Consumers deserve accurate information on ISPs’ actual broadband ...

and what subscribers get. Ofcom and industry should write a mandatory code of practices, Chairman Colette Bowe told Ofcom Chief Executive Ed Richards. ISPs should have to tell prospects in plain English not only about lines’ theoretical speed, but factors that hurt it, she said. Two weeks after installation, ISPs should have to ask customers their actual line speeds, and offer a penalty-free move to another package based on that information, she said. If actual speed is substantially lower than what a consumer signed up for, the person should be able to quit the contract with no penalty, Bowe said. And broadband ads should do a better at explaining factors affecting broadband speed, she added. In response, Richards said Ofcom and ISPs are talking about specific information to be given to prospects, estimating the speed their access lines can support, and offering data early in the contract on actual rather than estimated speeds. He agreed that ISPs should let unhappy consumers move without penalty to other packages. Ofcom hasn’t ruled out regulatory action if that is needed, he said. The U.K. Internet Services Providers’ Association (ISPA) said broadband connection speeds differ widely. Speeds at adjoining residences served by the same ISP can vary due to uncontrollable factors, such as distance from the phone exchange, phone line and residence wiring quality, time of day, hardware, and how many people are on a single connection, ISPA said. Customers should talk to ISPs about real-world speeds and “never choose an ISP based on price alone,” ISPA said. Industry has only itself to blame for the “twist” it’s in over broadband speeds, said industry analyst Ovum. ISPs stress speed and price, so consumers want high speeds said analyst Michael Philpott. ISPs also muddy the issue by using a “simpler” up-to tariff plan that in theory delivers maximum possible speed on a given line but differentiates other aspects of service such as value-added offerings and service bundles, Philpott said. The Consumer Panel idea of coming clean on theoretical speeds is a good one, Philpott said, downplaying the utility of giving information on speed factors unless it involves advising customers how to improve speed. The recommendation to give users a chance to move without penalty to another package or quit a contract leaves consumers hanging, since there’s no guarantee another ISP can provide better speed, he said. Customers could be “setting themselves up for months of misery of switching from one ISP to another,” he added. A more sensible outcome would be for ISPs to adjust an unhappy customer’s tariff plan, perhaps based on bandwidth actually provided, Philpott said.