Wednesday, May 24, 2017

British Telecom: Declan's complaint to the CEO of BT about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late through our BT YouView box (WITH TREBLE UPDATE - Day 5 26/5/2017)


UK Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ)

It's not just our Church and State website that's under attack (74 blocks on public access to the site this month; 16 blocks last week; 1 block so far today) despite the fact that a leading web hosting provider, SiteGround, is paid $1,000 per year to host our site and manage the server. This afternoon Declan wrote to British Telecom CEO Gavin Patterson to complain about the handling of the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late. BT is one of the world's leading communications services companies. Yesterday BT Customer Care informed Declan that he will be charged £129.99 on his next BT bill if their engineer reports today that our fault has nothing to do with their network but is the result of our home wiring, our equipment or their network has been damaged within the boundary of our property. This is Declan's email to Patterson:

Gavin Patterson
CEO
British Telecom

Address removed for email


24 May 2017

Dear Mr Patterson,

Yesterday British Telecom informed me that I will be charged £129.99 on my next BT bill if your engineer Alexander finds on his visit this afternoon that my fault has nothing to do with your network but is the result of my home wiring, fault with my equipment, or your network has been damaged within the boundary of my property.

I have informed your Customer Care Team that the fault is intermittent TV reception through your YouView box. This afternoon I am not experiencing reception problems through your YouView box or through the property aerial, so I do not believe a case can be made that the fault is the result of my home wiring or fault with my equipment, or indeed that your network has been damaged within the boundary of my property.

I trust that I will not be charged £129.99 on my next BT bill and that this frustrating intermittent TV reception problem through your YouView box can be resolved.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey
Managing Director
Network for Church Monitoring

"Let me recommend an important web site - churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out." - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty

22 May: British Telecom: We pay BT £65.53 per month but Declan is told that there is nothing they can do about the bad TV reception we have been accustomed to getting of late (WITH UPDATE - Day 3 24/5/2017)

DAY 4 UPDATE 25 May (12.50pm): This is our fourth day in a row dealing with BT. Declan has been told by BT Customer Care that none of his repeated requests for the engineer's report has registered on their system. The engineer assured us yesterday that we would not be charged for his visit, and that BT would have no problem providing us with a copy of his report this morning. In fact, the engineer was so helpful that it would be our intention to ask for him again if the fault persists, so long as his report contains no surprises. We are all hoping that the frustrating intermittent TV reception problem we have been experiencing of late has been resolved, although the engineer explained that only time can really tell. Now Declan's request for this report is being dealt with by BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer), but it appears that we may not see the report until next Wednesday, if at all. Of course Declan will make a Subject Access Request (SAR) for the report if he thinks he has to; we just can't understand what is so special about a supposedly run-of-the-mill report, and what it is about Declan's straightforward request for same that BT Executive Level Complaints are finding so difficult to handle. Declan has just received this email from Trevor Potts on behalf of BT CEO Gavin Patterson:

Hello Mr. Heavey,

Thanks for your email to Libby Barr. I'm sorry to learn you’re having problems with your BT service.

Our team are now dealing with your case and will own to resolution.

So we can understand your issue please give us a little time to investigate, a dedicated case handler will be in touch by Wednesday at the latest.

Before then, if you’re a bit worried or something's changed just drop us a note at elc@bt.com or contact us on 0791 888 4688

Best wishes,

Trevor Potts
Executive Level Service Team; BT Consumer

DAY 4 UPDATE 25 May (10.16pm): Following our first internet cut as BT customers this afternoon, Declan wrote back to Trevor Potts requesting assurance that we will not be charged for the engineer's visit yesterday. Declan attached a double-signed note that the engineer left us before leaving our flat. The engineer first wrote that there would be no charge for his visit, and then added that he could not say that we had damaged any BT equipment or that the fault is the result of our home wiring. Declan copied BT CEO Gavin Patterson into the email. Our contract with BT commenced on 28 May 2014. The internet cut this afternoon lasted 26 minutes (from 1.39pm - 2.05pm).



DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (10.55am): Where is all this going? No assurance as yet from BT Executive Level Complaints that we will not be charged for the engineer's visit on 24 May, notwithstanding the engineer's written assurance that there would be no charge for the visit. Yesterday Declan also wrote to Tracy Reid of BT Executive Level Complaints requesting that she delete erroneous fault details for 25 May. He copied BT CEO Gavin Patterson into the complaint. He sent her this follow-up email this morning:

For the attention of Gavin Patterson, Chief Executive, British Telecom

Tracy Reid
Executive Level Complaints (Consumer)
British Telecom

Address removed for email


26 May 2017

Dear Ms Reid,

I refer to my email to you yesterday and again respectfully request that you please delete from my online account fault details for 25 May 2017 under the title Phone fault 02084703021 - Completed (please see attachment). The diagnostic run reads:

"We have run a line test and we cannot find a problem with your line. The problem may be with your own equipment so we need you to carry out some tests. To get help with that click on the 'Help Section' on top right. If you have already checked your equipment and still have a problem then please call 0800 800 151. If you have made an appointment already the details will be shown below. There is no need for you to do anything further."

Please note that I have never reported a fault with my phone, nor do I have a problem with my line.

I am even more worried now that BT intend charging me for the engineer's visit on 24 May to resolve my frustrating intermittent TV reception problem of late, notwithstanding the engineer's written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that I had damaged any BT equipment or that the fault is the result of my home wiring. In addition to deleting fault details for 25 May 2017, please could you also reassure me that I will not be receiving any extra charges on forthcoming bills for anything so far.

I am deeply concerned that I may need to seek legal advice as to how to proceed in this matter. I am however still hopeful that these two issues can be resolved amicably by BT Executive Level Complaints (Consumer) without any undue delay.

Yours sincerely,

Declan Heavey

M: 07880437681

DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (12.45pm): Declan phoned BT Executive Level Complaints following his email to Tracy Reid above. He was unable to speak to her, and no one from BT Executive Level Complaints has returned his call. Most certainly we are worried at this point in time. The reluctance of BT Executive Level Complaints to provide us with a copy of the engineer's report aside, why is it so difficult for them to assure us that we will not be charged £130 for his visit on 24 May, particularly in light of his written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that BT equipment had been damaged or home wiring impaired? At the moment our TV signal strength through our BT YouView box is stable at 92%, and signal quality is 100%. The engineer told us that any signal strength above 50% is acceptable when it comes to home wiring! Do I now have to publish his note too? Are we going to be told that the engineer's double-signed handwritten note is of no value to us and has been overridden by a false and fabricated report that renders us liable to £130 on top of our next £65 monthly bill? Are we looking at the Small Claims Court here?



DAY 5 UPDATE 26 May (5.52pm): BT Executive Level Complaints have still not confirmed whether any charges have been raised on Declan's account by the engineer, nor have we been provided with the engineer's report, nor have we been provided with any explanation as to why a phone fault we never reported cannot be removed from Declan's online account. We guess they are closed for the long weekend, so damn it the engineer's name is Alexander Boyce and I am now going to publish his double-signed handwritten note which we will use to contest any charges that have been raised as a result of the report that he has submitted for BT's senior engineering team to investigate. It is quite clear from this note that Boyce provided us with written assurance that there would be no charge for his visit because he could not say that we had damaged any BT equipment or that at the time the fault (viz. intermittent TV reception through our BT YouView box) was the result of our home wiring:



Click to enlarge

From My Picks:

20 February: The Central London County Court: District Judge Avent dismisses Declan's claim against the Greater London Authority-commissioned St Mungo's that alleged the falsification and fabrication of data against us (WITH UPDATE 16/3/2017)

'Let me recommend an important web site churchandstate.org.uk. Operating out of London this well-designed and exciting web site covers church-state, population, climate change and other issues. Check it out.' - Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty