[UPDATE 22 MARCH 2007: This case has been resolved. See here for details.]
Here is supplemental information in relation to this complaint which I have submitted by phone today. I spoke with ____, who has contacted Operations in relation to it.
I ordered a new phone in August because I needed broadband at this address, which is only 2 miles from a broadband exchange (Sixmilebridge, Co. Clare).
I was told that the lines on that exchange were tested each month, and that I would know by the end of August whether it was fit for broadband.
However, it turns out that the line which was installed is what is known as a “split line” or a “carrier line”. Instead of a direct connection to the exchange, my calls and those from other houses are multiplexed on a single copper pair. This “party-line” is inherently incapable of broadband.
Since then, I have discovered that the house next door has got broadband. This subscriber pays the same as I do – yet they get their own copper and I do not, despite the fact that I ordered the line for the sole purpose of broadband.
When I ordered the line, I was under the impression that the only determining factor governing broadband suitability would be distance from the exchange. I had no idea that it would also hinge on the apparently arbitrary decision as to whether a dedicated or a split line was installed.
I want this split line replaced with a dedicated copper pair to Sixmilebridge exchange.
Comreg tell me that I am entitled to a reply within 10 working days. However, I was astonished to hear them also say that they have no regulatory function in relation to broadband – just voice.
Is there anyone in charge here? Minister?