Telstra 'issue' hid ADSL availability from rival carriers The Competitive Carriers Coalition (CCC) has claimed Telstra “discriminate against consumers trying to buy broadband from competitors by incorrectly claiming their telephone lines were unable to provide a service.” The coalition says Telstra applies less stringent tests when its own retail arm seeks access. ““As a result, …
This has been going on for literally years.
I knew about this trick back in 2008 If you got denied ADSL you did the following;
1. Order ADSL Via Telstra, you would magically be able to get it with them
2. Cancel the services the same week, as you had a 30 day cooling off period.
3. Order service with the ISP you originally wanted.
I am not shocked by this in the slightest.
1) Register the line anyway, with an ISP like iiNet.
2) Request a Telstra DSL service.
3) Wait for the codes to become active and iiNet's previous application kick in.
4) Laugh when Telstra send you connection advice and a bill for a service that automatically connects to the iiNet Walled Garden :)
Strictly speaking, Telstra's system should have picked up the prior application, but like management, it doesn't actually do anything.
It seems a bit far-fetched that fixing this "mistake" will somehow take another six months, too - were the Retail and Wholesale bits using different line test data, or different criteria? If it's a different database - just stop doing that and have everyone use the one Retail have. Criteria? Clearly the wholesale ones were wrong - so correct them: it should take six minutes, with a bit of testing, not six months! Indeed, why aren't the Retail bits supposed to order through exactly the same Wholesale systems as other ISPs?
I thought BT were bad - my FTTC install came with the wrong paperwork, because BT Wholesale had "accidentally" missed out a section, so Openreach had to re-book the appointment; later, a fault got me helpful suggestions from the Openreach tech like "you'd be better with BT for broadband"... All very much not supposed to happen, of course.
Personally, I think it might be better if both incumbents were barred from providing retail ISP services directly: make them wholesale-only, giving a genuinely level playing field. Is it actually necessary for them to have the option of selling directly to consumers, given the problems it's causing?
>far-fetched that fixing this "mistake" will somehow take another six months, too -
Classic mistake, all too common by management.
Software is not the 'easy part' of a large company.
As demonstrated by the telephone companies that have gone bust because of problems with billing, and the turnpikes that have taken massive stock market write-downs because of problems with billing, and the general business companies that have changed management because of failed BI implementations.
It is easy to underestimate how complicated a simple software change is. It is never as simple as it appears.
Frankly the only surprise is that they are still in business - mind you, they have "the name" so can do what they effing well like. I have not used Smelstra for over a decade, mainly because their customer service was crap, and am very happy.
I am happy to pay more for service as long as I get it. Westnet is streets ahead of Telstra, so that is who I stay with. For example my father who I eventually got off Telstra and onto Westnet, phoned Westnet because he had an issue with his internet connection. Once they had solved the problem, they phoned me, yes ME, to tell me about what they had done.
Now in anybody's language that is service! Yes I was the contact person, but that kind of care for their customers is a hallmark of Westnet, and non-existent in Telstra.
Up yours Telstra!!!
"“We are . writing to advise that a potential issue with the ‘Excess Transmission Loss’ result in our Service Qualification (SQ) systems and processes for the provisioning of Wholesale ADSL and LSS services has been identified, following a complaint by a Wholesale Customer.”
“ … there is the potential for some limited instances where Telstra Retail may have been able to supply an ADSL service where Telstra Wholesale requests have shown that the ADSL or LSS service is unavailable as the current path for the PSTN service suffers from excessive transmission loss.”
“Our investigations into the scope and scale of this issue are continuing. However, we believe the instances in which this has occurred are low.”
This is Telstra spin at it's worst and a complete abuse of the Wholesale/Retail situation - and proof that the current so called split is not stopping Telstra from it's underhanded tactics.
Actually this probably works against Telstra customers, My reading is that that the results for the external (wholesale) requests were at a higher standard for loss, meaning that they could expect lines meeting the standard to be relatively error free. Whereas Telstra retail customers would probably experience more dropouts, reconnects and line errors (resulting in lower consistent speeds) because of the lower standard. Another reason why we should be encouraging Fibre To The Premise (FTTP) rather than Fibre to the Node (FTTN) for the NBN. The NBN being an independent provider, it is not beholden to any one carrier and so is able to provide the same level of service to all clients. Unfortunately if you do not happen to be covered by the NBN, then you will probably end up with Fraudband :(
Unfortunately once the Fiberal's tell NBN Co. to get the paperwork ready for the NBN's sale, Telstra thanks to the billions the Labour and Liberal governments would have given them for the pits, pipes and now copper, will be in a prime position to buy it all and then the games begin in earnest all over again. Telstra have excellent lawyers, unfortunately the politicians don't care, because once they finish in politics, it's a nice fat super and gravy train for life, so why should they.
Almost everyone I know has had a situation like this happen to them at some point since DSL was rolled out. If all of these have seen it happen, how on earth can "the scope and scale" be at all limited?
The only thing they are seeking to limit is the scope and scale of each allegation of wrong-doing, security breach, illegal misappropriation/maldistribution of private data and other malpractices they get found out doing as part of their day to day operations.
What's been publicised to date is shocking in the extreme... but just Imagine how much of this stuff doesn't ever see the light of day :-(
Yes, it has been well known for years that Telstra would deny a connection from a competitor, and then magically the line would be suitable when you apply through them. This has been going on forever. The only surprise it that is has taken this long for it to official. Combat Wombat's advice was regularly doled out in the Whirlpool forum.
I cannot express my opinion of Telstra in a family forum such as this.
I tried to get ADLS via a number of providors back in 2011 and they all said they couldn't provide it; rang Telstra and they connected me to ADLS2 on the existing wiring; speeds were reasonable (tbox downloads worked flawlessly).
I've sinced cancelled my Telstra line when the NBN arrived, but I'm still stuck with them for mobile.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
