dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
uniqs
8

MFido
Montreal
join:2012-10-19

MFido to scorpido

Member

to scorpido

Re: Teksavvy sucks

said by scorpido:

If you can't handle the costs associated to having a contract-less service provided via a third parties infrastructure then maybe you should really be looking at deploying your own infrastructure.

You think you are smart, eh?

Teksavvy should NOT give credits for all people changing their minds each other day ...

If you are tired by the IISP ... go with Rogers and Bell and enjoy their oligopoly ...
scorpido
Premium Member
join:2009-11-02
Abbotsford, BC

scorpido

Premium Member

@lawrence171

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.

@Headspinning

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

scorpido to MFido

Premium Member

to MFido
Changing of their minds is a different story, I agree that TSI shouldn't provide a refund if the customer changed his mind. But if the install experience is such a screw up by Bell or Rogers that the customer changes their mind then yes TSI should eat that cost and try to get it back from Bell or Rogers for screwing up the install. It's part of taking ownership for your customers. Again, I ordered service from TSI, it doesn't matter what the name on the van says. If the install is screwed up then it is TSI issue. If it was a bell or rogers issue then we would call them. Also known as contractor ownership. If a contractor is there on your behalf, your responsible for any issues and trying to get any money out of the contractor after giving you customer compensation for whatever the issue is. My god is this what customer service is come down to? Such a sad state of affairs when everyone tries to pass the buck.
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
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.