Unable to port landline number after signing up to Full Fibre

[#1]

I may be missing something but my interpretation of all the official documents discussing number porting relate to the process when moving to a different ISP. Not upgrading your current service, which means losing your your landline number without a process to port it to a VOIP provider.

[#2]

@MisterW 

As far as I understand it, if a Plusnet customer decides to change from ADSL / VDSL with Plusnet to full fibre with Plusnet they lose their landline as Plusnet do not offer the option of full fibre with phone. Therefore, if the OFCOM requirement that numbers should be available to be ported for up to 31 days is applicable to such changes, Plusnet (whether via BT or EE or otherwise) must somehow "retain" that phone number so that the customer can move it to a VOIP provider if they so wish.

If the VOIP provider requests that number it must be available if they are to get it. The technical method of requesting it is immaterial if Plusnet (or BT if that is their internal group process) are not "retaining" it in such a way that it is available for the VOIP provider to gain it. That is the problem that appears to apply here according to the OP.

I am trying to establish if there is something the customer must do when dealing with Plusnet when requesting the upgrade to full fibre so that the number can be available to be ported to a VOIP provider after the upgrarde to full fibre has been actioned. Maybe @FlossyThePig is correct in that the OFCOM requirement regarding the availability of the number is not applicable to upgrades with the same provider. If so is that a deliberate omission in the OFCOM requirement ort an inadvertent omission?

Hopefully we will understand better once @adamwalker has made his enquiries and the OP @Michael_0 updates this thread.

[#3]

I am trying to establish if there is something the customer must do when dealing with Plusnet when requesting the upgrade to full fibre so that the number can be available to be ported to a VOIP provider after the upgrarde to full fibre has been actioned. 

Therefore, if the OFCOM requirement that numbers should be available to be ported for up to 31 days is applicable to such changes, Plusnet (whether via BT or EE or otherwise) must somehow "retain" that phone number so that the customer can move it to a VOIP provider if they so wish.

@jgb AIUI under the 'old' system, when the landline is 'ceased' , the losing provider MUST return the number to the rangeholder within 2 weeks, and was usually done almost immediately. Once back with the rangeholder, the number was quarantined for a minimum 2 weeks and it was no longer possible to port to a voip provider. The 'new' system is the the losing provider MUST NOT return the number to the rangeholder for at least 31 days, after that , once returned , the rangeholder need not quarantine since any quarantine period has already lapsed. Until the number has been returned to the RH , it SHOULD still be available for porting.

AFAIK the customer, in the case of upgrading to full fibre, does not need to do anything to request the number remains available, that is the default.

It seems, in the case of the OP, that someone in the porting system was not aware that inactive ( but not returned to RH ) numbers can still be ported.

Maybe @FlossyThePig is correct in that the OFCOM requirement regarding the availability of the number is not applicable to upgrades with the same provider.

Whether it is part of an upgrade or not is irrelevant, it is purely associated with the ceasing of a landline and its subsequent return to RH.

[#4]

Some excellent follow-up input from @FlossyThePig, @jgb and @MisterW.  Thank you all and it sounds like there is still hope that my number is not yet beyond reach.  I really hope so and will post with the outcome.

[#5]

Just a brief update.  This matter is no further forward.  I tried specifying Openreach as the holder of my number but this was rejected with the same reason as originally when I specified Plusnet.  Maybe there is some special way to specify this pot of numbers in limbo so I have asked @adamwalker for any help or guidance with this.  I know OFCOM state that providers must facilitate the porting of numbers but the processes just don't seem to be there to support it.  I really hope to be proven wrong.

[#6]

Hiya @Michael_0 

I'm really sorry for the problems you are having with this and I would be be right frustrated if I was in your shoes.  

I think I have the best solution for you and I have popped more detail on your ticket here

Come back to me here once you have updated it and I will get straight on it!! 

[#7]

Ten days' and still trying.

The suggestion from @SammyM was to reactivate my old landline circuit to facilitate retrieval of the number but this wasn't possible as the line has already been reused.  The latest suggestion is that I tell my VOIP provider to contact the 'Openreach migration team'.

I have done this and am currently awaiting a response.  As before, I shall update with the outcome.

[#8]

The suggestion from @SammyM was to reactivate my old landline circuit to facilitate retrieval of the number but this wasn't possible as the line has already been reused. 

That doesnt make sense!. I can't see how the D-side circuit could be reused, its specific to the property, and unless there's no spare E-side lines (unlikely?) , how can the circuit have been reused ?

[#9]

deleted

[#10]

Basically @MisterW they have removed the equipment and used the pairs t connect another line. At this stage it would be another installation which w can't do.  

At this point his new Voip provider will have to do the port and escalate it through there processes as we are not stopping the port.  

[#11]

@SammyM This really is the nub of the problem.  My VOIP provider submits two forms: one is a 'Letter of Authorisation' and the other is for the 'Customer Port Details'.  These both have to be completed by me and they both require the name and address of the current holder of my number.  I have submitted these twice now: once with Plusnet; the other with Openreach.  Both have been rejected as detailed earlier in this thread.

The process is described as Gaining-Provider-Led but unless you (Plusnet) supply me with the details of the current holder of my number so I can add it to these forms, the Gaining Provider can't help.  How can they escalate the process if they don't know where to focus this escalation?

Can you offer any further advice?

Thanks, @MisterW , for the extra opinion on that.  It didn't make a lot of sense to me but I'm no expert and if PN were willing to try it then fine but I think if it was going to work then it would have worked with my first port request using PN as the holder.

[#12]

The process is described as Gaining-Provider-Led but unless you (Plusnet) supply me with the details of the current holder of my number so I can add it to these forms, the Gaining Provider can't help.  How can they escalate the process if they don't know where to focus this escalation?

@Michael_0 that agrees with my understanding.

Under the new 'right to port' , my understanding is that PN should still be the holder of the number although it has been ceased. It should not have been returned to the Rangeholder (Openreach) yet.

Maybe @SammyM can confirm whether that is the case ?

[#13]

We deffo are and there should be no reason as to why your new provider is saying the details are incorrect. 

I suspect it maybe a issue with them escalating it but before I say that for sure, let me speak to Adam, take over the case and do some probing on our side. Is that ok @Michael_0 ?

[#14]

Hi @SammyM , yes, that's fine.  Feel free to do what is required.  I don't mind repeating the port request naming Plusnet as the holder if you are able to give me some assurance that it's likely to succeed this time 😀

[#15]

Once the OP's problem has been sorted to his satisfaction, we (and more importantly Plusnet) need to understand exactly what has gone wrong here and what needs to be done procedurally within Plusnet to ensure it does not recur ( or feedback passed to other parties if the cause is elsewhere). It is relatively early days since the OFCOM porting requirement was introduced and so it may well just be unfamiliarity with the procedures necessary to ensure successful porting.