spotted it, would everyone?
• When a phone picks up on the DVA the  phone connected to the Hub phone socket keeps ringing - will investigate more

[Stevek1311]

---

@Stevek1311wrote:

 . . .

• When a phone picks up on the DVA the  phone connected to the Hub phone socket keeps ringing - will investigate more

---

So the explanation for this from BT today is somewhat surprising on several levels:

They said with Digital Voice you get 2 lines for one account number.  I could be receiving one call via the DVA and make another call via the socket at the back of the hub.  Clearly this could be a plus point about Digital Voice so why don't they make more PR out of it