Re: BT dropping PSTN in 2025 - really??

[Scott]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 16:42:21 +0100, Postman Pat
<a...@the-post-office-not.com> wrote:

>Just got another daft email from BT trying to sell BT Internet etc.
>
>It states
>
>>Secondly, I'm sure you're aware that shortly we're going to be turning off all PSTN lines in 2025 - the first step of the digital switchover is next year, we'll no longer to be able to re-activate PSTN lines that go down - so if you're not ready yet, we really need to look at this for you to ensure you won't lose your numbers. Have you already migrated to a cloud platform?
>
>I am not sure whether this is just an illiterate email, but what
>happens when the POTS subscriber
>
>- has no ADSL
>- has no idea what ADSL or VOIP is
>- is on the end of a copper pair which BT fix *for voice* but won't
>fix *for data* for weeks and weeks (the standard BT practice for non
>huge customers)
>- gets regular power cuts *and* has no GSM signal (and probably has no
>mobile phone)
>
>I went to VOIP (from ISDN2 which worked 100% for 20 years) when I got
>FTTP but would not have done so earlier due to poor *data* service
>levels on copper. I would advise anyone to *not* go to VOIP unless
>they have FTTP, and FTTP will take much longer than 2025. At home (N
>of Brighton) there is no FTTP in most of the villages. And no GSM;)
>
>What does this bloke mean by "re-activate PSTN lines that go down"?
>
>And what does "cloud" got to do with VOIP? This is BS, surely :)

I think they are expected to piss off, along with anyone wishing to
interact with central or local government who does not have internet
access.

I saw an advert by National Savings & Investments saying that the
preferred method of selling their 'products' was online. It went on
to say that customers without Internet access could still purchase
from 'participating' post offices, and a full list of participating
post offices could be found on the website.

[Tweed]

Postman Pat <a...@the-post-office-not.com> wrote:
> Just got another daft email from BT trying to sell BT Internet etc.
>
> It states
>
>> Secondly, I'm sure you're aware that shortly we're going to be turning
>> off all PSTN lines in 2025 - the first step of the digital switchover is
>> next year, we'll no longer to be able to re-activate PSTN lines that go
>> down - so if you're not ready yet, we really need to look at this for
>> you to ensure you won't lose your numbers. Have you already migrated to a cloud platform?
>
> I am not sure whether this is just an illiterate email, but what
> happens when the POTS subscriber
>
> - has no ADSL
> - has no idea what ADSL or VOIP is
> - is on the end of a copper pair which BT fix *for voice* but won't
> fix *for data* for weeks and weeks (the standard BT practice for non
> huge customers)
> - gets regular power cuts *and* has no GSM signal (and probably has no
> mobile phone)
>
> I went to VOIP (from ISDN2 which worked 100% for 20 years) when I got
> FTTP but would not have done so earlier due to poor *data* service
> levels on copper. I would advise anyone to *not* go to VOIP unless
> they have FTTP, and FTTP will take much longer than 2025. At home (N
> of Brighton) there is no FTTP in most of the villages. And no GSM;)
>
> What does this bloke mean by "re-activate PSTN lines that go down"?
>
> And what does "cloud" got to do with VOIP? This is BS, surely :)
>

Basically they lose service. There’s no obligation to provide analogue
voice service over a copper pair.

[Scott]

Any additional considerations if the person is vulnerable or has a
disability?

[Wilf]

On 23/08/2022 at 16:42, Postman Pat wrote:
> Just got another daft email from BT trying to sell BT Internet etc.
>
> It states
>
>> Secondly, I'm sure you're aware that shortly we're going to be turning off all PSTN lines in 2025 - the first step of the digital switchover is next year, we'll no longer to be able to re-activate PSTN lines that go down - so if you're not ready yet, we really need to look at this for you to ensure you won't lose your numbers. Have you already migrated to a cloud platform?
>
> I am not sure whether this is just an illiterate email, but what
> happens when the POTS subscriber
>
> - has no ADSL
> - has no idea what ADSL or VOIP is
> - is on the end of a copper pair which BT fix *for voice* but won't
> fix *for data* for weeks and weeks (the standard BT practice for non
> huge customers)
> - gets regular power cuts *and* has no GSM signal (and probably has no
> mobile phone)
>
> I went to VOIP (from ISDN2 which worked 100% for 20 years) when I got
> FTTP but would not have done so earlier due to poor *data* service
> levels on copper. I would advise anyone to *not* go to VOIP unless
> they have FTTP, and FTTP will take much longer than 2025. At home (N
> of Brighton) there is no FTTP in most of the villages. And no GSM;)
>
> What does this bloke mean by "re-activate PSTN lines that go down"?
>
> And what does "cloud" got to do with VOIP? This is BS, surely :)

As far as I'm aware, OFCOM has mandated the demise of PSTN lines by
2025. So it will not be just BT. But someone here may know more and I
could be wrong.

--
Wilf

[Tweed]

Considerations yes, obligations to provide a copper based analogue
telephony service no.

See
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/123118/guidance-emergency-access-power-cut.pdf

See also
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/227680/consultation-review-of-telephony-USO.pdf

and

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/1904/pdfs/uksi_20031904_en.pdf

[David Woolley]

On 23/08/2022 16:42, Postman Pat wrote:
> Just got another daft email from BT trying to sell BT Internet etc.

Not daft, and sale of POTS has already stopped in parts of the country
and will for all of the country by September 2025.

This topic has been done to death, recently, on <news:uk.telecom> and as
off-topic posts on <news:uk.tech.digital-tv> although that thread has
now drifted to global warming and nuclear power.

This is something that has been brewing for years and already caused an
uproar a year or two ago.

[David Woolley]

On 23/08/2022 16:42, Postman Pat wrote:

> What does this bloke mean by "re-activate PSTN lines that go down"?

It means that if you cease POTS service on a line, including as the
result of moving your account to a new subscriber, you will never be
able to get POTS service back on that line. This is already the case
for a large number of exchanges.

[David Woolley]

On 23/08/2022 19:42, David Woolley wrote:
> Not daft, and sale of POTS has already stopped in parts of the country
> and will for all of the country by September 2025.

I meant September 2023, i.e. just over one year from now.

[David Woolley]

On 23/08/2022 16:42, Postman Pat wrote:

> what
> happens when the POTS subscriber
>
> - has no ADSL
> - has no idea what ADSL or VOIP is

The baseline offering is that they will get a box that plugs into the
mains and a phone socket, together with two DECT handsets, paired with
the box. In some cases, they may get a second box that plugs into the
main, and the first box, and a fibre plugged into that second box.

The first box has a socket into which a single phone can be connected,
and, as alternatives to the two DECT phones they can request either a
wall wart, paired to the first box, and with a phone socket on it (I'm
not sure if this is DECT or WiFi). There is also an option of a single
DECT + Alexa handset, but that is probably only for people who already
have ADSL.

They aren't expected to know that is ADSL or fttp, or that is VoIP,
although different standard features, increased, latency, that it fails
in power cuts, etc., may give away the fact that it isn't POTS. I don't
think they even need to know it is DECT.

In practice, the non-fttp option is fttc/ADSL at 0.5Mbps.

These are BT retail options. I'm not sure if anyone else offers POTS
only over Openreach local loops.

[Andy Burns]

David Woolley wrote:

> In practice, the non-fttp option is fttc/ADSL at 0.5Mbps

They're doing this to let them close the exchange buildings, surely they won't
migrate a pure POTS customer to VoIP over ADSL, only to have to move them again
in a few years? If fttp is available they'll supply that, if VDSL is available
they'll fit that, ADSL must be their least preferred option?

[Theo]

Postman Pat <a...@the-post-office-not.com> wrote:
> Just got another daft email from BT trying to sell BT Internet etc.
>

> It states
>
> >Secondly, I'm sure you're aware that shortly we're going to be turning
> > off all PSTN lines in 2025 - the first step of the digital switchover is
> > next year, we'll no longer to be able to re-activate PSTN lines that go
> > down - so if you're not ready yet, we really need to look at this for
> > you to ensure you won't lose your numbers. Have you already migrated to
> > a cloud platform?

That is a strange email. What part of BT was emailing you about that? BT
Business perhaps (who expect their customers to know what 'PSTN' and 'cloud
platform' mean)? Sounds rather chatty - did it come from an account manager
or similar at BT?

> I am not sure whether this is just an illiterate email, but what

> happens when the POTS subscriber
>
> - has no ADSL
> - has no idea what ADSL or VOIP is

> - is on the end of a copper pair which BT fix *for voice* but won't
> fix *for data* for weeks and weeks (the standard BT practice for non
> huge customers)
> - gets regular power cuts *and* has no GSM signal (and probably has no
> mobile phone)

I don't think those people will have migrated their PSTN to a cloud
platform, not having a clue what those things are.

I think they are currently migrating VDSL customers over to SOGEA (ie with
no analogue voice). I'm not sure what the plan is for voice-only customers
at the moment - they can provision those capable of VDSL or decent ADSL with
a DSL service and a router to plug in their phone.

I'm not sure what happens to those on marginal lines not really capable of
ADSL, but those people are few.

> I went to VOIP (from ISDN2 which worked 100% for 20 years) when I got
> FTTP but would not have done so earlier due to poor *data* service
> levels on copper. I would advise anyone to *not* go to VOIP unless
> they have FTTP, and FTTP will take much longer than 2025. At home (N
> of Brighton) there is no FTTP in most of the villages. And no GSM;)

What's your definition of 'poor data service'? Can you get 512Kbps up and
down? That's what a 'voice only' FTTP line gives you. Obviously FTTP is
more reliable than copper, but VOIP generally works fine in that kind of
bandwidth.

If your line is so bad that you can't get that, I assume they will either
not turn off your PSTN or put you top of the list for FTTP. I think those
are relatively rare.

There is the power cut issue, which has rightly been highlighted by many
others. That is mostly solved with batteries, but Openreach have
cheapskated out of that one, and I think the solution is just providing a
suitable battery pack to those in that position. That should have been part
of the design from the outset, but it seems like they're hastily trying to
paper over their omissions.

> What does this bloke mean by "re-activate PSTN lines that go down"?

Not sure, but I suspect it means you can't order PSTN service on an existing
line that is still in place but has previously been cancelled.

> And what does "cloud" got to do with VOIP? This is BS, surely :)

Many businesses have migrated their voice calls from the telco who provides
their wires to a third party VOIP operation over the internet. The 'cloud
providers' offer lots of fancy business features like virtual telephone
exchanges, online voicemail, call routing services and load balancing, menu
trees, call recording for compliance, etc etc - as well as way cheaper
calls. Businesses still using old fashioned copper voice lines are
dwindling, mostly small businesses that don't use the phone very much.

(Some of the smaller scale cloud VOIP operators are fine to use as a
domestic phone provider over your broadband, paying £0-2 per month for a
number)

Theo

[David Woolley]

On 23/08/2022 21:37, Andy Burns wrote:
> if VDSL is available they'll fit that, ADSL must be their least
> preferred option?

I think I really meant VDSL, although I think ADSL and VDSL are
basically the same technology (COFDM) with different parameters, and
0.5Mb/s isn't going to use many sub-carriers.

[Bob Eager]

VDSL does, of course, eliminate the need for copper from the cabinet to
the exchange (given that there is no POTS provision).

[Scott]

On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 17:58:58 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

>>> Basically they lose service. There?s no obligation to provide analogue

>>> voice service over a copper pair.
>>
>> Any additional considerations if the person is vulnerable or has a
>> disability?
>>
>
>Considerations yes, obligations to provide a copper based analogue
>telephony service no.
>
>See
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/123118/guidance-emergency-access-power-cut.pdf
>
>See also
>https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0025/227680/consultation-review-of-telephony-USO.pdf
>
>and
>
>https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/1904/pdfs/uksi_20031904_en.pdf

Thanks. I'll read all this with interest later.

[Scott]

Can this be given battery back-up or alternatively uninterruptible
power supply at 230 volts? Will the phone work independent of the
router?

[Mark Carver]

And that's the thing. I can easily 'picture' the copper trunks between
the exchange and cabinet going by 2025,
but FTTC/VDSL is still going to be with us well into the 2030s. (i.e
copper from cabinet to home)

[David Woolley]

On 24/08/2022 09:55, Bob Eager wrote:

> VDSL does, of course, eliminate the need for copper from the cabinet to
> the exchange (given that there is no POTS provision).

That's actually FTTC that does that. There's no technical reason why a
cabinet couldn't generate an ADSL interface (I'd rather suspect VDSL
chip sets have that as standard). The reason that VDSL isn't used from
exchanges is that the full speed distance is limited.

VDSL tends to force the use of FTTC, rather than enabling it.

[David Woolley]

On 24/08/2022 10:14, Scott wrote:
> Can this be given battery back-up or alternatively uninterruptible
> power supply at 230 volts? Will the phone work independent of the
> router?

Given that it is mains powered, you can use a UPS. Assuming phone only
users get the same hardware as BT retail xDSL customers (Smart Hub 2),
which seems likely, from an inventory point of view, it is their
standard current offering, it is wall wart powered, but there is no
information whether it is AC or DC. Many early routers were AC powered.

The router is the DECT base station, so the supplied phone, obviously
won't work without it. The alternatives involved plugging the phone
into the router or using a device paired with the router.

You may well be able to pair the phones with a different DECT base
station, but I don't see how that helps.

[Bob Eager]

And of course, there's no guarantee that the fibre even goes to the same
exchange. Smaller exchanges can be closed.

[David Woolley]

On 24/08/2022 10:14, Scott wrote:

> Can this be given battery back-up or alternatively uninterruptible
> power supply at 230 volts? Will the phone work independent of the
> router?

This was my primary source <https://www.bt.com/broadband/digital-voice>

[Bob Eager]

I didn't put that very well. What I mean is that FTTC/VDSL can exist
without the copper to the exchange, if there is some other phone
provision (i.e. VoIP). In fact, that's effectively what I have (I have no
POTS on my copper connection).

There is no need for the fibre to go to the same exchange, so a few
bigger places to terminate fibre will suffice.

Then the smaller exchanges can be closed and the copper removed, apart
from that still going from the cabinet to the premises.

In the fullness of time, even that copper will go, or that is the stated
intention.

[Martin Brown]

On 24/08/2022 10:31, David Woolley wrote:
> On 24/08/2022 09:55, Bob Eager wrote:
>> VDSL does, of course, eliminate the need for copper from the cabinet to
>> the exchange (given that there is no POTS provision).
>
> That's actually FTTC that does that.  There's no technical reason why a
> cabinet couldn't generate an ADSL interface (I'd rather suspect VDSL
> chip sets have that as standard).  The reason that VDSL isn't used from
> exchanges is that the full speed distance is limited.

The other reason is that VDSL generates enough interference that they
don't want it in the Exchange. They install a new FTTC cabinet near the
exchange but external for people on Exchange Only lines to get VDSL.

> VDSL tends to force the use of FTTC, rather than enabling it.

It sort of does both. ADSL signals are just about slow enough that it
can go back to the exchange without causing too much trouble.

They do seem to be rolling out FTTP fairly aggressively in places where
the copper circuits are overstretched and on their last legs. My village
they were breaking one working ADSL line for every two they tried to
repair. Something had to give and FTTP seems to be their fix for it.

There are several internet refuseniks in the village so I will know soon
enough what happens when they are upgraded to FTTP. One has care on call
over POTS so that could be very interesting indeed. Apparently the
supposed battery backup option is as rare as hens teeth and not always
correctly installed when it is provided. :(

https://community.bt.com/t5/Home-phone-including-Digital/Digital-Voice-Backup-Battery/td-p/2215888

I thought they had halted rollout to vulnerable customers because of
these various SNAFUs. I'm now on BT's digital voice service.

FWIW I think the 2025 date is fantasy land invented by some desk jockey
who has no clue about the state of the UK telecoms network.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[David Woolley]

On 24/08/2022 19:18, Martin Brown wrote:
> One has care on call over POTS so that could be very interesting indeed.

I believe the social alarm people had a lot of advance warning, and I
believe they are generally moving to mobile network based solutions.

[Martin Brown]

How exactly is that supposed to work in remote rural areas with no
reliable indoor mobile phone coverage? Like my village for example.

I can see it would probably be OK in cities. Even then I know people who
live in localised not spots in otherwise well covered areas - usually
close up against a steep cliff with the masts at the top of it...

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[MB]

On 24/08/2022 20:28, Martin Brown wrote:
> How exactly is that supposed to work in remote rural areas with no
> reliable indoor mobile phone coverage? Like my village for example.

Not just "remote rural areas", often if I am in soemwhere like a cafe
with no public WiFi then I will try 4G, more often than not I cannot get
a connection inside.

Some years ago my employer decided we did not need a landline phone at
work so we had use mobile phones all the time, we quite often had to
stand outside the front door to make a call.

[Mark Carver]

On 24/08/2022 20:28, Martin Brown wrote:

> On 24/08/2022 20:12, David Woolley wrote:
>> On 24/08/2022 19:18, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> One has care on call over POTS so that could be very interesting
>>> indeed.
>>
>> I believe the social alarm  people had a lot of advance warning, and
>> I believe they are generally moving to mobile network based solutions.
>
> How exactly is that supposed to work in remote rural areas with no
> reliable indoor mobile phone coverage? Like my village for example.
>

It won't work, as we've discussed ad-infinitum. If a particular person
is that vulnerable, you may need to review the wisdom of living in such
an isolated location

[Woody]

Maybe they were not vulnerable when they moved there say 40+ years ago
(we've been here 32 years come the end of November) and the upheaval of
moving in your 60's or more is probably not viable, apart from the
stress involved, your friends living locally, and the effort in finding
somewhere else to live.

No, in my book this is typical metrocentric Civil Service thinking
supported by ministers who in reality haven't a clue.

[MB]

On 25/08/2022 09:04, Mark Carver wrote:
> It won't work, as we've discussed ad-infinitum. If a particular person
> is that vulnerable, you may need to review the wisdom of living in such
> an isolated location

So someone who might have lived in a village (or even the same house)
all their life with neighbours to support them, should moved to a
strange area or the dreaded old people's home?

[Mark Carver]

On 25/08/2022 10:00, Woody wrote:
> On Thu 25/08/2022 09:04, Mark Carver wrote:
>> On 24/08/2022 20:28, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 24/08/2022 20:12, David Woolley wrote:
>>>> On 24/08/2022 19:18, Martin Brown wrote:
>>>>> One has care on call over POTS so that could be very interesting
>>>>> indeed.
>>>>
>>>> I believe the social alarm  people had a lot of advance warning,
>>>> and I believe they are generally moving to mobile network based
>>>> solutions.
>>>
>>> How exactly is that supposed to work in remote rural areas with no
>>> reliable indoor mobile phone coverage? Like my village for example.
>>>
>> It won't work, as we've discussed ad-infinitum. If a particular
>> person is that vulnerable, you may need to review the wisdom of
>> living in such an isolated location
>
>
> Maybe they were not vulnerable when they moved there say 40+ years ago
> (we've been here 32 years come the end of November) and the upheaval
> of moving in your 60's or more is probably not viable, apart from the
> stress involved, your friends living locally, and the effort in
> finding somewhere else to live.

The best thing my aunt and uncle did just before they both hit 70 was
downsize, and move into manageable retirement accommodation. All their
neighbours and local friends had either died or moved away.
My parents were horrified, and even more horrified when I suggested they
did the same. I wish now (23 years later) I'd pushed them harder to do it.
Fortunately my mother lives 100 metres from a VF/O2 cell site, and has
80/20 VDSL, only 6 miles from a major hospital, and 10 miles from me
(her only remaining family member) in a suburban environment. Despite
all of that, it's still really 'difficult' to deal with her, (despite a
daily carer who goes in, mostly for my own peace of mind).
It would be impossible if she was in a remote rural situation, and I
doubt (for starters) I could find any care company willing to visit.

> No, in my book this is typical metrocentric Civil Service thinking
> supported by ministers who in reality haven't a clue.
>

They certainly don't, but I'm afraid we are all going to have to work
around that.

[Mark Carver]

See my other post. If they still have neighbours alive and with marbles,
still  supporting them, then that's possibly the 'route' for on going
'emergency' support

[Martin Brown]

On 25/08/2022 09:04, Mark Carver wrote:

Elderly living alone is enough if you should fall and be immobilised by
breaking a leg. More common than you might think osteoporosis sneaks up.

They have lived in the village all their life and have all their friends
and a support network there. Why should *they* be forced to move into
town because BT CBA to provide a reliable working rural phone service?

It has to be made robust against power failure for those who depend on
it for their safety. Safety critical systems should not be compromised.

Offcom CBA to regulate the telecoms industry. Not fit for purpose!

There is no way that "improvements" to speed for the few like me should
be allowed to result in total loss of a critical facility like care on
call for the elderly residents. Even BT seem to have tacitly accepted
that and have AFAICT stopped the rollout to elderly no internet users.

It doesn't have to be POTS but it *does* have to work in a powercut!
Falls are much more likely during a powercut and in the dark.

Some elderly residents still tend their allotments at 90+ years of age
here so they only need the care on call as an insurance policy for
living alone in case they should fall whilst alone in their home.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

[Mark Carver]

On 25/08/2022 10:19, Martin Brown wrote:
>
> Elderly living alone is enough if you should fall and be immobilised
> by breaking a leg. More common than you might think osteoporosis
> sneaks up.

Yes, I know thank you. My mother broke her hip, and thanks to her fall
alarm help arrived within the hour (and in the middle of lockdown).
However, she lives in a suburban environment, that played a big part.

> They have lived in the village all their life and have all their
> friends and a support network there. Why should *they* be forced to
> move into town because BT CBA to provide a reliable working rural
> phone service?

See above, it's not just phone services that are crap in rural
environments, you need to assess things at a much broader level.

> It doesn't have to be POTS but it *does* have to work in a powercut!
> Falls are much more likely during a powercut and in the dark.

I agree. So the solution is a UPS then ? Get on a buy one, don't bother
waiting for 'the state' to supply it.

[David Woolley]

On 25/08/2022 10:19, Martin Brown wrote:

> Offcom CBA to regulate the telecoms industry. Not fit for purpose!

Ofcom implements government policy. Current policy is pro-business
(Rishi was reported, today, as regretting being swayed too far against
this by the scientists during Covid, and the likely successful candidate
is further to the right), pro-personal responsibility, small government
(little regulation), and anti public expenditure.

We've just been dragged out of the EU basically because the EU liked
regulating for social, rather than profit, reasons, for the government's
liking.

The alarm companies are are effectively outsourced public expenditure,
although what the government may be forgetting is that care in the
community is cheaper, for the public purse, than paying for care homes.

It's an interesting thought that the electorate for the Tory leadership
may be biassed towards the generation that is affected by such issues,
but even the less right wing of the candidates, is still very much into
business knows best, and personal responsibility. I guess many of them
can afford a high mast for the mobile terminal.

Incidentally, I wouldn't consider being in ones 60's as that old.

I looked at AgeUK on this and they seem to be making surprisingly little
fuss about it.

One side point is that smart meters also require a good mobile
connection, although I think they can hop from meter to meter to find
one with such a connection. Maybe social alarm companies will need to
relay between installations.

[David Woolley]

On 25/08/2022 10:19, Martin Brown wrote:

> It doesn't have to be POTS but it *does* have to work in a powercut!
> Falls are much more likely during a powercut and in the dark.

A telecare industry body does seem to have a guidance document, but you
almost have to give your life history before they will let you look at
it, so I haven't done that:

<https://www.tsa-voice.org.uk/campaigns/digital-shift/mobile-communication/>

This is from one of the alarm companies:
<https://taking.care/blogs/resources-advice/will-personal-alarm-work-after-digital-telephone-switchover>

They point out that the battery backup offering is likely to only cover
you for one hour.

They offer a range of, what appear to be mobile network based, options,
and looking at the brochure, they say they use a multi-network SIM,
presumably to improve the coverage.

I've also found a document,
<https://www.local.gov.uk/our-support/sector-support-offer/supporting-financial-resilience-and-economic-recovery/digital/switchover/digital-switchover-toolkit-commissioners>
from central government to councils, about this, although it doesn't
seem to mention the power and network outage issues.

Note that this isn't just about speed, it is also that the copper is
becoming a maintenance liability, and also they have a lot of real
estate in exchanges, that can be sold off.

[Mark Carver]

On 25/08/2022 14:09, David Woolley wrote:
> On 25/08/2022 10:19, Martin Brown wrote:
>> It doesn't have to be POTS but it *does* have to work in a powercut!
>> Falls are much more likely during a powercut and in the dark.
>
> A telecare industry body does seem to have a guidance document, but
> you almost have to give your life history before they will let you
> look at it, so I haven't done that:
>
> <https://www.tsa-voice.org.uk/campaigns/digital-shift/mobile-communication/>
>
>
> This is from one of the alarm companies:
> <https://taking.care/blogs/resources-advice/will-personal-alarm-work-after-digital-telephone-switchover>
>
> They point out that the battery backup offering is likely to only
> cover you for one hour.

I don't understand that. You only need to be using 'serious' power in
the event of the device making a call. Surely the quiescent power draw
for the device to be listening out for the pendant signal should be tiny
? If the battery of a modern 'dumb mobile phone' can keep that powered
in standby for a few weeks then.......

[MB]

On 25/08/2022 10:19, Martin Brown wrote:

> Offcom CBA to regulate the telecoms industry. Not fit for purpose!

The trouble is that it will left to BT provide the service whilst as
usual other telecom companies cherry-pick and won't provide service.