Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
screening and low level call handling??  the virus team was mentioned earlier - that was screening. you have NO IDEA how many irate customers we had, when we told them "no, sorry, this isnt tech support, we are just doing a few checks on your pc, then well pass you onto ANOTHER call q to get your problem fixed".....trust me, ive been there - that screening idea does not work |
That was specific to a problem, which I have to say ntl didn't handle terribly well in the initial stages. This is irrelivant to the bigger picture.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
also, make your mind up  earlier you said that the local franchises should do the tech support - tho they are only really customer services. so they would become a jack of all trades - hardly "grouped by area of expertise". i agree with you - people are more focused that way - hence tech support is all grouped together in swansea. |
You have misunderstood what I said. Local network related tech support should be handled on a local basis. Centralised incedent related tech support should be grouped.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
very true, but this thread is about q times. the point i was trying to make is that whilst the customer undoubtedly has a problem, they are often able to fix themselves if they just tired. if they did that, they would fix the problem, they wouldnt have to call us, the call q's would drop.
|
Yes it is about queue times, but the two are linked. Becuase ntl's service is so appalling at such regular intervals, the costs that your customers have to endure are unacceptable. If I could get through instantly at any time, I doubt anyone would be saying that they object to the costs of a local call. But this is in the perfect world, and I have to say that bar a couple of occasions you and your colleagues have not got to my call in any period less than 45 minutes. Like I said before, this is unacceptable. I don't blame you for this personally, I blame the system. The system doesn't work. The system needs to change. If you don't think tried and tested systems like I have suggested work, then why don't you come up with a better one?
I'm sick and tired of hearing the same negativity, but I never hear any suggestions from the people who claim to know thatg all this stuff 'won't work' never telling me what would work.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
I KNOW you will get reimbursed for network problems - but i cant really see how you can take offence at them taking money out of your account if you refuse to tell them you have had a problem with your service??
|
Yes I know I would too, if I wanted to. Like I said before, it's not worth the hassle. I've tried it, it's a hassle, it's my decision to not have any more ntl induced stress in my life.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
I SHUDDER to think of the average customers response if we turned around and said "yea, we can fix that, but it'll cost ya".
|
Other much more successful organisations operate on such a model. Why do you think they are much more successful?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mark W
at the moment we will do all we can to get that customer back online, or improve his service. even if its because they thought they were bill gates and played with the settings of their pc or done something themselves to knacker their connection. often that means an overhaul of most of the settings in their pc. all for a local rate call. i personally dont think thats extortion......
|
And again, I'll say this is why a pay per incedent service is a better idea for pc related or setting related issues. If I started twiddling my settings and couldn't get on the net as a result, I'd be quite happy to cough up a few quid to know I could get it fixed.
Right now, I have cough up a few quid, waste an hour of my life just to be told that there's nothing can be done anyway!
You see my point?