Given the document below, you have to determine if "Yes" or "No", the summary is factually consistent with the document.

Document:
NAME_1 expected BT to connect her home to a telegraph pole visible from her window at a holiday village in Corton, Suffolk. But BT Openreach quoted her a price of PS18,799 plus VAT, saying it was due to the "huge" civil engineering task of laying 400m of underground cables. NAME_2 said: "Maybe it's because I'm old, they think I'm stupid." She retired to Waterside park on the coast 18 months ago and since then has tried to get BT to install a phone line. More on this and other Suffolk stories. A neighbouring property has been linked by an overhead line to the telegraph pole on The Street, which is adjacent to the holiday park. But BT told NAME_2 it would have to dig up the road to install her landline. "[I'm told] there's no option, although a radio link or a link to another house would

Summary:
1. An 83-year-old woman has been told she will have to pay more than PS18,000 to get a phone line to her home because it would take too long to install.

Is the summary factually consistent with the document? (Yes/No)
Start your answer explicitly with "Yes" or "No", and if you answer no, explain which sentence is inconsistent and why.
 Provide two versions of response separated with exactly 6 asterisk symbols: ******.
user