uSwitch.com Broadband News

Kent village named UK's worst broadband blackspot

News

Posted at 9:40am by

Person using mobile broadband at home

The Kent village of Farningham has the UK’s worst broadband service, with average connection speeds of 1.3Mb, a study of the most poorly served areas has revealed.

Broadband speeds in the parish are so slow that it would take 45 minutes to download a music album. Downloading a movie would take 12 hours.

Not far behind Faringham in the technology slow lane are the Scottish Borders town Duns and Harbury in Warwickshire, where average speeds are 1.43 Mb and 1.51Mb respectively.

Perhaps not surprisingly, rural locations such as these dominated further down the list, once again highlight the digital divide between better served cities and worse-off areas with low population density.

Among the worst 20 places for broadband, Worcester is the sole city, with an average connection speed of 2.01Mb.

A gap in service standards was also noted between the north and south of the UK. Farningham and Holsworthy are the sole locations south of London to figure in the list.

Conversely, the midlands county of Lincolnshire is home to three broadband blackspots, namely Brigg (1.71Mb), Ancaster (1.88Mb) and Grantham (1.97Mb). Meanwhile, provision in Scottish villages is especially bad, with Stevenston (1.76Mb), Dunoon (1.90Mb) and Banchory (1.95Mb) making the list.

The findings are based on 98,000 speed tests conducted between August and October 2010.

A full breakdown of the study's findings is available here

More news on: Broadband speeds, Broadband coverage

15 comments

  • @Woandy, 16th November 2010, via Twitter.

    Kent village named UK's worst broadband blackspot http://bit.ly/bUEdhs

  • Johnstone, 16th November 2010.

    The village of Paley Street, near Maidenhead, only gets 0.5Mb

    Reply
  • Simon Irwin, 16th November 2010.

    Just read the article above, I live in Magheramorne outside Larne in Co.Antrim and my speed is 960kbps if I'm lucky

    Reply
  • CJ Montgomery, 17th November 2010.

    Your sham of a survey obviously missed the village of Scarfskerry. We're lucky if I can maintain 300 Kbps. Yeh that's right 0.3 Mbps.
    Farningham's broadband is FOUR TIMES FASTER THAN OURS IS!

    Reply
  • Michael Brown, 17th November 2010.

    Think you are well off the mark with the village in kent.Talacre in Flintshire has ave connection speeds of 445.kbs download.Thats on a good day..It's normally about 222kbs down and 448 up

    Reply
  • Ron Macdonald, 17th November 2010.

    Cardrona village in the Scottish Borders - not far from Duns -has a download speed of 0.5Mb and despite valiant attempts by MP's, Councillors and village residents there is no immediate or even short term plan to improve this!

    It seems that BT is now duplicating fibre optic provision in high density populations in the UK. Surely it would be better to cover areas which are not already provided for and so offer broadband to a greater number of users.

    Reply
  • Godfrey Solomon, 17th November 2010.

    I'm happy to see Farningham's slow broadband claim and don't wish to steal their cudos, as I was born nearby: However, here in Sicklinghall, North Yorkshire we average around a third of their speed at around .45mbps.

    Reply
  • Warren Lightfoot, 17th November 2010.

    You might want to consider Lydden in Kent, near Dover the best speed we can get in the village is 0.5Mb if you are very lucky you may get 0.8!

    Reply
  • R Boyes, 17th November 2010.

    I appreciate that you cannot test every line for such a survey. However, for 18 months leading to October 2010 I was only achieving 250kb/s (Leconfield exchange, East Yorkshire). I repeatedly reported this to TalkTalk who initially said it was my internal wiring.

    After extensive tests they agreed it was the line from the exchange. BT tested the line and said 250kb/s was all it could carry. I actually left TalkTalk and went back to BT. I am now getting on average about 1.2Mb/s. Better but still dreadful. I think you should have a look at this.

    Reply
  • Alex, 17th November 2010.

    Can we have a bit more information about how the speeds were measured? Did the data come from your own speed checker or is it made up of theoretical speeds from the suppliers' pre-order "see what speed you might be able to get" checks?

    BT's one reckons I could get 14Mb but I can tell you they would certainly say something else if I gave them a call and it would be that have to stay on 2Mb.

    According to your survey there are two people in my village on 6Mb which is almost certainly not true due to the "broadband down fibre" (not cable) nature of our connections.

    Reply
  • Simon Cock, 17th November 2010.

    I live in Great Rollright, north Oxfordshire and suggest that we here have a much slower broadband speed than Framingham. I've just run a test and recorded a download speed of 741 kbps and an upload speed of 372 kbps. I obviously have to use a BT copper wire connection!

    Reply
  • Mike D, 19th November 2010.

    1.3Mb - luxury! - oh, I dream of 1.3Mb in my village (and so do most of the other Affetside residents too). The best I seem to get is about 900Kb on a good day. We have now given up complaining to BT. We are rural though, so we have to accept that urban centres will always get better services whether it is broadband or anything else.

    If I may suggest that the study used is not as comprehensive as it could be.

    Reply
  • Nigel W, 24th November 2010.

    1.3Mbs is superfast!! We routinely get 0.2 - 0.3Mbs in Stanton Harcourt, Oxon (Eynsham exchange)

    Reply
  • Ian F, 25th November 2010.

    My village of West Hougham is lucky to exceed 500kbps and a recent check (by BT) gave download speed of105kbps

    Reply
  • Sherry A, 12th October 2011.

    BT copper wire connection 0.5 Mbs in Carlton Colville, Lowestoft Suffolk!!!!

    Reply

Add your comment