Speed Drop over years

[imjolly]

your connection speed is still within your expected speed range according to stats

which exchange and cab are you on?

[RKM]

imjolly said: your connection speed is still within your expected speed range according to stats

That's the problem though: the stats change to suit the conditions.

If the speed drop-off is just due to more users using the service and crowding at the cabinet or exchange then the "expected speed range" falls as well.

I am almost certain that when I first signed up for "Superfast Fibre" the expected speed range was 75-80Mbps, and I usually got 79.9 for a few years, with data records showing I regularly achieved >75Mbps downstream data throughput on speed tests.

Now the expected speed for my line is showing 65-80Mbps and my sync speed has been around 66Mbps for a while now, with speed tests rarely showing above 60Mbps : still within the down-revised expected range, but well below the expected range the service was originally sold on.

[iniltous]

Although the predicted speed can reduce , at the time of renewal of your contract, the new estimate is the one you either agree to , or you look elsewhere, you cannot expect that if you were given an estimate ( for example ) of 70-80Mb ten years ago , and received 80Mb, then the estimate reduces over time to 60-70Mb, and your speed is now 68Mb , that you have a valid complaint not getting 70-80Mb....
Unless another network provider is available , then it’s hardly a ‘BT’ issue anyway, FTTC is an OR system , and switching to another provider using the same kit, it should come as no surprise that the same ‘sync speed’ will be delivered.

[pompey1898]

Hi @RKM ,

Take a look here, it may help you understand :-

http://www.increasebroadbandspeed.co.uk/2014/vectoring-crosstalk-crisis

Have a look around the website, it is quite informative.

[RKM]

Pompey1898 wrote: Take a look here, it may help you understand

Hi Pompey1898, as you'll see in Post 2 of this thread, I already understand why the speed drop-off is occurring.

That reason doesn't excuse BT from moving the goalposts.  If they offered the service on a connection speed range, and you contracted with them on that basis, then they should be held to that speed range and require Openreach to upgrade their infrastructure to ensure it.

BT seem to be under the illusion that they have a captive market, which may indeed be true in many cases.  However, in my case, I already have a Virgin high speed connection coming into the house, albeit in a slightly less convenient location than the main phone point.

[pompey1898]

Hi @RKM ,

The estimate will also drop due to crosstalk.

[RKM]

---

@pompey1898wrote: The estimate will also drop due to crosstalk.

---

Precisely my point.

In any other line of business the service supplier would be expected to meet the terms agreed at the point of sale, not shift the goalposts because their infrastructure is stressed.  The supplier would be required to invest in the infrastructure to ensure that the original offer was met, or negotiate a price drop.

I haven't seen anything from BT suggesting the latter: quite the contrary!  Price has gone up while service has gone down - and surreptitiously so at that.

Arguably, BT/Openreach should have anticipated the exchange/cabinet cross-talk and its consequences (it isn't rocket science) and constrained their original estimated speeds accordingly.

However, the fact is that they were desperate to attract new clientele with high speed estimates (that they should have known were unsustainable) and have since lowered that metric to make it appear that they continue to deliver what was originally offered.

I doubt anyone here has sufficient information to determine if this was deliberate policy to mislead from the start or sheer incompetence in being unable to predict the obvious.  However, either way, it has made me extremely cautious of BT/Openreach G.Fast "Estimated performance" and to consider alternative upgrade options.  The alternative may well be lying/incompetent as well, but that's a comparison between established and potential behaviour.

[RKM]

---

@iniltouswrote:
Although the predicted speed can reduce , at the time of renewal of your contract, the new estimate is the one you either agree to

---

Which would be fine IF they informed you of the reduced service at the time of renewing the contract and IF the goalposts weren't shifted during the term of the contract.  Neither of those conditions have been met.

In fact, at the last renewal they sent this:

Nothing mentioned about estimated speed reductions, those "great improvements" were just additional services they wanted me to pay for.  So no "improvements" at all, just smoke and mirrors to conceal their service degradation, despite the price hike.

I should add that this was after several offers to upgrade to exactly the same service as I already had "for only £x a month more"!

[Needaname]

Evening all

after reading all of these comments it has made me realise that I need to certainly look at other alternatives to BT. It is galling that after paying them over £100 per month for all these years all I seem to have received is a worse service (admittedly that includes BT mobile - but even that service seems to be getting worse) I would rather pay my money somewhere else and hopefully get better service. 

time to start looking!

Thanks all!

[RKM]

---

@Needanamewrote: after reading all of these comments it has made me realise that I need to certainly look at other alternatives to BT.

 As others have mentioned, if the alternatives use the same Openreach connectivity (ie. still uses your existing phone line) then the service won't be any better, although the price probably will.

I'm in the fortunate position of already having a Virgin high speed connection to the house, so that offers an option that doesn't depend on Openreach.