dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
Search similar:


uniqs
13930
scorpido
Premium Member
join:2009-11-02
Abbotsford, BC

scorpido to dfs42

Premium Member

to dfs42

Re: Teksavvy sucks

I think to solve this whole issue Bell needs to design a system with real-time updates and should contact a dedicated number to the indie isp to confirm that the modem is online and that the circuity is proper. Get rid of this midnight crap before a repair order can be issued. The whole dsl ordering system is a joke and it costs everyone money.
lawrence171
join:2001-12-24
Canada

lawrence171 to scorpido

Member

to scorpido
said by scorpido:

I wasn't making a argument, it was a fact. My comments I am sure reflect what most customers who have had actual real issues and then do not get the refund they deserve. Your business won't go far if you blame everyone else. Even if the issue was caused by someone else on behalf of you. I order DSL service from TSI and Bell screws up the install or doesn't show up and I waste a day from work, I don't care what the name on the van is, I ordered service from TSI so TSI should take ownership of the problem and eat the cost of their contractor (in this case Bell). Insurance is a different business so apples and oranges. And with response to your "and arguments like yours is both self-fish and detrimental to customer and businesses." I don't know what kind of business your in but due to TSI blaming Bell and the customer in the first place and not eating the cost is what caused this thread in the first place..so please use your apparent great wisdom and explain to me how my comments are selfish and detrimental? This is a ever growing issue with TSI.

Drop the condescending tone.

Your argument was essentially that it is the cost of doing business, and one should not whine about it. This is where the insurance example applies - if the cost of doing business goes up, what would a business do?

Arguments like yours are detrimental because you are defending exceptionally difficult customers who drive up cost for everyone. From the looks of the conversation, TSI acted very much in good faith in their attempt to rectify the issue, and the customer has chosen to be difficult.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm

Anon

said by lawrence171:

Drop the condescending tone.

Your argument was essentially that it is the cost of doing business, and one should not whine about it. ...

Arguments like yours are detrimental because you are defending exceptionally difficult customers who drive up cost for everyone.

He isn't wrong at all. HeadSpinning even made the case.

What this is is a failure in the way winback (or other) works.

It is indeed the price of doing business and to say otherwise is wrong.

If TSI Or anyone else has a problem with it, then it's up to them to go to the CRTC and bring these charges up. Otherwise they will continue to eat the costs at the expense of us, the beloved customer.

As stated above, you would think CNOC (ie all the so-called indie's) would bring this up. But no. They are just as happy taking peoples money instead of raising the issue (people are easy to push over), and they are saying screw you we are keeping your money and giving the people the finger.

This isn't exactly pro-customer. It's anti-customer.
scorpido
Premium Member
join:2009-11-02
Abbotsford, BC

scorpido to lawrence171

Premium Member

to lawrence171
Wow you really have taken this personally. I didn't have a condescending tone and even if I did you are in no position to comment about it so keep your unneeded remarks to yourself as they only show that you take things to personally to be in this thread. If a customer is on purpose trying to cause head aches and waste time and money yeah feed them to the crows. But if a customer has a legit issue then it is the cost of business to accept responsibility and refund the customer no matter if the money will be re-coupe or not. My personal 2 cents worth is that your too close to this issue to be able to offer a valid opinion and that you should retire from posting in this thread.
The whole system needs to be revamped I think
Dunlop
join:2011-07-13

Dunlop to dfs42

Member

to dfs42
So the OP has not written anything in about a week, even longer where had had a post that was more than a sentence long.

Any particular reason outside of the inflammatory title that this thread is getting bumped?
scorpido
Premium Member
join:2009-11-02
Abbotsford, BC

scorpido

Premium Member

I'm good to let the thread die out.

Upsidedown
@utoronto.ca

Upsidedown to TSI Marc

Anon

to TSI Marc
If TSI had to dig back till 2009 to look for a reason to not refund the guy, then I'd say Teksavvy is past the point of no return in terms of customer service.

"Given its the same location, he clearly has to know that somebody will need access to the utility room", can you confirm that with a recording? Can you be 100% sure that he knows? How do you know if he remembers?

'We're not going to refund you this time for the botched install because you cancelled in the past' is not going to end well. Try using that as a defense when the CCTS complaint/ charge back comes in.

You can say what you want Marc, but when you need to attack the customer to infer that TSI didn't screw up... Well...

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to Dunlop

Anon

to Dunlop
said by Dunlop:

Any particular reason outside of the inflammatory title that this thread is getting bumped?

Two sides to the coin.

If people can only try and shut others up and show only one side, what good is a forum? Better of to create only a webpage saying TSI is god. Rest be damned.

Nothing inflammatory about it this whole thing. Actually it opened eyes on at least one key issue many don't know about. And that would be Bell winback phone-drones are actually being paid (indirectly) by the likes of TSI.

I never knew this. Did you?

Is it right?

Will TSI & CNOC allow it to continue?

Only two sets of people being hurt here. A) the TSI's out there and the beloved customer. Bell is laughing all the way to the bank in situations like this.

In regards to the person in question he can always reply back that what he said is indeed true and counter what Marc said, but hasn't. So we can let that rest. But as you have seen, there are more issues and situations which harm (and financially harm) everyone... Except for Bell.

Worth it? Yup. HeadSpinning brought something up I never thought of, and likely for others as well, which is valid. It opens eyes. But some people can't see past the tip of their nose.

A couple of things came out of this topic actually. And it's good that people know the issues on both sides.

Trying to shut it down does nothing except for hiding from it.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to Upsidedown

Premium Member

to Upsidedown
said by Upsidedown :

If TSI had to dig back till 2009 to look for a reason to not refund the guy, then I'd say Teksavvy is past the point of no return in terms of customer service.

"Given its the same location, he clearly has to know that somebody will need access to the utility room", can you confirm that with a recording? Can you be 100% sure that he knows? How do you know if he remembers?

'We're not going to refund you this time for the botched install because you cancelled in the past' is not going to end well. Try using that as a defense when the CCTS complaint/ charge back comes in.

You can say what you want Marc, but when you need to attack the customer to infer that TSI didn't screw up... Well...

Not sure where I'm inferring anything. I'm not blaming anybody. I'm flat out saying - We're being used. I see a pattern of abuse. We've already eaten losses in the past with this customer. It wasn't difficult to find.. The only reason we looked into it is because he said he had signed up with us before.

It's simple... I don't like being used. I don't think that's right. And I don't want others to get the idea that they can do that to us and get away with it.

Once bitten twice shy.

TSI Pierre
Premium Member
join:2011-09-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Pierre

Premium Member

+1
Dunlop
join:2011-07-13

Dunlop to hm

Member

to hm
said by hm :

said by Dunlop:

Any particular reason outside of the inflammatory title that this thread is getting bumped?

Two sides to the coin.

If people can only try and shut others up and show only one side, what good is a forum? Better of to create only a webpage saying TSI is god. Rest be damned.

I'm saying start a new thread with issues and not piggyback off of this one because it is fun causing drama. Nobody is asking anyone to shut up.

TSI has been extremely open with this particular thread

TOPDAWG
Premium Member
join:2005-04-27
Calgary, AB

TOPDAWG to dfs42

Premium Member

to dfs42
I don't know the OP but the idea he is using someone makes no sense to me. Maybe in the past tek was a bad experience but he hoped it changed and tried again. I've done that before.

what would he get out of using tek?
scorpido
Premium Member
join:2009-11-02
Abbotsford, BC

scorpido

Premium Member

Good question, how does the customer get any benefit from ordering then cancelling?

Upsidedown
@utoronto.ca

Upsidedown to TOPDAWG

Anon

to TOPDAWG
+1, if he cancelled AFTER the service was installed and demanded the refund, then he'd be using Tek (say, to condition his copper) and abusing the company.

Demanding refund post bad install cant be classified as abuse, its quite a leap to conclude that. Nor did Marc provide a reason for why the OP cancelled last time and thus assuming abuse is just also quite a leap. So this "pattern of abuse" doesn't really hold up.

Although, I do find Marc's strategy/approach quite interesting. Quite... Lawyer-esque...


TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc

Premium Member

Lawyer-esque?

LOL... lawyers would advise me to stay very far away from this place.

I just haven't listened to all of the calls myself yet.. this is the run down to date:

Timetable
11/1/2012 Order Placed
11/7/2012 Order Confirmed for 11/10/2012
11/8/2012 Customer called in to confirm appointment
11/10/2012 Customer calls in to advise that the Telco room is locked. Will need to be rescheduled
11/10/2012 Order Rescheduled
11/12/2012 Reschedule Confirmed for 11/13/2012
11/12/2012 Customer wants to cancel. Advised that if he cancels now, no refund
11/14/2012 Order Cancelled

waiting to confirm that the install was done on the 13th...

I just got a copy of the initial call to listen too right now but I don't have time to listen to it today.

I'm also asking my team to contact CCTS to get their opinion.

If there's something to learn here.. I'm game to chase it down. What I've seen so far and the last call from the 12th that I listened to.. tells me this is a case where a retention team from an incumbent offered an attractive deal and as a result we're on the hook for costs.. the OP called back two days later and the day prior to the install to cancel.. plus the prior history and the fact that we've already extended good will the first go around..

It's all fine to take the other deal.. we just shouldn't be on the hook for the change of mind.

MFido
Montreal
join:2012-10-19

MFido

Member

Totally agree with you Marc.

For the others who are "the forum's smarts" hiding after an anonymous name ... let them run their own business and eat the "cost of doing business" with customers changing their minds ...
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

1 edit

MaynardKrebs to hm

Premium Member

to hm
said by hm :

[

CNOC seems reactionary only. Like firemen only reacting to put out fires instead of being on the ball to prevent them. I don't think I care much for CNOC. I find them sitting on their asses doing nothing and only reacting.

Pretty much.
The CRTC is currently soliciting opinions for a cellular "code of conduct".

In a similar vein, CNOC should be WRITING their own suggested "code of conduct" for incumbents and present that to the CRTC for comments from the CRTC and incumbents. Maybe then the crap can stop.

Maybe #1 on the list should be:

1a) The instant an order comes in from an ISP to 'port' DSL service from a WTN or dry loop, the losing ISP is enjoined from soliciting the customer for 'win-back' for a period of 1 year. This includes offering discounts and inducements on any other services offered by the losing ISP.
1b) Failure of either ISP to do so results in a penalty of $x, payable to the other ISP.
1c) If the customer rescinds the port prior to installation/cutover date, the retaining ISP is responsible to all costs incurred by the ISP who has just lost the business, to a maximum of the tariffed (or otherwise) fee for installation.
1d) Accounts for all matter above are to be settled monthly on a net basis between the parties. Failure to do so will result in a 10% penalty added to the GROSS (before netting) amount payable by the offending party.
Expand your moderator at work

nothing
@videotron.ca

nothing to Upsidedown

Anon

to Upsidedown

Re: Teksavvy sucks

said by TOPDAWG:

what would he get out of using tek?

Nothing. Not even a so called "line condition". People can only pull this with Bell, as detailed here: »Re: Teksavvy sucks

This does *not* apply to cable. And this person ordered cable to my understanding.

So there is really no motive.
HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON

HeadSpinning to scorpido

Member

to scorpido
said by scorpido:

@Headspinning

With regards to yours I wouldn't provide a refund as it was clear the customer was just screwing around.

We never collected a dime from the customer. That was supposed to happen at the install.

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to MaynardKrebs

Anon

to MaynardKrebs
In addition to the post that hasn't showed yet (if it does??), something else strikes me as odd about teksavvy

If we review the link here, »Teksavvy - What the hell has happened to you guys?, where this guy was also told he wouldn't get a refund (yet they gave it to him as we read further down), a couple of distinct observations can be concluded by comparing these two situations.

A) Techsavvy does not treat people equally. Someone sits ther and actually says no soup for you, even if the situations are exactly the same.

B) If the person in the referenced link ever decides to once again try techsavvy a few years down the road, it seems techsavvy keeps a "black list" file on you and if the same situation occurs, they won't give your money back.

C) It has become very evident that unless you call billing (to be seen yet), or post a bad review, or make a topic that causes fanbois to bunch their panties, Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's) at techsavvy is to deny a refund across the board, with only certain people authorized to even say you can get your money back. This would appear to be a couple of the TSI employee's who work the forums and maybe (we don't know yet) billing.

I'm curious if TSI billing has also refused people a refund so we can draw a clear line here.

Kind of strange that TSI keep a sort of black list on people and keeps information on people who never had the service (or keeps certain information like this after 6 months to a year).

Some very strange things are showing here.
Expand your moderator at work

TSI Pierre
Premium Member
join:2011-09-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Pierre to hm

Premium Member

to hm

Re: Teksavvy sucks

A) Situation was not exactly the same, the Tech did show up to the residence, the problem is there was no access to the telco room.

B) Customer did the exact same thing in the past... why? what's the reason to sign up and then cancel a week later? what's the motive?

C) We do ask that you let us trouble shoot your connection and see if we can get you up and running. We have costs and we have deadlines as well as to when we can cancel and not get charged. We simply try and be fair...
epsilon3
join:2008-03-29
canada

epsilon3 to hm

Member

to hm
said by hm :

In addition to the post that hasn't showed yet (if it does??), something else strikes me as odd about teksavvy

If we review the link here, »Teksavvy - What the hell has happened to you guys?, where this guy was also told he wouldn't get a refund (yet they gave it to him as we read further down), a couple of distinct observations can be concluded by comparing these two situations.

A) Techsavvy does not treat people equally. Someone sits ther and actually says no soup for you, even if the situations are exactly the same.

People are not equal! Is this news to you?
said by hm :

B) If the person in the referenced link ever decides to once again try techsavvy a few years down the road, it seems techsavvy keeps a "black list" file on you and if the same situation occurs, they won't give your money back.

The person who opened the other post is an idiot!
said by hm :

C) It has become very evident that unless you call billing (to be seen yet), or post a bad review, or make a topic that causes fanbois to bunch their panties, Standard Operating Procedures (SOP's) at techsavvy is to deny a refund across the board, with only certain people authorized to even say you can get your money back. This would appear to be a couple of the TSI employee's who work the forums and maybe (we don't know yet) billing.

I'm curious if TSI billing has also refused people a refund so we can draw a clear line here.

Kind of strange that TSI keep a sort of black list on people and keeps information on people who never had the service (or keeps certain information like this after 6 months to a year).

Some very strange things are showing here.

What is strange here are people like you hiding after an anonymous name trying to be smart ... without too much success ...
Expand your moderator at work

hm
@videotron.ca

hm to TSI Pierre

Anon

to TSI Pierre

Re: Teksavvy sucks

said by TSI Pierre:

A) Situation was not exactly the same, the Tech did show up to the residence, the problem is there was no access to the telco room.

How is it different between the two?

1. In this instance tech went, but person not informed of the access needed to the locked wire/telco room. Customer stayed home for nothing. As detailed in the call tickets posted by Marc.

In the other instance, No-Show tech. No one bothered to call him to say oops, "order is stuck in the system". Whatever that is supposed to mean.

Bottom line:

While the scenario is a bit different, the result is the same. 2 people wasted their day. 2 people w/o service.
said by TSI Pierre:

B) Customer did the exact same thing in the past... why? what's the reason to sign up and then cancel a week later? what's the motive?

In this case, yes the customer ordered 2 years ago in the past and cancelled, as stated by Marc. But why did he cancel back then? Was it a no-show tech? Motive? No service, credit card charged.

In the other instance, customer cancels because the tech never showed up. No one bothers to follow up or inform the person of anything. No service, credit card charged.

Now this leads to the obvious, 2 years from now if this same person from the other refund topic decides to give teksavvy another shot and he is greeted with the same type service, will Marc turn around 2 years later and say, "we have on file on you that you ordered from us 2 years ago and cancelled. And even though we gave you a refund this time we are not because this is a trend with you.

Would be quite the jaw dropper, eh?

However, this is what happened here.

Basically, Marc, just told everyone if we fail to deliver and you cancel we keep a black list on you as a trouble-maker. PLus we won't refund you, plus we will charge you another thing to stick a knife in your back, a restocking fee (as seen).

So why on earth would the person in the other topic ever have faith and be secure in his judgement about trying you again down the road? Seems you are telling people if you leave us because of a service failure and we refunded you, don't ever come back to us because it won't be pretty with the next service failure.
said by TSI Pierre:

C) We do ask that you let us trouble shoot your connection and see if we can get you up and running. We have costs and we have deadlines as well as to when we can cancel and not get charged. We simply try and be fair...

In this topic there was no connection to trouble-shoot. He didn't have service. Period. This is something to trouble-shoot internally.

In the other topic, again there is no connection to trouble-shoot. He didn't have service. Period. This is something to trouble-shoot internally.

You seem to be forgetting that people who take a day off work have costs just like you do. Are you being fair? You are more or less saying people should take another day off work so you can try and get it right the second time around, but there is no guarantee of you getting it right. The same thing can occur.

Now back to the Teksavvy "black list" you are keeping on people and the word fair that you used. How fair is that when 2 years down the road someone gives you another shot only to get the same type service then be told it happened twice so you are a trouble-maker.

Should I keep a black list on teksavvy and say, "oh, two of your customers had no-show techs in 2 years. This is a trend and it shows something about you and your bad faith." How fair does that sound? Pretty weird, eh. But that's what you are doing.

The other person in the other topic... you should make him aware of what he can experience two years from now and how he can be "labelled" by TSI, and how you will not only charge him but also ding him for a restocking fee. Sound fair? I think it does considering it happened here. People should be aware this can happen to them in the future for trying teksavvy. I mean, you do treat all customers equally don't you? This topic clearly indicates you label people though... Especially those who didn't have a good experience and who are vocal about it.
HeadSpinning
MNSi Internet
join:2005-05-29
Windsor, ON

HeadSpinning

Member

said by hm :


In the other instance, No-Show tech. No one bothered to call him to say oops, "order is stuck in the system". Whatever that is supposed to mean.

Bell has multiple systems, and sometimes the orders don't flow from one to another for various reasons.

Pain in the ass sometimes. Not an excuse - a bit of background info.

HiVolt
Premium Member
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON

HiVolt to TSI Pierre

Premium Member

to TSI Pierre
said by TSI Pierre:

A) Situation was not exactly the same, the Tech did show up to the residence, the problem is there was no access to the telco room.

Speaking of that... Not this particular instance, but in general, I'd like to know what Bell does for their own customers in such situation...

Does the tech attempt to reach anyone in the building, ie the super or management, or do they have a key?

I have a hard time believing that Bell would ask their new or existing customers to make arrangement with the building super or manager for a technician to have access to the telco room...

So are they only doing this to inconvenience independents?
MaynardKrebs
We did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17

MaynardKrebs

Premium Member

HiVolt,

Post that question in the Bell forum and let's see what the answers are.

TSI Marc
Premium Member
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON

TSI Marc to HiVolt

Premium Member

to HiVolt
they have to have the building owner let them in just the same... it's private property...