A friend who runs a garage business wants to get broadband. BT tell him
that he can't have it because there is a DACS on his line, and there are no
spare pairs into his village which would allow removal of the DACS !!!!

This isn't a remote location, it's about 20 miles south of Norwich!

Is there any accepted procedure to persuade BT to install more lines?

--
Graham J

"Graham" <graham@nospam.zen.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4705f1bb$0$13929$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk...
I'll be interested to hear if anything can be done about this, because my
parents are in the same situation in their cottage in Yorkshire: they are
close enough to the exchange to get broadband (according to the BT
line-length app) but there are very few pairs going to the village so every
line is via a DACS. People can't even get second lines for faxes or dial-up
so as to leave their main line free for voice.

Graham wrote:

Well .... if we in the UK are ever going to get up to speed maybe there should
be a compulsory requirement for the provision of broadband to the home and
business ?

Graham

"Graham" <graham@nospam.zen.co.uk> writes:

Maybe the answer would be for someone to build more houses or split a
large house into flats. BT's USO requires them to provide, if requested,
a voice line to each premise. So if there are no spare pairs, BT would
be forced to install new lines to the village. Hopefully while they are
doing this they would put in enough lines to remove the DACS and allow
for future expansion.

"Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4705F617.50ACF08@hotmail.com...
The answer is to complain like hell to BT. Do it in writing and get names.
The further up the chain of command the better.
Their current stated policy is to remove DACS to enable broadband "wherever
possible".
I complained right up to the CEO's office a few years back, before removal
of DACS wasn't their policy.
It worked for me - took them a while to do it but they did.
If there physically aren't enough pairs in the local network for DACS to be
removed, then BT should be putting in place plans to uplift the local
network.
This process should be triggered by complaints such as your friend's.
They shouldn't just sit back and do nothing.
Tell him to start making a nuisance of himself - and involve the press as
well.
I sent a copy of my DACS complaint to the Sunday Times and they ran an
article on my problem and contacted BT.
Anything that gives them bad publicity will help make them shift their
asses!

Best of luck,

George

"George Weston" <geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote in message
news:5mmouqFe7jipU1@mid.individual.net...
How many subscribers are typically multiplexed over a single DACS and a
single pair back to the exchange?

Does the chance of success depend on the number of subscribers? If so, my
parents' village may be doomed because there are only about 15 houses in the
village itself - with outlying farms along some of the roads in/out. Is
there more chance of getting (for example) 50 new pairs to serve 50 new
lines than to get 5 new pairs to serve 5 new lines?

"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:13gcfkq3gqpgc3f@corp.supernews.com...
Two lines per DACS box, IIRC.
BT's policy now is to not fit any more DACS units, so if some more demand
for lines was made in the village and all the DACS boxes/circuits were
already used up, they would have to provide new line plant to meet the
demand (and hopefully do away with the exiting DACSes at the same time).
How about canvassing the residents in your parents' village and get them to
apply for second lines in their houses? :-)
George

"George Weston" <geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote in message
news:5mmvdmFdaq86U1@mid.individual.net...
When the residents asked (individually but all at around the same time) a
few years ago, they were told that all the houses had one phone line, and
BT's obligation was only to provide one line (subsequent ones being on a
best-endeavours basis). There were no spare pairs and no extra capacity on
the existing pairs (so presumably every pair had a DACS driving two lines),
and BT did not intend ever to supply any more pairs, so there could never be
any new lines.

Intriguingly, when there were tentative plans to build a couple of new
houses, one of the reasons that the plans never went ahead was that it would
never be possible to give the houses telephone lines. This suggests that BT
did not intend even to honour the "one line per house", which I thought was
a non-negotiable statutory obligation.

I think this was in the days before the exchange supported ADSL, when people
wanted scond lines for dial-up internet or fax, so the need to un-DACS the
lines to support ADSL didn't arise, but it is now an issue.

BT's line tester says that various numbers in the village should support
broadband at (I think) 2 Mbps, so line length is evidently not an issue, but
that there may be (ie there is!) incompatible equipment on the line.

"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:13gcp0jq56sj68@corp.supernews.com...

<snip>
That would be the case but it's amazing how BT can react when faced with a
media onslaught.
All the more reason to complain - a concerted effort by all villagers
directed towards national and local media (including the local BBC/ITV
stations) might well make a difference. All it would take would be a bit of
co-ordinating and letter-writing. Also involve the local parish, district
and county councillors, and the local MP. They will all add weight to your
campaign.

The planning process does not take into account the availability or
otherwise of telephone service as a valid reason for or against granting
planning permission. I know this, as I am a Community Councillor involved in
making recommendations for planning applications in my part of Wales (in
England they are called parish councillors).
However, it could well be that the person or persons who proposed to build
the new houses decided not to do so for this reason? I don't think this
would be the case, as they'd be throwing away the chance to make a few quid,
so my gut instinct is that this is a bit of a rural (as opposed to an urban)
myth.
All the more reason to complain.

Again, all the more reason to complain.
The forecast speed is greater than that in my remote-ish village.
My forecast speed was 1Mbps but I am actually achieving 2Mbps to 3Mbps on a
daily basis.
(Current speed is 2.3Mbps).

Go for it!

George

"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:13gbt15681higef@corp.supernews.com...
The solution is in the users hands.. find the people with two lines and
persuade them to drop one line and get broadband. Then start a community
WiFi service for the ones that remain using the broadband.

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 13:28:06 +0100, "George Weston"
<geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote:

Why just complain to BT ? Surely if there is real competion in this
country then any other service provider should also be compelled to
provide service, i.e. Virgin Media or any other OLO


jim

"jim" <jim@nospam.usenet.com> wrote in message
news:5i2dg39b0kn4ihhgju1qdt0emkkfinlgb3@4ax.com...
Hollow laughter....
No private company will *ever* be compelled to provide a universal service
similar to those the Post Office or BT is obliged to honour.
The reason for this is that they were both previously state monopolies and
inherited those onerous obligations from their parent organisation.
Who would want to invest in a company that was compelled to provide service
to everyone, everywhere at a standard price? It would be economic death!

George

"George Weston" <geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote in message
news:5mngl2Febd4rU1@mid.individual.net...
and then make it worse by giving licenses to other companies that allow them
to select which customers they supply.
Then you introduce a regulator whose job it is to make sure BT keeps its
prices high enough that the other operators can undercut them and still make
a profit.

"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:fe613m$grb$1@news.datemas.de...
A lovely positive solution - you should move to my area!

George Weston wrote:

I agree. I've been involved in a bit of local campaigning and it can indeed get
results. You do need to get people to cooperate though.

Graham

jim wrote:

Given the size of VM it would sem fair to expect them to do a little more now.

Graham

"Mortimer" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:13gbt15681higef@corp.supernews.com...
I'm tempted to set up a website to list those postcodes where ADSL is NOT
available. Unless anybody knows of such a site? I expect it will be a
mountain of a task ...

I think it would have to show the email address for the person reporting the
lack of service, and some brief details of the circumstances. I can think
of three different locations personally.

Does anybody want to reply here to start the ball rolling?

-- Graham J

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 20:42:32 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband ,
"dennis@home" <dennis@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:

I really do wish people wouldn't make silly remarks like that. The
regulator's job is to prevent companies ripping us off, constrained as
they are by the law.
--
Mark McIntyre

On Fri, 5 Oct 2007 20:12:30 +0100, in uk.telecom.broadband , "George
Weston" <geoweston@NOSPAMgooglemail.com> wrote:

Sorry? So does that mean VM don't have to provide a universal 999
service?
--
Mark McIntyre

"Mark McIntyre" <markmcintyre@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:tqifg312a1s8ejfk39fttialtgqrh41trt@4ax.com...
No, that's not what I meant, and I guess you know that.
I will spell it out in case you had difficulty in understanding me.
I meant the "universal service obligations" whereby:
BT is under a duty to provide a telephone line to any premises in the UK
that requires one.
The Post Office is under a duty to deliver mail to every address in the UK
(also for the same price, regardless of distance).

George