Reply from Comreg on issue of line splitters

Gadgie

I sent an e-mail to Comreg to enquire about the legality of eircom using pairgains when installing lines, after being given information on this board that they could not be installed after April 2002.

Here is my initial e-mail:

---

Original Message

---

From: Glenn
To: consumerline@comreg.ie
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:10 PM
Subject: Eircom Line Splitter


Hi,

I have a line splitter/pairgain on my eircom line. I do not want it there and certain did not ask for it nor give my permission for it to be installed. I would like it removed but eircom tell me this cannot be done.

However, I have heard that these line splitters cannot legally be installed since April 2002, but I cannot find any documents to back this claim up. My line was installed on August the 18th 2003.

I would like to order DSL for my line but this device is preventing my from passing the pre-qual test.

Can Comreg please advise me on the legality of these devices?

Regards,

Glenn

Here is the reply I got:

---

Original Message

---

From: Aileen Canning
To: Glenn
Cc: Paul Brennan
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 10:21 AM
Subject: FW: Eircom Line Splitter


Dear Glenn,

Thank you for your email.

I refer first to your query about legality of use of carrier/pairgain systems. If a carrier system/pairgain device is required for eircom to provide you with telephone service it is perfectly legal for eircom to deploy this. There is a common misconception that these devices are illegal – I have seen claims to this effect posted on www.boards.ie but this is not a correct reflection of the situation.

This appears to be an inaccurate reference to the Copper Loop Frequency Management Plan which was agreed between Eircom, Esat BT (representing the industry) and ComReg in April 2002 and is hosted on eircom wholesale’s website.

This document sets out various rules about the type of technologies that can be deployed on short, medium and long lines. It also provides for an operator to request removal of a pairgain where that line is requested for unbundling. Esat BT therefore can – and do – request this service at present by ticking the ‘survey for spare pair’ option when ordering a line for unbundling and eircom wholesale then seek to provide a line without use of a pairgain/carrier system. However, it is a commercial decision for eircom retail as to whether they wish to use the same process when requesting a line from eircom wholesale for broadband use.

Finally as part of ComReg’s obligations to set a functional internet access rate to which eircom must adhere, ComReg is currently reviewing a detailed submission from eircom on use of carrier/pairgain devices in the access network. Any obligation with regard to functional internet access set by ComReg will of course have to refer to such deployments and set further conditions about their use and deployment. A decision from ComReg on functional internet access will be available in the coming weeks.

Please contact me again if I can be of any further assistance

Regards

Aileen Canning
Market Operations
Commission for Communications Regulation

So it looks like we'll have to hassle eircom ourselves if we want pairgains removed from our lines...

Aileen has given me permission to post her response, and hopefully this will clear up any misconceptions people had about the Copper Loop Frequency Management Plan.

BigEejit

Dammit .... why did they bother with that plan if €ircon can use pairgain anywhere they feel like ... all it seems to be is setting forth a mechanism for Esat BT to unbundle a line and get pairgains off it during the process .... Comreg, you are spineless.

Ripwave

Originally posted by Glenn
... Esat BT therefore can – and do – request this service at present by ticking the ‘survey for spare pair’ option when ordering a line for unbundling and eircom wholesale then seek to provide a line without use of a pairgain/carrier system. However, it is a commercial decision for eircom retail as to whether they wish to use the same process when requesting a line from eircom wholesale for broadband use.

Yeah, the old "eircom retail/eircom wholesale" myth/fallacy/fraud (take your pick). Comreg pretends that they're seperate companies, and that "eircom retail" will act in it's customers best interest, rather than in the best interest of "eircom wholesale".

The "no pairgain" rule is a service for telcos, not for end users. And if you could actually get your phoneline unbundled, that'd be fine (and it might actually pressure "eircom retail" into requesting the removal of pairgains on it's lines, to stop people switching telcos who would request it).

Of course then we'd end up with the kafkaesque situation where the only way to be sure of getting that "spare pair" would be to order it through eircom retail, because all the other telcos would get the same run around from "eircom wholesale" that they're getting now when it comes to getting access to DSL ports. ("Sorry, we don't have any spare pairs available, eircom retail just got the last one (thousand)").

Ripwave

Originally posted by BigEejit
Dammit .... why did they bother with that plan if €ircon can use pairgain anywhere they feel like ... all it seems to be is setting forth a mechanism for Esat BT to unbundle a line and get pairgains off it during the process .... Comreg, you are spineless.

That's exactly what the mechanism was supposed to provide. ESAT could then have turned around and installed their own pairgain on the line if they wanted to.

The problem is that unbundling has been a total failure, so the rule that forces eircom to provide a "clean" line (where practical) to a competing telco is meaningless, because there are no telcos compteing to unbundle your line.

(Without this provision, there would have been nothing to stop eircom installing pairgains everytime ESAT or Telco X requested that a line be unbundled. Even if it only happened in 5% of cases, it would be damaging to competition, because that 5% would try to move back to eircom, and the other telco would be left with all the up front costs, with no long term payback).

spongebob

There are two more gross fallacies in there too.

1. A customer such as ESAT can request and get a 'spare pair' where a Customer such as Mr Muck esq. is treated differently. Mr. Muck would personally "unbundle" the pairgained line from its pole with a JCB if they tried it on my line. Why are there tiers of customers ? What right has one tier got over another when the Analogue service is 'Universal' .

2. Comreg imply that by your applying for an extra line Eircom were therefore able to pairgain him because 'he asked for it', (sounds like what a fat old Barrister would say to an 18 year old rape victim in court does it not?) . Eircom are not obliged to give you a victim impact statement in advance . Why?

Eircom often pairgain your line when someone else (say your neighbour) requests a service. Comreg do not feel it proper that Eircom inform you then that your service has been degraded through no fault of your own and at the request of another party. Why ?

Had you known that you would be pairgained you would probably have lived with one usable line, now you have 2 unusable lines, why were you not given the chance ?

Nice to see Boards get a mention in official correspondence

M

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
1. A customer such as ESAT can request and get a 'spare pair' where a Customer such as Mr Muck esq. is treated differently. Mr. Muck would personally "unbundle" the pairgained line from its pole with a JCB if they tried it on my line. Why are there tiers of customers ? What right has one tier got over another when the Analogue service is 'Universal' .

There aren't "two tiers of customers". There are two types of telco - those that stand to gain by asking for a pairgain to be removed, and eircom, who don't need to make this request, because everyone is already getting their line from them, and can't do anything about it.

If eircom retail were trying to win back an unbundled ESAT customer, you can be damn sure that they'd request a "spare pair". But if you're already locked in to eircom, why would they bother?

2. Comreg imply that by your applying for an extra line Eircom were therefore able to pairgain him because 'he asked for it', (sounds like what a fat old Barrister would say to an 18 year old rape victim in court does it not?) . Eircom are not obliged to give you a victim impact statement in advance . Why?

Because, in theory, you can always switch to the competition if you don't like the service.

Apparently the fact that there is no competiton doesn't matter!

Comreg can't, and won't, ban pairgains. They just won't allow eircom to foist pairgained lines on competing telcos.

Comreg have made it plain time and time again that they do not see themselves as being in the business of protecting consumers rights, they are only regulating to prevent anti-competetive behaviour. Keep your eye on the ball!

(Do you have any comment on the last paragraph of the Comreg reply, about "functional internet access", or is this just typical CS smokescreen?)

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
Had you known that you would be pairgained you would probably have lived with one usable line, now you have 2 unusable lines, why were you not given the chance ?

Because it would have cost eircom over €200 a year in lost line rental to tell you in advance that the second "line" would be a waste of money.

Remember, that the "line" is free, it's the phone number that you're paying for. (That's the only logical explanation. And if you want two phone numbers, it's actually cheaper to order eircom Hi-price instead).

spongebob

Originally posted by Ripwave
Comreg have made it plain time and time again that they do not see themselves as being in the business of protecting consumers rights, they are only regulating to prevent anti-competetive behaviour. Keep your eye on the ball!

Thanks Ripwave!

They have certainly made it clear that they find the consumer to be a dreadful inconvenience. I think the Ombudsman may recalibrate their mindset on that matter in the near future.

M

dahamsta

A pity Aileen didn't come along a long time ago and clear up the issue rather than let it propogate. Then again I suppose she must her hands full cleaning up after that gob****e of a boss.

adam

spongebob

Aileen, I regret to say, is parroting the Etain Doyle "we have no power , what can we do" line. Etains ongoing paralysis and dithering has permeated the organisation to the extent that Comreg are a very good example of "Institution Failure". I am delighted that she is going but am fearful for the country given the legacy she has left behind.

Article 12 of the Communications Acts 2002 explicitly prohibits the imbalance of rights proclaimed by Etain and her 2 sidekicks through Aileen in that email.

12.—(1) The objectives of the Commission in exercising its functions shall be as follows—

(a) in relation to the provision of electronic communications networks, electronic communications services and associated facilities—

(i) to promote competition,
(ii) to contribute to the development of the internal market, and
(iii) to promote the interests of users within the Community

I see that subsections I II and III have equal weight in this section.

ESATs right to a clean 'spare pair' under subsections I and II is Equal To but Not Greater Than The consumers right to the same 'spare pair'. Yet Aileen has told us , with no basis in Statute Law, that an entity with rights under subsections I and II has a Greater Right that being specifically the right to apply for a 'spare pair' .

The Ombudsmans office is there to vindicate the rights of the individual when they are wilfuly ignored, with no statutory basis, by arrogant functionaries like the Commissioners for Communications Regulation.

While Ripwave is absolutely correct about the internal mindset in Comreg it nevertheless has no basis in the law of the land. The user of Communications services (AKA the Consumer) has an equal right to a hearing from the Commission and to a restitution of wrong.

Get your 'spare pair' from Eircom. You are entitled to it just as ESAT BT are. Ask Aileen how your rights under section 12 have been fully vindicated in this decision she communicated to you.

M

andrew163

A pity Aileen didn't come along a long time ago and clear up the issue rather than let it propogate. Then again I suppose she must her hands full cleaning up after that gob****e of a boss.

*hits head off table and leaves a small crater*

I've said that at least twice in the last 6 months here... :rolleyes: but do you ever listen to little ol'e me? NOOOOO

ah well at least it's out in the open now

spongebob

Aileen simply admitted that Comreg are not doing their job properly, fortunately she did so in writing.

M

DaithiSurfer

What would happen if you are happliy using DSL or Friaco etc and then Eircon split the line. You would end up with a **** service through no fault of your own even though you have paid in advance for a particular service.
Is this allowed?

STaN

OK...

So i can ring up eircom tomorrow (which number?) and ask for a completely seperate pair of wires into my house?

I have ISDN at the moment and my line is also failing for DSL, for unknown reason. [The estate is over 30years old, possibly split lines?] A house 200ft away has 1Mb i-stream, so im assuming it has nothing to do with range as the RADSL product should go further.

So if they install a new line, does it raise the chance of getting ADSL?

andrew163

Originally posted by STaN
OK...

So i can ring up eircom tomorrow (which number?) and ask for a completely seperate pair of wires into my house?

I have ISDN at the moment and my line is also failing for DSL, for unknown reason. [The estate is over 30years old, possibly split lines?] A house 200ft away has 1Mb i-stream, so im assuming it has nothing to do with range as the RADSL product should go further.

So if they install a new line, does it raise the chance of getting ADSL?

afaik (you might want to confirm this), ISDN lines can't be split.

Originally posted by STaN
ask

ASKing something from eircom is like asking a hungry dog to serve you a lump of meat.

Originally posted by DaithiSurfer

What would happen if you are happliy using DSL or Friaco etc and then Eircon split the line. You would end up with a **** service through no fault of your own even though you have paid in advance for a particular service.
Is this allowed?

DSL won't work over a splitter, so if you have DSL and they split the line, presumably you can attack them legally saying that they breached the contract? (they cut you off before the contract expired)

FRIACO, on the other hand, will still work fine, because it's just bog standard dialup with a twist... So it'll still work, but at half the speed. (usually 26.4K to 33.6k)

spongebob

Originally posted by andrew163
afaik (you might want to confirm this), ISDN lines can't be split.

There are pairgains that allow ISDN access, they are too expensive for Eircom.

DSL won't work over a splitter, so if you have DSL and they split the line, presumably you can attack them legally saying that they breached the contract? (they cut you off before the contract expired)

DSL wont work at all, the the DSL'd pair is therefore tagged on their database and not available for splitting thereafter, how do you think Biddy knows its a DSL line if you ring in a fault. They will merrily split analogue lines and don't give a damn who is affected.

FRIACO, on the other hand, will still work fine, because it's just bog standard dialup with a twist... So it'll still work, but at half the speed. (usually 26.4K to 33.6k)

No, depending on the pairgain used it can go as low as 12k. In my last house I and all the neighbours had 16.8k connections, never any more and never any less.

Ironically, A different department of Comreg can be called out to get rid of a pairgain if you know your radio stuff. Some pairgains cause a lot of interference around 50Mhz and if you know your Radio Frequency Regulations a fella will come out from Comreg with a scanner and will simply tell Eircom to get rid of it after he proves it is causing interference, Comreg are also responsible for managing the Radio Spectrum in Ireland.

M

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
ESATs right to a clean 'spare pair' under subsections I and II is Equal To but Not Greater Than The consumers right to the same 'spare pair'. Yet Aileen has told us , with no basis in Statute Law, that an entity with rights under subsections I and II has a Greater Right that being specifically the right to apply for a 'spare pair' .

Not to put too fine a point on it, Muck, that's a load of cobblers. Or, if you prefer, your argument has no basis in Statue Law.

ESAT "right" to a spare pair is there to prevent them being put at a competetive disadvantage vis a vis a company that can whip up a spare pair when it feels the need.

You, as a user, aren't in competition with eircom, so you don't have any rights under the competition clause.

As a consumer, your only rights are those delineated under the USO, and that doesn't include the right to an unsplit line.

As comreg have failed in all 3 provisions (promotion of competetion, development of the internal market and promotion of consumer interests), it's obvious that there is no imbalance. (Which is the irony emoticon, again?)

(I'm not arguing that this position is good, I'm just pointing out that spreading misinformation doesn't do anyone any favours).

spongebob

The USO is derived from a number of EU directives. It is in addition to the Comms Act which lays down a balance of duties for Comreg.

Here is the Law again, 3 equal subsections in section 12(a)

(i) to promote competition,
(ii) to contribute to the development of the internal market, and
(iii) to promote the interests of users within the Community

ESATs rights under sections I and II are Equal to those of the Consumer under III. A pairgained line is useless to me and to ESAT for ...different reasons maybe ?

Our Rights are nevertheless equal in statute law. Theirs to a competitive network access and to participation in an internal market and mine to my 'interests' .

I fail to see how the hell you read anything else into it, its in plain english from what I can see when I hold it up to the light

M

dahamsta

Someone split Mucks line so he can take it to the European Court of Human Rights for gawds sake!

adam

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
Our Rights are nevertheless equal in statute law. Theirs to a competitive network access and to participation in an internal market and mine to my 'interests' .

I fail to see how the hell you read anything else into it, its in plain english from what I can see when I hold it up to the light

Because ESATs right to be protected from anti-competetive behaviour by eircom is clear and unambiguous. It's not at all clear that you have a right to an unsplit line. (Note that ESAT doesn't have an absolute right to an unsplit line, it only has a right to one if one is available - eircom isn't required to spend €5000 to run a new line up the side of a mountain in Galway to provide ESAT with an "clean" unbundled line, if there are already lines in place but the only way to provide service it to split one of the existing lines).

It would obviously be in your interest (in the short term, anyway) to have Comreg force eircom to give you free phonecalls and free line rental. It would obviously be ludicrous to suggest that Comreg has failed in it's duty to promote your rights as a consumer because Comreg has failed to deliver free telephones for everyone. The fact that you would like an unsplit line, and that it would even be in your best interests to have one, doesn't mean that you have a right to one.

The fact that ESATs protection from anti-competitive behaviour allow them to request an unsplit unbundled line doesn't mean that they have more rights than you do. It just means they have different rights.

spongebob

Originally posted by Ripwave

The fact that ESATs protection from anti-competitive behaviour allow them to request an unsplit unbundled line doesn't mean that they have more rights than you do. It just means they have different rights.

I am not up the mountain in Galway anymore, (good call Ripwave). and therefore my rights have changed. I am now within 1 km of my exchange in an area with plenty of houses and a ratio of about 1.8Dsides(gross) per household. Quite a lot of planning permissions and high density rezonings have happened in this area in the past 6-7 years which is a good predictive indicator of a requirement for more copper.

My position is that I am technically within the reach of all services I can reasonably expect over copper. I am in an area with an overall sufficiency of copper and of ducting and I therefore will not accept being pairgained in those circumstances. I moved within the technological constraint barriers in order to get those services as a right.

Therefore I do not see any overweening technological argument as to why I or my neighbours should be pairgained under any circumstances. I expect Comreg to uphold those rights and have a right to expect that. Were I to email them to get them to do their job I would not accept some prattle about ESAT having a greater right than I do.

M

Ripwave

Originally posted by Muck
Were I to email them to get them to do their job I would not accept some prattle about ESAT having a greater right than I do.

With all due respect, Muck, you're the only one prattling about ESAT having greater rights that you do.

The right that you should be kicking up a fuss about is the right to have a choice of telcos to unbundle your line to. Focusing on the right to an unsplit line is loosing sight of the forest because you're looking at the trees.

spongebob

What happens if I want to stay with Eircom and have a splitter ?

M

theking

I'm with Ripwave on the legal reading. All that you've been granted by that section is that Comreg will consider, in the broadest way, the interests of consumers, as a group.

It gives no enforcable right to any individual.