Pay as you go landline monthly charges?

[iniltous]

Removing the landline phone service completely is available, and saves £2-£5 , presumably people who keep a  landline phone  service do so  for a reason , possibly a long standing phone number that may receive the occasional incoming calls from friends / relatives ,  as well as this incoming calls facility, they make value the option to make calls , including emergency service calls ,  in case of the mobile being unavailable, those services are not free to provide so why complain about the relatively small sum to have  access to them  ?

In the past there was always the complaint, that ‘I have to pay for a phone service that I do not   use  , I only want broadband and that should be cheaper without a phone service’ , and that’s what you can now have it saves them £2-£5  , in many cases the same people now complain ‘why do I have to pay for a phone service , it should be included with my broadband rental’ , so what do they they want  ? the discount for ‘no phone’ or an included phone service ? 

If you have a mobile for your phone calls , and don’t want to pay for having a landline phone service for incoming calls ,  you don’t have to it   , there isn’t a gun to your head , how is that a scam ? 

[Grassmarket1]

In an ideal world - yes; but in reality - no.

People are busy, often alarmed by their bills & tend to think all their problems (not just BT) are unique. Forum searches are clunky & the real answers often hidden amongst a lot of ‘noise’. By contrast - if you even START to ask Google a question that has been asked before - it helpfully prompts likely questions & suggests answers. BT Forum certainly doesn’t match up to that!
So - it’s much easier & safer to ask again & be sure to get an up-to-date answer. 

In short - just suck it up! 

[Grassmarket1]

@iniltous the scam is that, in the past, if you didn’t make calls you just paid line rental. Line rental used to be phone line only. So why should we pay more now? If BT want to incentivise those who choose no voice line, why don’t they give them a discount off their line rental? PSTN or Digital Voice - it’s all the same wires - costs BT nothing. It’s a scam. 

[iniltous]

the scam is that, in the past, if you didn’t make calls you just paid line rental. Line rental used to be phone line only. So why should we pay more now? ( you don’t , it’s £2 to £5 cheaper with no phone ) If BT want to incentivise those who choose no voice line, why don’t they give them a discount off their line rental? ( they do it’s £2 - £5 cheaper ) PSTN or Digital Voice - it’s all the same wires - costs BT nothing. It’s a scam.

You cannot have it both ways , when you had to have a ‘phoneline’ with broadband you cannot argue it’s unfair to charge for an unwanted phone line , then when a discount is given for not having a phone line , claim ‘well the line is there so a phone service should be included’ , that what you had to start with .

In your case , do you want a phone services for the incoming calls and access to emergency calls , even if you never  intend to make chargeable calls , because you have a mobile for that ?

If the answer is yes , why do you think that should be free , why do you think it should be available to you  but someone doesn’t want any telephony at all ( so they don’t have a phone number , no incoming, no 999 ) should have to  pay the same as you , with your ability to access something they cannot .

If the answer is No , save £2-£5 by not having a phone number .

Im really struggling to see any  logic in your argument 

[Grassmarket1]

@iniltous the logic is simple: the £2 charge in my bill is labelled as PAYG - so clearly BT think they ARE charging me £2 for PAYG - even if you don’t! There’s no line entitled ‘phone service’ or telephony’ - just a simple ‘PAYG’.

The other part of the logic is precedent: in the past everyone paid BT ‘line rental’ just for the phone line - long before broadband ever existed. It’s still called ‘line rental’ now - so clearly it should still include the phone line. Unless BT ever announced that their definition of ‘line rental’ would no longer include phone lines, or that they were going to start giving a discount to customers who didn’t have one - which of course they didn’t- then ‘logically’ it should still include the phone line today. 

And it IS a scam - because it’s a hidden charge. When I cancelled my own £8 call plan, they never even said they’d still be charging £2 anyway. Nowhere on the BT website or MyBT can I find the existence of this £2 charge even acknowledged - let alone explained. The fact that so many people here are making the same complaints about it (much to the irritation of the Gurus & Sages!) is more than adequate proof that it’s a scam.  

[licquorice]

You clearly have no concept of the difference between a physical line which is required to carry either broadband,  telephony or both and the exchange equipment required to provide a phone number and the ability to make calls.

[Grassmarket1]

@licquorice what I have no concept of is a ‘line rental’ charge that used to include phone line (& indeed used to be phone line only) - but all of a sudden it doesn’t.
Q - What’s changed? A - mass exodus of people from paying for landline calls & call plans, in favour of inclusive minutes on their mobiles. So BT hatch a new plan: miraculously separate phone line from ‘line rental’, don’t tell anyone about it & start penalising people for not using their landline. 
Having worked in telephony myself - this kind of tactic is all too familiar!

[licquorice]

Whatever

[Grassmarket1]

👍 

[iniltous]

You still haven’t answered the fundamental question , if both you and I had the same broadband profile /speed from BT  , but you also have a phone service on a PAYG basis and I don’t  , I don’t have a phone number , no telephony at all , so no incoming calls possible, no 999 access , should we pay the same ? or should  I pay less than you , it’s  irrelevant if its you paying a premium or myself getting a discount, you should pay more because you are getting something I don’t .

Historical references are a little pointless, FWIW , I’d agree in that it’s ludicrous to call a phone service aligned to a broadband service a ‘landline ‘ , but that’s where we are , it’s ludicrous because of the association some people ( like yourself have ) with what was historically called a landline or line rental , it seems too much of a leap for some to make , replacing the term landline with phone service.

Assuming you don’t disagree with the above ( and it’s pretty unarguable ) ,  then if a charge is raised for having a phone service ( not a landline ) and that charge is £2 -£5 , if thats a ‘scam’ price , what would you suggest is a reasonable figure is  ?, it can’t be zero can it , otherwise you are getting something I don’t get , or I am forced to pay what you pay , by having to pay ‘extra’ for something I don’t want .

The £2 -£5 is only for  PAYG , in respect that if you want a phone service it has to have a call plan , and the lowest ( cheapest ) call plan is PAYG , but telephony is also available for something like £9 for 700 mins or £18 for unlimited calls , that’s not £9 plus £2-£5 , it’s £9 , or it’s not £18 plus £2-£5 , it’s £18 .

If I wanted what you have ( telephony ) I’ll pay a bit more , if you want what I have ( no phone service) you can save a few ££ , we both have the option to have what the other has , you have never had that much choice before .

What is it about the above you can possibly argue with ?