Cable Forum - View Single Post

krs · 15-03-2010, 18:19

Well, the saga is cleared up at a practical level, and thanks to those who've responded. Just for info...

The short story is - the phone line was being handled by BT, and it was they who cancelled the service.

The long story:
The phone contract was with Virgin, and has been for about 10 years. In January we began the transfer process to become Sky customers, and Sky instructed BT to connect a BT landline (which Sky would then use). The BT engineer connected the BT landline to the Virgin terminal. But before the day was out, we cancelled the Sky contract because it had been misleadingly represented, and were assured that all our services were back with Virgin.

We've been paying Virgin for TV, internet and telephone (as previously) and, when we checked, were reassured that Virgin were supplying our telephone service. Last week BT decided for some reason (perhaps Sky had not paid them?) to cancel our BT phone line - the one we never knew we had, and for which we had not paid. And since then, Virgin - whom we have paid have dealt with our queries without ever noticing that we did not have an active phone connection with them. They had our money, but would have no incoming/outgoing calls on our log at all. It wasn't until an engineer did attend on site that the BT factor came to light and is now being resolved (eventually we'll get our old number back).

So the curiosities in the tale...

Why could Virgin not notice that we had no phone service supplied by them when we spoke to them? Surely someone woudl have noticed that their tests on the line status were actually being directed at a number which they did not control, down an inactive cable?
Why did 'Faults' send us to 'Customer Services' who then sent us back to 'Faults' - do the people in the company not know who handles which aspect of their work?
Why did an engineer attend today, but not attend on Friday?
Why did BT supply our number when we had concelled the contract, and why did Virgin assure us they were supplying our telephone connection when, in fact, they were not?

...no need to answer those questions - I'm just highlighting some of the things that are odd about the whole scenario.

15-03-2010, 18:19	#6
krs Inactive Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 11	Re: Ringtone, but no inbound/outbound calls Well, the saga is cleared up at a practical level, and thanks to those who've responded. Just for info... The short story is - the phone line was being handled by BT, and it was they who cancelled the service. The long story: The phone contract was with Virgin, and has been for about 10 years. In January we began the transfer process to become Sky customers, and Sky instructed BT to connect a BT landline (which Sky would then use). The BT engineer connected the BT landline to the Virgin terminal. But before the day was out, we cancelled the Sky contract because it had been misleadingly represented, and were assured that all our services were back with Virgin. We've been paying Virgin for TV, internet and telephone (as previously) and, when we checked, were reassured that Virgin were supplying our telephone service. Last week BT decided for some reason (perhaps Sky had not paid them?) to cancel our BT phone line - the one we never knew we had, and for which we had not paid. And since then, Virgin - whom we have paid have dealt with our queries without ever noticing that we did not have an active phone connection with them. They had our money, but would have no incoming/outgoing calls on our log at all. It wasn't until an engineer did attend on site that the BT factor came to light and is now being resolved (eventually we'll get our old number back). So the curiosities in the tale... Why could Virgin not notice that we had no phone service supplied by them when we spoke to them? Surely someone woudl have noticed that their tests on the line status were actually being directed at a number which they did not control, down an inactive cable? Why did 'Faults' send us to 'Customer Services' who then sent us back to 'Faults' - do the people in the company not know who handles which aspect of their work? Why did an engineer attend today, but not attend on Friday? Why did BT supply our number when we had concelled the contract, and why did Virgin assure us they were supplying our telephone connection when, in fact, they were not? ...no need to answer those questions - I'm just highlighting some of the things that are odd about the whole scenario.