Openreach has laid full fibre to the house but BT won't send an engineer to connect it

[iniltous]

The dwellings that can order FTTP ,  given their  survey note  are obviously served from a telegraph pole albeit one with line of sight problems ( so no direct line from the pole to those  houses )  , but whatever the issue is , it’s not insurmountable  , so how is your current copper pair service provided, is it from the same pole ( which is unlikely as you would expect your survey note to be the same as them )  or a different method used for your  address (  and the other address that doesn’t show WBC FTTP ) basically what’s the difference between your address and the ones that have availability ?

Openreach can and do exclude individual addresses and small groups of addresses when they build an area ( with a view to revisiting them some point ) if there is an issue that would be expensive or ‘complicated’ to resolve , for example if an address were set well back from other properties that faced a telegraph pole , and that set back property was served underground with armoured cable ( not ducted ) because the telegraph pole that serves everyone else couldn’t deliver service to that  property , then Openreach will simply exclude the problem property  and show availability for all the others ….this is exactly the same with Alt Nets .

Perhaps you can describe more fully the area and your property relationship to the other properties that have availability etc …but it does appear that your address was excluded, there is a way to ask Openreach to check it’s not a mistake ( basically asking why my neighbour can get FTTP and I cannot ) , fill in this formwize.

https://www.openreach.com/forms/fibre-broadband-availability---customer-form

[MidlandsButternut]

Thank you for your help with this. We are a row of 7 semi-detached cottages.  There is one pole in the centre on the opposite side of the road and they laid cables across the road from this and up to the cottages.  There is a hole directly outside mine ready for it to be connected to the house.  The only difference in the address is the house number.  It was a major undertaking as they had to close access to the village for a week to do it (we only have one road) so every cottage was included. We are all showing as being connected to the same base station on the checker on the main road which is about half a mile away.

[brookheather]

Does the OpenReach checker give a date for FTTP?

https://www.openreach.com/fibre-checker

[MidlandsButternut]

It just says 'not yet available' which is why the situation is so frustrating, the hole is outside my house ready for FTTP and more than one of the Openreach engineers have told me to ask BT to connect me from this to the house

[36ULW]

I don’t think the OP is part of a Funded Community Project but If the Build is part of a Community Funded Programme Openreach will BTTW, Build to the Wall on every Premises that Contributed to the Build Cost whether they’ve placed an order with a CP or not.

[iniltous]

Quite a bit of this makes no sense the SNN for the properties that can get FTTP , including the one showing as already having an ONT already installed, (  so obviously already gone through the order journey )  , shows overhead service from a pole ( and the OP states a pole exists ) , yet the OP also states the road was closed and excavations made to each house wall , so the Survey Network Note is apparently wrong as it should be UG ( underground ) and presumably should be ‘ built to the curtilage hard ‘ , why this discrepancy ? 

Obviously the point about CFP ( Community Funded Projects ) may  be pertinent, where an individual approaches OR and their neighbours to see who would be prepared to contribute towards getting FTTP installed ( may be with the help of Government vouchers if in an area that is deemed outside of a commercially viable area ) but the OP makes no mention of being asked if they want to be part of a CFP and declining to contribute ( it should come as no surprise that in that scenario , someone that didn’t contribute is excluded ) , so presumably the OP doesn’t fit into this category.

There is also the possibility that this area was provided under some publicly funded scheme (BDUK)  , in which case the ‘normal’ commercial build criteria may not apply , but basically there appears to be much more to this than is currently known, perhaps the OP can provide much more in the way of background information.

I am curious if a pole exists and the properties in question were already served by overhead copper pairs from this pole , ( a question asked of the OP but not answered ) then  why  FTTP  wasn’t simply provided in the same overhead fashion ( as the SNN state )  that seems the logical and most cost effective thing to do .

Has the OP has misunderstood what the excavation was for and it was to get a fibre cable to the pole , and not to provide underground services to each ‘cottage’ ? 

Obviously the OP can’t be expected to use the correct terms , but what do they mean by ‘all connected to the same base station’  ? , it’s difficult to know what that’s intended to mean , same CBT perhaps ? 

The only way I can come up with a scenario that seems to pull together what’s been posted is if these dwellings are ‘new build’  or refurbished ruins ( so in effect new builds ) and the pole was existing before these addresses were constructed or turned back into habitable dwellings , that may even explain the ‘line of sight’ notes if there were scaffolding up against the ‘cottages’ at the time of survey, as that would obviously interfere with an overhead service,  if the developer asked for underground service ( presumably only for aesthetic reasons ) and was prepared to pay for that , it may explain the incorrect SNN , but  new build processes are not the same as retro build , and the OP hasn’t mentioned a developer being involved….its all a bit odd 

[tonysmini018]

What’s the name of your village?

[MidlandsButternut]

Caldecote

[tonysmini018]

It’s not where I was thinking about then. There’s one near Newark with a similar issue waiting on the water board digging a footpath

[iniltous]

Putting my Inspector Clouseau hat on , using the scant  info the OP has provided,  are  No.8 and No.9  much taller ( 3 story ) than the other cottages, and although street view isn’t that clear  it appears the existing copper dropwires are actually above the overhead power lines , this isn’t up to current standards ( don’t think it ever was )  but  given the difference in style of No 8 and No.9 it’s possible the local DNO ( power company ) put the power lines up after the Openreach lines , and by putting their power service below the dropwires ,  they rendered the Openreach wires defective, anyway FTTP can’t  copy that ‘illegal’ method ( being above power lines ) so that may explain why the pole wasn’t reused for FTTP and an underground solution provided, and the incorrect survey notes stating overhead service, line of sight issues.

The rest of the cottages No 5-7 and 10-12 don’t have any obvious copper service, at least not from the pole that serves ( in a non compliant way ) No.8 and No.9 , perhaps the OP can confirm I’m actually looking at the correct area , before making any further comments, I may be looking at the wrong place .

If by some miracle I’m correct , it’s 10-12 that don’t have FTTP availability but they are not served by the ‘illegal’ wires that are above the power , and presumably must be cable on wall across neighbouring cottages .

Obviously the OP may not want to provide this level of information, which is fine .

https://www.openreach.com/forms/fibre-broadband-availability---customer-form

try this formwize to contact Openreach , as ISP can only deal with the information provided, if the information is wrong you need the source ( Openreach ) to correct it .