Recovered from voice fault - profile going down instead of up

[#1]

On Tuesday 5th Nov. my landline was repaired after I reported a voice fault on 28th October due to storm damage.
I was expecting the IP Profile to increase in steps but it has in fact decreased. In the evening of 5th November it was 21 Mbps, today at 6 pm it was 15.97 Mbps.
The Plusnet reported line speed is clearly out of date (at 28+ Mbps).
I am on FTTC 80/20 and have read that ISP intervention is limited but is the behaviour of  my profile typical? If it persists is there anything I can do, such as turning my modem of for an hour or so (which actually worked for me for a [much smaller] profile drop earlier this year)?
What are your recommendations?
Thanks.

[#2]

Hi there,
I'd definitely agree that the line is looking more stable now:
<img src="http://community.plus.net/visualradius/generated/image13839033658155.png"/>
However the diagnostics I've just performed indicate an issue that we'd need to raise a fault for in order to resolve.
If you can raise this via http://faults.plus.net please we'll get that reported for you.
Adam

[#3]

Quote from: _Adam_Walker_

indicate an issue that we'd need to raise a fault for in order to resolve. If you can raise this via http://faults.plus.net please we'll get that reported for you.

Adam,
As recently noted elsewhere, given that PN has detected an issue which needs to be reported, why does the customer need to raise a fault report to get it fixed?  Would you agree that it would (from a customer's perspective) be a better level of service if PN got on with raising the fault and reported it?
Cheers,
Kevin

[#4]

My sentiments entirely townman,
The dialup connection test which seems to be required to report the fault would require me to disconnect from the internet which would not be convenient until this evening so direct reporting by PN in this instance would be helpful.

[#5]

Mikko,
I guess that it is the case that the line test has to be done before the fault can be reported.  I think that for most people a few minutes disconnect would not be an issue, however may be PN take this approach as a means of leaving the user "in control" of when to perform the test?  That said there is no definite near time correlation between activating the fault checker and running the tests.  Some tests though are passive and do not impact connectivity.
I cannot see a strong reason for PN not just testing the line and doing whatever is needed to report the fault they have identified.  There are a multitude of conditions which could case a short service break at anytime.
Hope your issue is soon resolved.
Kevin

[#6]

Quote

As recently noted elsewhere, given that PN has detected an issue which needs to be reported

This is because there's other information we need before we can broach this with our suppliers such as the best contact details for the customer, best time of day to contact them, when the fault began, begin automated testing etc, the quickest way for us to gather this is if a fault is raised via the checker.

Quote

My sentiments entirely townman,

Sorry if that seems a hassle but it should only take a few minutes of your time.

[#7]

Adam ad Kevin,
Noted and thanks. I'll do the test later.

[#8]

I've just been through the fault reporting process.I delayed it until now as I thought I would be required to do PPPoE dialer test (a bit of furniture movement would be required to access the modem). However, it was not asked for.
I've done a couple of "normal" speed tests, which give same results as those posted before and are attached here. 

[#9]

We need our faults team to look closer into this, your profile is currently set at 8.2M-16.5M Downstream, Interleaving High - 8M-17M Upstream, Interleaving On which isn't helping your speeds, there's also a potential copper joint fault that we need to report to our suppliers.

[#10]

OK thanks.
A new drop cable was installed from the house to the street pole. I didn't notice if it was a twisted pair (or twisted during installation would do - the twisting to balance the line and reduce noise). In any case a new connection fault could have occurred during installation of the new line.

[#11]

BTOR are booked to come today between 8am - 1pm.
As you said on my ticket: "our appointment for an engineer has been booked for 22/11/2013 between 8am and 1pm. If an engineer visits your premises and the fault is found to be caused by your equipment, internal wiring or as a result of damage to BT equipment a charge of £60 will apply. "
I'd just like to confirm that My wife and I will be here until well after 1pm so won't take any nonsense about no one being in if there'a a no-show.
Will update after they've been.

[#12]

BTOR has been.
Reset the DLM and his machine shows DL speed of 78Mbps but speed tests give only about 26Mbps. He said maybe the account (not the line) is still capped or the profile may recover in a few days.
What do you now see from your end PN?

[#13]

Quote from: Chris

There's also a potential copper joint fault that we need to report to our suppliers.

Did the engineer check this out?  Did they do a line test?  Do you know what was the result of the Eclipse (exit) test?
I have known all of their test boxes and gizmos to report a line fault free, only to have the (automated) Eclipse test report (to the engineer's mobile phone) a rectify loop error - "oh that must be a fault in the test system" - only to have another engineer comes two weeks later who takes the time to test the D-Side pair from the cabinet to the property and thereby finds a rectify loop error!
One problem with BTOR is that they are often not fully briefed about why they are there.  I have found it wise to be clear with PN about the purpose of their visit and to check their understanding of what they are supposed to be doing before they start work.
@Chris...
Elsewhere you asked "What could PN do better (differently) in respect of BTOR?".
How practical would it be to advise customers in clear and simple terms what PN expects a visiting BTOR engineer to perform and what activities the customer should witness before the engineer exits the site and under what circumstances should the customer feedback details via their ticket?
As you might recall from my experience earlier this year, some engineers do not have / read the briefing notes either for the current job or the fault history on a line.  That experience also indicated that what an engineer reported does not always reflect what happened / was found during the visit.  Indeed I suspect that some reports are a complete fabrication
Cheers,
Kevin

[#14]

The first thing the BTOR engineer said was that the didn't know why he was there. I had to fill him in with the history. Line tests ahowed no fault except apparently capped DL speed (at 25Mbps).
I confirmed to him that I wasn't using the extension cabling as I had cordless phones (forgot about a couple of caller IDs elsewhere in the house). He disconnected the extension wiring 'just in case'.
I saw full DL and UL test results on his test gear after he had requested and obtained a DLM reset but so far I only get about 26Mbps DL (UL always was OK).
Perhaps it will increase to full speed over next few days?

[#15]

Just did a BTw speedtest:
Profile now 77Mbps, actual DL speed 24Mbps