Broadband service check is inaccurate

[KB88]

Despite having known issues and Internet being down, the service checker claimed to be good service with 152mp/s. Through 4 independent checking services, we did not have more than 37mb/s. Can't speak to anyone as it advises me to use the checker... which is just not correct at all. Poor poor poor service , had nothing but issues with sky broadband since joining and it's almost impossible to work from home with it. Anyone had better luck with buying some decent quality hub instead if the standard issue sky one? Never had these issues with BT and we've since upgraded to fibre which ironically, we've had issues with since day 1

[HiHowAreYa]

Stop using mobile phones WiFi to do speed tests. Always use a ethernet cable connected to a computer for testing.

[KB88]

I did both, and both measured significantly lower than expected service. Mobile can measure the level of wireless connection from one device from a the router and wired measured delivery from router to devices. Both have their merit and when both are the same it is often a more conclusive review of the service provided 

[TimmyBGood]

---

@KB88 wrote:
 Anyone had better luck with buying some decent quality hub instead if the standard issue sky one? 

---

A third party router may help with WiFi coverage, but shouldn't make any difference to speed delivered to the address, particularly over FTTP.

[HiHowAreYa]

The service checker tests the speed from sky, to the sky hub. As you stated the result says 152mbs.

Your test results are on WiFi using mobile phone. Your results are 36mbs. So it's showing big drop testing using your method instead of using a cat5e or above ethernet connection to a computer.

Your results are in accurate/ false

[KB88]

I might be inclined to believe you however... all our devices are currently not working with wireless due to poor connection. Reset router, devices, the lot. Nothing. So clearly not getting 151mb/s, so in fact it is not accurate otherwise I'd be having normal function. So forgive me if the other means of testing reflects the level of service I'm getting and forces me to be sceptical of the method sky themselves have delivered.. I mean why would they lie... oh wait. 

Spoke with sky who said they only guarantee 10mb/s over wifi and only 151 is to be expected with ethernet cable only. 

[Mark325]

I have been told by sky the service they provide cannot be check by the Internet speed checkers as the service is more complex! I pay for 900mbps and get 480 to 550 on average, when I querried how much it would cost the leave early, they suggested I drop to a lesser service level but due to current pricing levels I would have to pay an extra £20 a month to drop to 500mbps.

Can you belive the crap sky are spouting, a rubbish service with honesty standards akin to the the labour government.

[RGT]

I am having a similar problem.
Just upgraded from BT FF150 to Sky FF500. At BT I consistently got 130MBps (at my laptop) so I was naively expecting at least 3 times better than that with the faster service and saw that the guarantee was 400Mbps (at the router).
The first issue is that the laptop won't connect to the Pod any more after we went away for a few days, so my speeds are averaging less than 300Mbps, but another big issue is the speeds to the router. Often it is very fast, but occasionally it is below 400 - this is measured using Sky's Health check on either the MySky app or MySky in a browser. Whenever this happens I screenshot it so I have documentary evidence.
On the 12th August I spent 2 hours doing a speedtest on my phone, then a healthcheck, then a speedtest on my laptop, recording all the results. Along the way I rebooted theHub and also the Pod to try to force the laptop to reconnect to the Pod and also tried to change the laptop security to WPA2 without success as I think that's what the engineer did to force it to connect before ew went away. Didn't work though.

During the 2 hour test all the other devices were paused (except those connecting to my Solar system and Powerwall that use very little bandwidth) to stop any possible interference. I managed 16 tests,  of which 5 failed because the healthcheck service test was "unavailable" [1]. Of the others, one reached a speed of over 500Mbps and another 370 with the average being 450. I ws interested to see though what the 20 day history would show, but Sky still shows no data for the 12th at all. There was another period where I did multiple healthchecks and have screenshots of results but the history shows no record for the day.

Are all the healthcheck results I do (on whichever device) recorded, or should they be ?  Is that what should happen, or something else ?

If Sky are deciding what to record it is very easy to be sceptical of their history if I want to make sure they are meeting their guarantee of never less than 400Mbps for 3 consecutive days.

[1] Why is this unavailable so often ? A cynical mind would conclude that it gets past stage 3, sees the speed is poor and then "fails" the test without telling you.

[JimM1]

@RGT Sky does ONE check per day to the Hub and records that result and depending on the hub you have from sky it can be seen as a TR69 entry in the log file, and always at the same time whatever it is in the log! Its easy to see throygh the web interface on the Sky Broadband Hub SR203 and earlier sky Q hub, sky Max no idea how or where you could get to it!

Missing day on the sky log does happen from time to time, its a one off those things! Cynical or not, three missing day's then zero each day!

[RGT]

Hi Jim, thanks for the explanation of 1 of the ?s in my post.
Seems a bit odd to only do ONE test per day, but I guess with a lot of customers....
It's not missing things from time to time though - since the 21st July it's missed 25th and 26th of July and the 2/3/10/11/12/13 and 16th of August !
Not many opportunities to have 3 consecutive days less than 400Mbps to fail the guarantee !!!
In a 20 day period there should be 18 3-day spans, in the data I have there are only 9.
Cheers   Roger