Ofcom Warn BT of Possible Investigation Over Troubled UK Digital Phone Switch
The UK telecoms regulator has responded to recent concerns that BT’s switch to broadband-based Digital Phones may have left some vulnerable customers without access to a working service. Ofcom warns that they could potentially “step in” and investigate the operator (such things sometimes lead to a significant fine), but it’s not yet clear if they will.
At present a big chunk of the UK fixed line telecoms industry, particularly larger players with significant legacy bases of landline-only users like BT and Virgin Media, are currently having to deal with the challenge of migrating old analogue based landline phone services to newer Internet Protocol (IP / VoIP) based digital phone services. This is a complicated process and one that does sometimes run into problems.
For example, we recently reported on a situation where a customer found the battery back-up that BT supplied for their Digital Voice service didn’t always function during power cuts (here). The Telegraph (paywall) has also reported on a few cases where pensioners and vulnerable residents in rural communities were left without connectivity over Christmas for various different reasons.
Advertisement
However, the government and Ofcom have set out clear guidance and rules for the best process to follow when switching to digital phone services, which is particularly tough on the need to identify and protect vulnerable users from harm (e.g. those with telecare devices).
“If we see evidence of widespread issues, we’ve shown we’ll step in. Earlier in December, we fined Virgin Media £23.8m for putting vulnerable customers at risk of harm during its programme to migrate customers to digital landlines,” said Ofcom while referencing the recent fine (here). But Virgin Media’s case was, arguably, a bit more problematic than those highlighted today and had even been linked to some deaths (we’ll come back to this).
A BT spokesperson said:
“We’ve reviewed the customer cases shared with us. Our investigation indicates delays in Mr Farrah’s and Mr Barker’s switchovers were linked to number transfer and setup issues, some involving other suppliers. We’re working with both customers to resolve these issues. Mr Goodhart’s enquiry relates to a business phone line service provided by a third party.
We continue to encourage our customers experiencing issues to contact us directly so we can review their setup and provide the best solution for their needs. For customers with additional needs, we offer free battery back-up units, hybrid phones and in-home assistance. We’re also investing in improving mobile network resilience in rural areas.
Anyone with questions or concerns about the switchover should contact their landline provider, who can make sure they have the right solutions in place.”
The newspaper article doesn’t provide enough detail on the cause of the latest faults to be able to assess whether they’re something Ofcom would actually be worried about. But it’s worth pointing out that switching between providers and setting up new phone lines, whether via digital or older analogue methods, has never been a completely perfect process.
Technical issues have always emerged that sometimes cause short-term connectivity problems for a minority of users, not only with BT (all providers have experience unexpected problems). The question is often whether those faults could have reasonably been avoided or not, which can be hard to judge without more detail.
Advertisement
Ofcom does recognise that sometimes problems do happen that could not be avoided or foreseen beforehand. But it’s a very fine line and the recent move to hit Virgin Media with a hefty fine revealed how they have a low tolerance for mistakes where vulnerable consumers are concerned (that’s a good thing), particularly those with telecare devices.
In particular, the regulator is likely to take a dim view of providers that fail to correctly identify vulnerable users with telecare systems, or if a provider disconnects such users simply for not engaging in the migration process (such users might not have been able to engage, due to disability). This is why network providers now have to be VERY careful about cutting customers off from a vital service during major network migrations.
Mark is a professional technology writer, IT consultant and computer engineer from Dorset (England), he also founded ISPreview in 1999 and enjoys analysing the latest telecoms and broadband developments. Find me on X (Twitter), Mastodon, Facebook, BlueSky, Threads.net and Linkedin.
Advertisement
Leave a Reply
Privacy Notice: Please note that news comments are anonymous, which means that we do NOT require you to enter any real personal details to post a message and display names can be almost anything you like (provided they do not contain offensive language or impersonate a real person's legal name). By clicking to submit a post you agree to storing your entries for comment content, display name, IP and email in our database, for as long as the post remains live.
Only the submitted name and comment will be displayed in public, while the rest will be kept private (we will never share this outside of ISPreview, regardless of whether the data is real or fake). This comment system uses submitted IP, email and website address data to spot abuse and spammers. All data is transferred via an encrypted (https secure) session.
What this demonstrates is:
1/ engaging with people to achieve a somewhat complex technical change is hard, slow and expensive. You will always hit arguments of “what’s in this for me” and “forced worsening”
2/ doing a well planned technical change that is invisible to the customer (and is planned and thoroughly tested on that basis) is more predictable and therefore simpler (certainly for the customer!) and can ultimately be cheaper.
What does this mean, taken together? For BT, there should be more focus on solutions that are zero touch by customer, i.e. more “sotap for analogue” for non broadband customers, and developing solutions that streamlines or defers in home transition to voip or VoLTE
The right answer for some customers may be a “smart master” that does VoLTE with built in battery, remote triggered transition of landline service from copper to VoLTE, accepts and handles current analogue handsets in the home and the simpler sorts of safety pendant, and defers FTTP to a later deployment i.e. when better broadband is demanded by customer.
Virgin is in a trickier place with their tech.
It’s not possible to offer a zero touch solution while achieving the objectives of the PSTN closeout, there was always going to be a requirement to physically plug a phone into something else.
A huge chunk of the problem has been the care alarm operators doing their best to do nothing other than phoning up journalists to have a cry about the switch-off.
What Jonny said. Some in the industry seem more interested complaining over and over to the media — aka exploiting the BBC and Sky News — than doing anything practical to deal with the fact their tech simply won’t work in a post-PSTN world. Its much more palatable for them to have a weekly moan about ‘wah the PSTN is going” than actually spending money to solve the problem.
And the regulator, far from actually giving a damn to deal with a clearly evil social media site that is literally allowing people to create X-rated content without any problems, would rather waste time fining BT and other telcos for not doing enough for the minority who hate any kind of change, regardless of the benefits. Basically, the regulator has the wrong priorities.
This is one of the problems why the closure of Kenton Road and Ballyclare Telephone Exchanges have had be extended from late November. Some people are still not aware and others are not engaging in the process, for whatever reason.
Where were the regulators when CrowdStrike trashed multiple services and industries? Airlines grounded, with servers all over the World stopping working and various services like GP surgeries affected for long periods of time. It appears they’re quick to jump all over telecom companies, but are happy to have a regulatory vacuum when it comes to US tech.
Honestly its a rubbish product anyway. Internally the systems for engineers to role it out havent been ammended where it makes it straight forward enough to read and get it right .
Its just poor
Again, this is a failure of the regulators to require care providers to act responsibly and to play their part in identifying and assisting with the migrations of their customers.
Remember that BT and Virgin Media price gouge by nature so won’t mind paying fines to the regulator in the first place.
Significant numbers of customers ignore all communication from ourselves and only pay attention (and contact us to “report a fault”) when the PSTN stops working.
The letters from BT regarding a migration to DV must take a conscious effort to ignore. It is not a spontaneous process. Is that our fault for not getting implicit consent before migrating, their fault for not paying attention, or a bit of both?
The problem with DV is that its a closed system.
That is part of the issue, zen, sky, bt group have all done their own system
the “closed system” has nothing to do with customer apathy though.
If anything it makes it simpler as it means they don’t have to deal with interoperability and security concerns that exist if the customer could use their own equipment.
Sky, TalkTalk and Vodafone already did their own thing for PSTN services, using their own exchange equipment. They generally didn’t use Openreach WLR (and as such are not actually required to shut it down by 2027, though they will be impacted by the exchange closure programme)
Although a very different situation, we’ve had 4ft of snow in Aberdeenshire since New Year, and its highlighting the same issue – many people would rather shout to the media about the failures of the “powers that be” and demand everything be done for them, without taking any personal responsibility. Honestly, the PSTN retirement has been coming for years, and although the industry may have made mistakes, they have been excellent at raising awareness and supporting customers. The fault here lies with social-media-mentality, so maybe Ofcom need to focus on media literacy policy and tackling the ignorance and mis-information online.
The main issue is that Ofcom have not allowed Openreach (or their contractors) to manage the changeover. The ISP industry is full of complications and the relation ship is between the Consumer and their ISP not with the network provider Openreach.
If OR had been allowed to manage it they would be able to approach it, resource support personnel and possibly involve Age related charities. i.e a road by road approach to manage conversions to FTTP (including any civils) collectively and update any records if there is dependency. What we have at the moment is uncoordinated conversions to FTTP for different ISPs on different days with little customer support.
In my experience OR, their contractors and Sky technicians always ask the right questions regarding care products.
In addition OR offer an install option that includes conversion of telephone extension wiring to DV (or equivalent) but ISPs are not utilising complex install options because of cost and shying away from areas where civils is likely.
BT continues to be the scapegoat even when they are not the consumers supplier or where they are not the owner of the number. Backup options they provide clearly state the duration.
Ofcom seeking to blame BT for what they have created is a bit rich. If they want BT to delay PSTN or introduce Pre Digital Phone on mass then they can fund it. My view is Ofcom should place obligations on all sellers and providers of telephony services equally. The only reason they are acting now is because MPs (equally ignorant of the issues) are asking questions.