I have been going over this SFI2 issue somewhat and I think I see the flaw in the process. I hope this helps you, and I would be interested in your comments. When we report a broadband issue, having eliminated end user wiring and equipment and checked dial tone, BT do various tests, including checking the metallic path is OK to SIN349 from the exchange end. I understand you have some pretty comprehensive testing systems for this. If the metallic path is not OK, we can arrange an engineer and there is generally no issue with charges. This is not a problem. However, if you do not find any issue with the metallic path, the next step is that you offer us an SFI2 visit. You do not let us take any other action at that point in the fault process. This is the step that is broken! An SFI2 visit is simply to test/ensure a line meets SIN349 - something the exchange tests have already done pretty reliably. It is totally pointless, and severely uneconomical, for us to repeat the tests already done for this from the exchange. So, from now on, we'll be happy to accept BT's diagnostics and agree that the metallic path meets SIN349. What we need to know is what happens next? An SFI2 is clearly pointless as we both agree the SIN349 test would pass, so what is the next step in resolving a broadband fault within the SLG when it is not caused by a failure of the metallic path to meet SIN349? And, specifically, how do we get your fault reporting past the insistence on booking a pointless SFI2 visit at that point? We have a policy now of never disagreeing your SIN349 exchange test and so not booking any SFI2 engineers. So I need to know the next process step please, as a matter of urgency. After all, BT have put a time limit on fixing faults (the SLG) and we want to ensure we do our part to ensuring we follow the process to get the broadband service fixed. So, what comes after/instead of an SFI2 visit when a line meets SIN349 please? I look forward to your prompt reply.