Lack of BT Line in Older home?

I'm so incredibly annoyed right now, and I know I should just wait and make sure I have cause to be annoyed, but I'm no good at that.  We are moving to a new house, signing the lease tonight.  We called BT about moving our service to the new address and they told us that there is no BT line at the house.  It will cost us £124  to transfer our existing service and have a line installed.  Plus, I need to stay home from work, sit around and wait for the engineer to show up. 

The house is not new - probably built in the '30s.  How likely is it that it does not have a BT line installed already?  I thought it was pretty much impossible, unless you were looking at a new build.  Please, please allay my fears until I can get in and look around the place/ask the landlord this evening.  Tell me that it's a BT computer error.

It does sounds unlikely but even if it's true your new landlord should pay for that.  It's also possible there is a phone line there but with another compnay.

Yes, check with the landlord first. There may have been a BT line which was switched over to another service in the last few years. For example, we don't have anything to do with BT anymore. Line rental all the way to international calls are done thru TalkTalk.

This happened to me and my apartment was built in the 70's. I kept calling and they told me the previous tenents had service, but I couldn't find the hook up anywhere in my place. Telewest finally came and found the line ending outside my front door. So, he had to drill a hole and feed the line inside. It cost me about the same as what they're quoting you. But with the money I spent to have it hooked up, they then used as credit. So, I didn't pay a bill for about 5 months.

This happened to us and it took over a month for us to get a phone.  The previous tenants had switched companies and the new company had piggy-backed on the old BT line and had completely botched the installation.  BT installed a completely new line.   

it could be the fact service was switched but most homes should already have a BT line installed UNLESS there was renovation done and the line was removed from the home.

when i was at telewest this happened all the time (i was in the business section) due to store refitting and buildings being re-zoned from home to businesses - so it wouldnt shock me if that was the case in a private home. BT own most of the wire which is then re-sold to virgin, talktalk, etc so even if you look elsewhere youll still be charged the same amount.

i agree with everyone else here and contact the landlord and see what they say. they might pay for it all or might come to an agreement with you in cost.

There really isn't a BT line there.     It's Telewest.  Now we need to figure out whether it will cost less (in hassle and money) to switch to Telewest.  We signed up for a 12 month broadband contract with BT in November though, so I'm not sure it will be.  Sigh...why can't a phone line just be a phone line?

Good luck, Carrie. I totally feel for you on this. I was at the end of my rope dealing with this in November. I had to go a little 'American' on them, and psycho (I'm sure they thought this when I started to cry), but it worked out in the end!

There really isn't a BT line there.     It's Telewest.  Now we need to figure out whether it will cost less (in hassle and money) to switch to Telewest.  We signed up for a 12 month broadband contract with BT in November though, so I'm not sure it will be.  Sigh...why can't a phone line just be a phone line?

Either way your landlord should be footing the bill.

Either way your landlord should be footing the bill.

I'd love to not have to pay it, but is there really a law that states that the landlord must provide non-essential services, from the company of my choice, in my rented property?  Or would I be making more of a kind request of him?

I would argue a telephone line is an essential service. In any case you rented the property on the understanding that there was a BT line there, or at least that it would not cost you anything to use whatever line is there. You should not have to pay this because a previous tenant chose another company (it is only quite recently that BT had competition in this area so the change to Telewest could not have happened very long ago).  The landlord should pay for it and recover it from the previous tenant.

I'd talk to BT.  I think it may be possible to take on the Telewest line, then change over to BT at no charge.  The sticky point may be your current BT contract.  It would be nice to have uninterrupted service, though... even if you can't move your contract!

(We switched to Bulldog when we moved in, and BT often offers to take us back for free... as far as I know, our BT line was removed.)

Hi Britwife

I'd argue that as a landlord, providing a working telephone landline is NOT an essential service, it's an optional service. I will not pay for a working landline to any tenants and make it clear that this is the case. There is a physical wired line into my apartment, but if they want it 'working' then the bills go in their name, and not mine.

I agree though, that if there is no 'physical' line to the property, then the landlord should foot the bill for BT to come and install the last copper links to the property and provide a master socket.

Although the main provider, BT does NOT automatically provide the last link of copper to every home or business in the UK. As already mentioned, renovation work etc may have caused a previous BT line to have been disconnected or physically separated from the building itself and never 'reconnected' with BT. with the advent of cable services, maybe a previous tennant had the last link provided by Fibre optic cable ? - that would explain why there's no registered BT last link line registering on their systems.

however, another scenario is, there was or is a physical BT last link 'somewhere' - it's not 'live' with BT and so doesn't show up on their systems (although I'd have thought they'd have a record of it being installed previously somewhere!) and it is actually physically 'connected' and the 'carrier' is or was switched to a cable telephone company - I think this is known as Carrier select - this 'might' mean the reason you are getting the mesage from BT that there's no line there.

Sounds confusing I know, but keep banging on at BT and Telewest to find out more.

Good luck! DtM! West London & Slough UK!

Similar problem....

I move on Friday, and BT have told me that I would have to pay £124 insallation as there hasn't been a live line there for 12 months and they would need to call in an engineer.

Called the letting agent, to be told that BT are talking shite.  There is no need for cables to be laid, all that needs to happen is for BT to flip a switch, and the line can go live.  The letting agent is speaking to the landlord, but is confident that I have just been speaking to a moron at BT who doesn't know what she is talking about.

I would say to call BT back again, and get a bit pushy if necessary.

re: the landlord;s responsibility.  My landlord told me there was a line, if it turns out after I have paid the deposit that there isn't, then I would say she is contractually obliged to pay for the instillation.


Vicky

As mentioned above, unless you happen to be in an area which has separate cable service or similar, BT still owns the physical lines from the house back to the exchange.  In many parts of the country, BT is still the only company providing this local loop, so even if you transfer or get new service with some other company, it will still be BT which connects up the actual wiring to your home.

The issue of just how much work is involved in re-connecting a line which has been out of service for a while is a tricky one, because it all depends on the situation.  When somebody moves out and discontinues service, the line will just be marked as spare at the exchange.  It's all computerized these days, of course, so a few software commands will immediately render the line inoperable for both incoming and outgoing calls.

If you move in fairly soon afterward and the line is still physically connected, then all it takes is some more programming to set up your new number and associate it with the physical pair of wires.   However any spare pairs in the large cables which run out to various neighborhoods are considered fair game for reallocation when needed.  So the longer that line sits unused, the greater the chance that at some point it will be disconnected from the exchange so that the pair of wires it used previously can be allocated to somebody else.  The wires will still be there from the house to the nearest distribution point (either atop a pole or in a street-corner cabinet), but that might be as far as they go.  Re-establishing service in this case obivously involves more work to physically reconnect your line to the exchange again.  In some places where there is a shortage of lines, it could also mean installing pair-gain units, which allow two subscribers to share one pair of lines (kind of like an old-time party line, except that in this modern version you can both use the phone at the same time and neither party is actually aware that the line is shared).

Unfortunately, it would be very complex to base the charge on the amount of work involved, not to mention confusing to the general public ("How come my friend's new line only cost £25 but mine was £200?"), so BT applies the standard installation charge to all situations.