You are totally and utterly clueless, there is absolutely no point in continuing this dialogue.
I agree this is pointless and a total waste of time
I have asked the moderators to lock this thread as the assertions of the OP which are wrong have been answered and the thread is now going round in circles.
If I were to hazard a guess, I would say your ‘line’ is ( in part ) what is commonly called an ‘Ali’ , or aluminium cable , although that is an over simplistic term , they are somewhat inferior to a 100% copper pair cable , but they are far from incompatible with ‘broadband’, they ‘may’ deliver a slightly reduced performance when broadband is delivered over them ( compared to a copper cable ) but it’s nonsense to imply aluminium = no broadband, in some circumstances there is no reduction in performance at all.
In the 1970’s the price of copper was such that some phone ‘cables’ were made from this Ali/copper hybrid material , and have proved to be less reliable than purely copper cables , and in comparison to a copper cable can in some circumstances, provide a reduced performance when it comes to broadband ( something that couldn’t be conceived back then ) but the phone network cables , both copper and Ali were never designed to use the sort of frequency’s that broadband uses, but it’s a relatively minor reduction in performance….however Ali cables certainly certainly do have a bad reputation with external engineers , and perhaps whatever ‘engineer’ you have spoken to , with the inability to fully repair a cable fault , has oversimplified this , and left you with the impression that broadband simply won’t work over this type of cable , but that is wrong, there will be hundreds of thousands of customers ( if not millions) using cables that are in part ‘Ali’ and have a perfectly usable broadband service over it .
It was also commonplace in the 1970’s to bury cables ( both copper and copper/aluminium ) directly in the ground , so if one of these cables becomes unreliable, ( not incompatible) it’s not a simple job to replace it , which would normally be the preferred repair for a cable that has a higher fault rate than normal.
If you had broadband, but it performed poorly , the chances are there was a defect in that cable , rather than any inherent incompatibility, and if that cable were in a duct no doubt it would be replaced with a copper cable but if DIG ( direct in ground ) that is a much more expensive proposition, and wouldn’t be considered, if all that would be gained would be a smallish percentage improvement in broadband speed ( say something like 10-15%)
Getting back to the original point , even the worst performing Ali cable pair can host a broadband connection that only needs to deliver 0.5Mb speeds , more than enough for Digital Voice, which was your original complaint
I'm going to lock this thread as it's going around in circles and I don't see any value in it continuing.
The information that has been posted is correct. Going by the screenshot you posted, your line is compatible with Broadband. What @iniltous and the rest have said is it likely that your line is "impacted". This could be because the line is part Aluminium or there could be a fault on the line.
In both cases, it doesn't mean that your line is incompatible with broadband just that the speeds might be impacted.
If you send me your information, I'd be more than happy to take a look at your connection and give you a call to discuss this in more detail.
I have sent you a private message with instructions on how to contact the team. You can access your messages via the envelope icon at the top right of the screen, or click on this link, Private messages