Rural broadband customers forced to pay extra

SIR – The push for superfast broadband – defined by the Government as speeds above 24 megabits per second (Mbps) – in rural areas is to be commended.

Many street cabinets are now fibre-enabled, so those fortunate enough to live within a few hundred yards of one have seen dramatic increases in their broadband speed

– in some cases up to 80 Mbps – with no increase in phone charges.

A recent email from BT Customer Care said: “This is to let you know we’ve upgraded your local telephone exchange, so you should now have a more reliable broadband connection. Where possible, we’ve also increased your speed.”

However, this does not help properties that are a mile or so away from cabinets and connected by copper wire. Whatever advantage gained in the fibre upgrade is lost by the distance the signal has to travel over copper. In some cases this has resulted in speeds of less than 1 Mbps. With many services now available only via download, such low speeds are useless.

The only way to achieve speeds of 24 Mbps is to have fibre-to-the-premises connections. However, fibre connections come at an additional cost to the customer of up to £15 a month.

Thus we have a two-tier system: those who live further away from street cabinets have to pay more.

The Universal Service Obligation proposed by the Government should oblige internet service providers, such as BT, to provide fibre-to-the-premises connections at no additional cost.

Earlier this year, BT spent

£1.2 billion to retain the broadcasting rights for European football. It seems that a modern fast broadband system is not its priority.

Dr Alun Rhys Williams

Cilgerran, Cardiganshire

SIR – My average broadband speed is 2.1 Mbps. In rural South Korea it is 1,000 Mbps – a speed fast enough to download an HD film in three seconds.

Why is this? Christopher Learmont-hughes

Caldy, Wirral