Got no signal? Phone networks called out over poor coverage

Mobile data provided by operators is misleading customers, warn MPs

- Jon Ungoed-Thomas

In the village of Peaslake in the heart of the Surrey Hills, ramblers and cyclists can often be seen shaking their heads and walking in circles, with their mobile phones held aloft.

"It's a dead zone," said Andrea Fry, who works in the village store. "You get walkers who can't make calls or use their maps. The whole area is awful for reception."

If people look at official maps of their mobile coverage provided by Ofcom, the communications regulator, and the network operators, the signal for the area looks pretty good. But experience tells the true story.

The Observer has seen evidence that the data provided by phone operators and cited by Ofcom as the "most comprehensive tool available to customers and businesses to check mobile coverage" is often inaccurate. Ministers have warned the regulator that millions of people who use the maps to inform decisions about which provider to use when moving house, for example, are being misled.

The coverage in nearby Cranleigh, one of the biggest villages in England, is so poor it has been raised in parliament by local MP and former chancellor Jeremy Hunt. Sarkant Karim, who owns a barber shop on Cranleigh high street, said: "It doesn't matter what network you have, the reception is rubbish. It's bad for business."