Think before connecting to NBN

One needs to think very hard before connecting to the National Broadband Network. It is presently available to over six million addresses, but only a little over two million have connected, including me.

Most connections, reportedly 85 per cent, have opted for the ‘slowest' package which is 20 megabits per second (mps)

Internet providers have been forced to refund to customers because the speeds advertised cannot be met. As I type this, my speed is 2.34mps. It is rarely any faster though I once recorded 10.8mps. My 'dongle' which works through the 4G mobile network is consistently faster, but is very expensive.

But that is not the end of the NBN disaster. We have four phone plugs in our house. None can be used anymore, only the one phone plugged in to the modem.

We no longer have a phone that works when the power fails, which is often.

We had an outside bell, which no longer works.

If I want to send a fax, I must bring the machine to that one modem socket. Receiving a fax? Forget it.

But the landline is something else. There is no dial tone anymore, that comes after the number is dialled. When a call comes in, there is about a five to 10 second delay before the calling party can be heard.

In short, the NBN does not offer a comparable service to ADSL and the old landline. The NBN technology is obsolescent, if not obsolete. There are already companies offering speeds 10 to 15 times faster than the advertised NBN top speed of 100mps in restricted areas.

Already, $20 billion has been written off the NBN ‘investment' and still it cannot break even. No wonder no private company, including Telstra, would touch it. Australia is now locked in to an extremely sub standard service which has so far cost over $50 billion and rising.

My advice is simple. Don't do what I did. Postpone your connection to NBN for as long as you can. The old ADSL internet and landline are far better. Don McLean, Bunyip

Revenue services when made aware of this fact put forward the standard response that I have been lucky not to have been charged appropriate rates for the past 47 years.

To suggest that this is the case is ridiculous in the extreme. The property has been subject to 24 valuations in this time and to maintain that it has never been included in the valuation of the property is nonsense.

During one valuation I actually met council’s valuer at the dairy as part of the biannual valuation process.

When I was contacted by the current valuer I was informed that property records only date back to 2006, and there is no mention of a dairy on council’s computer records.

Herein lies the problem. When records were transferred from the old card system apparently many houses and other buildings on properties did not find their way into the computer. Many of these so called uncaptured buildings are in excess of 60 years old.

Because it is not on the computer it has never been included in property valuations in council eyes.

Anybody would think the computer actually valued properties.

As a result of this revaluation of a 47 year old dairy the value of my property has been increased by $22,.000 or 28.47 per cent.

Combine this with a 17.5 per cent increase in the 2016-17 rate sees my rate bill for the last two years increase by 45.97 per cent.

Fairness and equity I don’t think, when 20 per cent of my gross income is paid in rates.

What business can survive this level of impost?

Advised by council’s valuer that there was an opportunity to object to the revaluation I replied this was under consideration.

The response was that the property would be more closely looked at and it would be highly likely that the valuation would be increased further.

Where is the fairness and equity when only a third of rural properties are subjected to audit? Why not audit all properties in the shire? Imagine the uproar should the whole shire be subjected to a 45.97 per cent rate increase in a two year period.

Trevor Collins, Neerim Junction