Fed up with slow Broadband ?

[Alison Tingley]

As part of its ongoing push to improve broadband access and speeds across the county West Sussex County Council are urging businesses and individuals to complete their register of demand. If you have not already done so go to http://www.westsussex-betterconnected.org.uk/  or if you are unable to access it call 01243 752018.

The level of demand impacts on the commercical viability of and therefore the level of investment in broadband infrastructure.  It is therefore vital that as many people register as possible if we are to attract private investment into the National Park and other rural areas of West Sussex

[Steve and Sue Redshaw]

cannot reach this website today (Sat 11th Feb)

 it redirects to here - www.westsussex.gov.uk/broadband - but never gets there!!

[Jenny Passmore]

tryed to get on the better connected link but can not as I don't have a strong enough broadband to get there.

0.5 is not enough.

[Bill Lewis]

the website appears to be down, perhaps they are updating it with more details on all the ways of getting broadband in the area? , instead of just showing what you can get via BT?

[Laura Warren]

 

Sincere apologies all, this website seems to be down at the moment.........

 

 

[Matt Alsbury-Morris]

Hi All, there seems to be some maintenance work being undertook on West Sussex County Council's website which is affecting more than just this link, various other parts of the County's website seem to be affected. Hopefully this will only last matter of a few hours. When I have further information about the situation, I will post it here.

[Bill Lewis]

Hi,

Test your broadband speed at http://www.speedtest.net , you may be surprised at the difference between what you were told you would get by your supplier and what you are actually receiving from them.

A recent test performed from a connection in "East Marden" for comparison >

cheers Bill

[Matt Alsbury-Morris]

Hi All, from all I can see the West Sussex Better Connected site is now back up again. Thanks for  your patience.

[Learning through Landscapes]

Similar thing in Hampshire too... https://www3.hants.gov.uk/broadband/broadband-signup.htm

[Ian Brodrick]

I have a tale to tell on the East Hants/West Sussex border - concerning the uncaring attitude of BT .  The NFU and CLA have confirmed that this is BT's general attitude to us in the Countryside and relatively common.

We have very poor broadband - but we do have it.  Unfortunately BT installed their new poles directly into the National Monument, without our or English Heritage's permission.

The BT South Downs Planning Manager then agreed to subsoil the offending routes - which could also provide faster lines off the poles.  He simply broke the agreement when he thought I wasn't looking and restored the overhead lines. 

I am, with various representative organisations, in complete agreement in saying that on occasions  BT cannot be trusted or relied on - even if you have a written agreement.

BT Legal then took us to court to get wayleave over the unlawfully installed lines.  They also cut off my line for 6 months.

After an expensive legal battle, BT got the slow overhead lines they wanted, and the ducting sits empty. I think they wanted to make a point, apparently one of thousands of such points they have made across the Nation in the last few years.

They have also broken a signed agreement to remove the unlawfully installed lines from the national Monument, and now simply refuse to correspond.

They also keep entering these properties  - on one occasion ripping off the planned new lines, causing hundred of pounds of damage. (we have had 5 or 6 such events).  At another property, my neighbour returned from holiday to find that new poles had been installed in her prize-winning garden - BT had entered the property by cutting down her 2m fencing and then put it back roughly using garden wire!  Seriously.... 

One senior BT Planning Manager told me openly that BT is not interested in low value customers in the country areas - he is one of those responsible for BT planning in the National Park.  Yes, seriously.

The agreements they made are still not honoured after years - and despite senior BT officers being fully aware of the events. I have copied all the correspondence to the very top!

We do now need very solid alternatives - and more marked reforms to create competition with infrastructure and not just service providers.

BT are not the organisation we need here - please disinvest from BT if you care about the Countryside.

 

Ian

 

ps can I also point out that BT put a new pole next to one of a row of 400 year old oaks at our lane - then came and cut the tree down, because it was too close the Pole, at Pigeons Copse, Stodham Lane.  The contractors made several thousand pounds we were told.  

BT Legal told us that the glorious oak was "dead" and needed felling (and apparently it was their job to do that?!).  It is growing back strongly.

There is urgent need to protect the ancient tree stock from these abuses.  Hampshire CC Roads did absolutely nothing about the matter - at all. 

(Correspondence available to anyone interested!)

 

[Bill Lewis]

hi,

a sad tale indeed, The problem as i see it is.. BT is a commercial company, it is NOT a public resource as it was when it was the GPO before maggie sold it off.

They should be paying the land owners to put telegraph poles on their land and asking specific permission to do so.

Aerial masts and other constructions all have to pay rent and rates etc..

Perhaps all those people with poles on their land should get together and negotiate due rent for these poles and cable ducts with BT.  They have a universal service obligation to provide phone lines as part of their take over of the GPO, as part of this they should be paying for the mess of poles and wires etc..

As an example, if people used telephone over the internet on a Fixed wireless service (like Kijoma) then there wouldn't even be a need for wires , ducts or poles! . They would also eliminate the £14.60 line rental (yes you pay them for the pole and wires in your garden)

PS. there are other providers such as Kijoma, however the County Council have chosen to ignore the service they provide as only "open networks" qualify as exiting.  As a summary the only "open network" is BT's  where you get fake competition (same speed from all providers, all paying BT to use the cables).

So all in all peoples attitudes need to change from assuming "BT must do it" and the Councils need to stop promoting BT as the ONLY solution.

I too have plenty of documentary evidence to cover this if required...

Bill

[Ian Brodrick]

(This response has been redacted by the National Park)

Absolutely correct.   

The problem is that BT have a monopoly and this affects their attitude to the general public.

Price - BT dictate the price they pay for their disfiguring 19th Century equipment to be draped across the Country.

Government - As you say,  local authorities and others go along with their ideas of "entitlement", and support a very poor status quo.   

The result has been a fixed and rigged market for Telecoms in the UK and incredibly low standards - we are 28th in the world last time I looked - for broadband - key to the economic future. Rural Turkey for instance is doing much better amid their national boom while our decline continues.

BT Openreach has let us all down, and I can tell everyone here that they really don't care. I have been emailing the very top people to no avail .

The New Telecoms Code etc. - The Government is aware of the problem and is rewriting the Telecoms Code, but should go much further -  Openreach should be fully split from BT as in Australia etc., and infrastructure sold to all providers equally.

Taxation on the system should be increased for overhead and low quality lines - and reduced for subsoil modern lines and fixed wireless.  The junk should be absolutely uneconomic.

Environmentally BT/Openreach should pay for the real impact of their shoddy system in the rural and urban areas, and have actual targets set for quality. I assure you that after a lot of contact with the company professionally and otherwise,  BT Openreach cannot be trusted with the environment.

Competition needs to be much fiercer for this former nationalised provider, and Ombudsmans and regulators far more competent.  The Telecommunications Ombudsman is famously pro-BT and feeble.  They all know each other!

Let's see what the New Telecoms Code brings - but BT will fight and pursue any individual who tries to enforce the existing code in the Courts!  It is their policy. Anyone and everyone...they really do think the Code is a minor and unnecessary obstacle in the way of their natural monopoly.  They spend millions of pounds avoiding and evading it.

After years of consideration, we are convinced that it would be better if BT/Openreach in the current form, failed, and we started again from liquidation or even from fresh with the best new technology in different hands and with a different structure. That could happen, and indeed should happen.

I wonder if would be a good idea to form a Telecoms User Group in the National Park, but probably and necessarily independent of the National Park Authority or its website?

[Laura Warren]

Ian,

 

Your message was not redacted because we are concerned about criticism of BT, but merely edited as there were a couple of sentences which contravened our House Rules with respect to tone and language.

 

We are happy to host robust discussion on our on-line forum, but will always to seek to uphold the standards of debate by ensuring that all postings are ‘civil and respectful’

 

Best wishes

 

Laura

Forum moderator