Good start to what I know will be problems ahead

[#1]

Additionally, maybe contacting one of the business help columns in a decent newspaper could bring a result?
Whatever happens, the client is lucky to have such an articulate, knowledgeable and persistent (not to mention polite) advocate. Well done, Townman. It sounds like, after a few initial glitches, Plusnet are doing OK too.
This would make a great case study in a course on comms regulation. Not that that's any comfort.

[#2]

At the bidding of AO and Jelv, I submitted the following report to Ofom this evening, though they are clear that they do not deal with individual complaints.

Quote

Name of your phone company: PlusNet Subject: Poor provision management by BT OPENREACH Brief summary of your experience/query: Ordered phone & Internet fron PlusNET 21/05/2015 to non-served out building within my land. BTOR pushed order through as NSP and required a survey, which after the event they raised a charge of £320. Survey carried out 15/06 identified work required to cut trees to allow access to BT circuits on dual service (electrical) pole. Since then 3x engineers have been out to install the line and have been unable due to tree obstruction. BTOR have not acted upon the survey they conducted and charged for. PlusNET have (due to Ofcom restrictions) not been able to esculate issue within BTOR. Subsequent to my correspondence to CEO BT Plc / CEO BTOR / CEO PlusNET, BT DSO sought to dismiss escalation claiming 2nd line to premises is not a priority case. On 28/07 BTOR tree subcontractors attended and left without doing work claiming H&S restrictions on dual service pole. It has been suggested that it will be 6-8 weeks before tree can be cut with coordination with local power company. PlusNET have been excellent in attempting to manage provision, however BTOR has shown total incompetence. They have not acted on the findings of their own (charged for) survey, do not have a clear plan to resolve and are not communicating well with PlusNET. I do not believe this is an isolated incident. This situation is having a detrimental impact in my plans to relocate my business office, target date being 3rd August. Ordering in mid May ought to have been early enough

Will see what this produces if anything.
On the PlusNET from, today BT DSL again failed to provide the promised update to PlusNET.
...a case study would indeed be a good idea - PlusNET, I'm willing to assist if you desire.
Kevin

[#3]

I take it you read my PM which is applicable to an individual complaint 

[#4]

Very succinct and to the point. I'm sure some note will be taken of it, even if it doesn't provide you with any immediate benefit.
There is a chance it will! They have intervened in a relatively trivial matter, but I admit with wider implications, wrt the loss of the balance of Line Rental Saver subscription by a single complainant when wishing to leave without penalty due to the Line and associated other price rises.

[#5]

Seems like there are so many complaints / escalations around that BTOR DSO is in melt down...

Quote

From ticket 104498493 We have yet to get an update, however we have been  [told] that the DSO team have high work stacks and that we will get a further update by 5pm today. I will monitor for this and update you once we have this. This Question is now on hold until Thursday 30th July at 4:00pm.

This is frustrating for all involved here - thank you for all your efforts in Business Support.

[#6]

This is well beyond ourselves in the forum, but I really hope this gets resolved for you soon Kevin.
Matty

[#7]

Quote from: Townman

Is this a NSP order?

NSP orders have to be very rare:

Quote

They would normally be uninhabited, unmanned, not governed by the Health and Safety at Work (HSAW), and do not comply with conditions as defined by local councils as habitable, including having toilet and welfare facilities. NSP include traffic control systems, mobile transmitters and windfarms. They are generally site in streets, footways or at the roadside and are normally unmanned.

[#8]

Andy, From what you've just posted, Townman should not have been charged for an NSP survey. Is that correct?
Full story here: http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,139693.0

[#9]

NSPs always incur a survey charge, irrespective of whether you proceed with the order or not.
I don't quite understand why a NSP order was placed. Openreach will accept it, irrespective of whether it was the correct order for the type of premises (the determination for the order is made by the ISP). The examples given on the Openreach site for NSPs seem to be quite different to what Townman was describing for his order.

[#10]

This one wasn't an NSP.

[#11]

Sorry, I meant in Townman's case

[#12]

At the risk of taking this thread off topic, is "NSP" a "not yet served premises" or a "not normally served premises" provision?  Any premise not having a phone line clearly requires a survey to work out how a line will be provided; if it is a dwelling which has no phone line would a NSP apply?
In my case the premise is an out-building (within the grounds of a dwelling) having neither a water supply or drainage (no sanitation) within.  It will be manned, but not habitable, will be governed by HSAW.  It's about 40m from the dwelling.

[#13]

It's best if a mod could move these posts to your thread, but...
My understanding is that you could just place a standard new line order and that the first £3,400 of excessive construction is covered by the USO.

[#14]

I thought it was non-standard premise.
I had to place an order of this type for a bloke's windmill once. I'll get some clarification anyway.

[#15]

Straight from the horses mouth (see attached).