I don't really see how this will change anything considering literally every availability resource already states that "all dates are indicative and subject to change" or similar. The quarterly dates are place holders, plain and simple. If you know where your cabinet is (it's not too hard to get an idea if you take a quick walk around your area), checking to see whether any work is going on would give you an idea as to whether the date is actually accurate or just there to show you that your cabinet hasn't been forgotten about. If a RFS date was announced, missed, then taken away until a more accurate date could be published, people like this would literally **** themselves thinking that it's no longer going to be available and kick up an even bigger stink.
As it stands nothing has changed with any advertising so if your number is still giving a date of 30th September then this is the predicted RFS date and is the date from which you should be able to order FTTC. Of course, as the article (point C) (and pretty much every other existing resource already) states, this date is subject to change if any unforeseen delays occur. It would blow your mind if you knew some of the crazy things which caused these delays and might cause this "UrbanHaze" guy to think twice before throwing his rattle out of his pram.
You're completely missing the point I'm afraid. If BT give a date and then miss it then fine. If they miss it again, understandable. Anything more than a 6 month delay brings into question the validity of the date in the first place.
The point is BT can't just continue to set the dates in what appears to be an arbitrary manner. 90% of your post is irrelevant for myself because:
a) the cabinet is down and has been for months
b) this small area in Peterborough is already half enabled they just 'forgot' the other half
The ASA agreed with the complainant. So your other points are a little irrelevant. I'm sure they would have considered similar arguments from BT.
I only took a contract out initially with BT because Infinity was due September 2011. Then December 2011 - ok fine. March 2012 - understandable. June 2012 - now this is becoming misleading. etc.
Last edited: