Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Do you think this is too harsh?

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 3:34:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
draft...

Just a note: I've left names and employee IDs out of the version I'm
posting. No need to smear these people on a permanent Internet archive, I
don't guess...

Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],



I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often appear
to be made up as they go along by same).



On August 23, 2004 I visited your Sprint store in [x]. For the second time,
I was issued an LG-1200 phone that was defective. The first one was replaced
without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I was
assisted by an overweight woman who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to be
able to give a name. I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the obvious:
the phone didn't vibrate. It also froze in screen-saver mode and could only
be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though the
phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
"user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
re-created.



But the problem was clearly being caused by me.



I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your call
center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke to
[x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the Sprint
store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
"assisted" me there. I was offended. I was spoken to like I was an imbecile
by the personnel at that store and was denied a replacement for my phone on
the grounds that the phone was likely not the problem. After stating my
intention to leave Sprint PCS at the end of my contract in October if the
issue was not resolved to my satisfaction, [x] placed me on hold
interminably and then came back with the following offer:



[x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone as
there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it. When
the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated and
activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number and
would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my account
that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do. I don't
necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first language
is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place. I'm
certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change the
fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if you
don't investigate this, shame on you.



When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone number
and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third line
on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this out
during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your call
center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new phone
was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
early termination charge. Tell me, are you familiar with the term "Slamming"
? Well, as someone who has worked for a telephone provider, I am very
familiar with the term. My state Attorney General's office is as well. They
have asked me to make every effort to solve this problem amicably, which I
have done.



My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my position;
she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had no
intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She has
proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of someone
with a little less ice water running through his or her veins. I had asked
to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
further. From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand why.
In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
character. She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much less
proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you want
someone like that representing you?





I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual, had
she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
resolution. I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG and
the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada, identified
only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather than
offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the process,
she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
back to Square One. You can tell me "That's policy," until you're blue in
the face. Such policies stink. And this situation has begun to stink so bad
it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this virtual
poisoned pen. But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.



Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked [x] to
review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
told me to call back after twelve hours.



TWELVE HOURS.



The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already spent
almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would take
that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
complex conundrum.



Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
"P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who also
was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of professionalism
which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I have
no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two weeks
in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.



In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience of
dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity in
the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be attributed
to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions to
even the simplest of problems. I find your company name to be rather ironic.
It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll follow
its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.







Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,



Shadow

More about : harsh

Anonymous
August 30, 2004 3:34:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Shadow wrote:

> Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
> get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
> service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> draft...

I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word "overweight" as
it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think it's a
well-worded, rational letter. Send it!

I'm sorry you've had so much trouble with Sprint...


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 5:24:42 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in
news:cgttjg$ecm$2@ratbert.glorb.com:

> I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
> "overweight"

.....and replace it with "fat bitch."
Related resources
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 5:55:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Neon Knight wrote:
> Steve Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in
> news:cgttjg$ecm$2@ratbert.glorb.com:
>
>
>>I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
>>"overweight"
>
>
> ....and replace it with "fat bitch."
"stupid fat bitch"... I agree... drop the "overweight"...
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 7:13:48 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:cgttjg$ecm$2@ratbert.glorb.com...
> Shadow wrote:
>
> > Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
finally
> > get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
customer
> > service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> > draft...
>
> I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word "overweight"
as
> it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think it's
a
> well-worded, rational letter. Send it!

I figured it was the only thing that would single her out since she was the
only overweight one in the bunch. But yeah, it might seem a bit pejorative
in context. Thanks for the input.
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 7:13:49 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

filing a complaint with your state's attorney general wouldn't take very
long and that might provoke some response. I know I always get an official
signed response from companies I have complained about. Sometimes it is
even drafted from their legal department.

Captainkrunch


"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MXwYc.338442$%_6.183364@attbi_s01...
>
> "Steve Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
> news:cgttjg$ecm$2@ratbert.glorb.com...
> > Shadow wrote:
> >
> > > Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
> finally
> > > get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
> customer
> > > service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> > > draft...
> >
> > I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
"overweight"
> as
> > it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think
it's
> a
> > well-worded, rational letter. Send it!
>
> I figured it was the only thing that would single her out since she was
the
> only overweight one in the bunch. But yeah, it might seem a bit pejorative
> in context. Thanks for the input.
>
>
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 11:12:46 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04>...
> Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
> get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
> service. Do you think it's too harsh?

No. You hit on the important issues: inconsistency, rudeness, hassle
(long hold times, having to call back multiple times), general lack of
accountability for getting the job done, surprise increases in your
phone bill. Like the others I think "big" or "large" would identify
the individual about as well as the perjorative "overweight."

I found that bringing in the Better Business Bureau seems to help in
getting the attention of Sprint management. Haven't tried using the
state Attorney General's office, which may be even more useful.

Why are you still a customer? Are you locked into a contract?


Don Doumakes
Email: doumakes at loganet.net (do not mail spamtrap@pinko.net)
My own Sprint PCS story: http://www.loganet.net/~doumakes/sprint.html
Anonymous
August 30, 2004 8:06:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

> Why are you still a customer? Are you locked into a contract?

Yeah, but the contract is up in October and T-Mobile has already offered me
the same rate with 2 free Samsung phones. I know the local management and
they say they'll look forward to hearing from me in November.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 8:42:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
news:yvJYc.11137$Ae4.3165@fe35.usenetserver.com...
> You asked for a critique,

No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
for your input now shaddap.
Anonymous
August 31, 2004 6:16:32 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message news:tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01...
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> news:yvJYc.11137$Ae4.3165@fe35.usenetserver.com...
>> You asked for a critique,
>
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.
>
>
A commendable effort by Isaiah, spurned by a potential beneficiary. :-\
Anonymous
September 1, 2004 3:50:45 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

You called her overweight so that narrows it down.

But calling her a bitch could mean any of thousands of employees of
SPRINT.
Anonymous
September 1, 2004 4:38:27 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message news:tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01...
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> news:yvJYc.11137$Ae4.3165@fe35.usenetserver.com...
>> You asked for a critique,
>
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.

Isaiah took a lot of time to provide you with well-thought-out comments.
I assure you that if you incorporated his suggestions, it would improve
the effectiveness of your letter 100%.

--

John Richards
Anonymous
September 1, 2004 4:32:13 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01>,
"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> writes:
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> news:yvJYc.11137$Ae4.3165@fe35.usenetserver.com...
>> You asked for a critique,
>
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.

You *asked* for comment. Isaiah took the time to read your proposed
missive completely *and* comment on it in detail. I don't agree with
some of his comments but, had it been me asking for the input, I
would have appreciated the effort nonetheless.

Given one of your comments in your initial post ("ya shoulda read the
first draft"), coupled with your reaction to Isaiah's feedback, I'm
now kinda wondering how much of your problems with SPCS haven't been
of your own making.

Btw: I thought it was pretty good, over-all. Needed to lose the
"overweight" comment, but, to my eye, that was the only glaring
deficiency. You are ticked-off at SPCS, and perhaps reasonably so
(given the caveat I mention above) and are not out-of-line for
expressing, to some degree, the depth and breadth of your disgust.

I would make one recommendation: Lose the part that implies they've
lost you as a customer. That will almost certainly cause the reader
to immediately lose interest. Yes, in a Perfect World, a responsible
manager or executive would want to know about your travails and why
you're abandoning them. In the Real World it's usually all about
"saving" the customer. If they believe the customer is a lost cause,
a vendor will almost certainly think "Next!" and wash their hands of
it.

--
Jim Seymour | PGP Public Key available at:
| http://www.uk.pgp.net/pgpnet/pks-commands.html
|
| http://jimsun.LinxNet.com
Anonymous
September 8, 2004 8:53:46 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

In article <tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01>, snape-like-
meREMOVE@comcast.net says...
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message
> news:yvJYc.11137$Ae4.3165@fe35.usenetserver.com...
> > You asked for a critique,
>
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.
>

Anal retentive and pedantic? Someone offers you up a well-thought-out
critique intended to help you get the satisfaction you feel you deserve,
and you think that deserves to be insulted?

As Bob Smith pointed out, you've revealed a lot of weight to the
presumption that you did a whole lot more than you admit in order to get
threatened with police action to get removed from a store.

I wish you luck. As Isaiah accurately pointed out, you're going to need
it with this kind of attitude.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
"A thing moderately good is not so good
as it ought to be. Moderation in temper
is always a virtue, but moderation in
principle is always a vice."

Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 8:33:31 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Shadow,

I know this response is few weeks past your post, but it sounds as though
you have been dealing with my AT&T reps! I recently sent a very similar
letter to AT&T.

If you do "sprint" to another carrier, run away from AT&T, unless you like
pain.

Gregg Hill


"Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04...
> Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
> finally
> get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
> customer
> service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> draft...
>
> Just a note: I've left names and employee IDs out of the version I'm
> posting. No need to smear these people on a permanent Internet archive, I
> don't guess...
>
> Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],
>
>
>
> I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
> personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
> employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often appear
> to be made up as they go along by same).
>
>
>
> On August 23, 2004 I visited your Sprint store in [x]. For the second
> time,
> I was issued an LG-1200 phone that was defective. The first one was
> replaced
> without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I
> was
> assisted by an overweight woman who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
> procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to be
> able to give a name. I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
> wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the obvious:
> the phone didn't vibrate. It also froze in screen-saver mode and could
> only
> be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
> back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though the
> phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
> "user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
> re-created.
>
>
>
> But the problem was clearly being caused by me.
>
>
>
> I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your call
> center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke
> to
> [x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the Sprint
> store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
> citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
> "assisted" me there. I was offended. I was spoken to like I was an
> imbecile
> by the personnel at that store and was denied a replacement for my phone
> on
> the grounds that the phone was likely not the problem. After stating my
> intention to leave Sprint PCS at the end of my contract in October if the
> issue was not resolved to my satisfaction, [x] placed me on hold
> interminably and then came back with the following offer:
>
>
>
> [x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone as
> there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it.
> When
> the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated and
> activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number
> and
> would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my
> account
> that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do. I don't
> necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first
> language
> is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place.
> I'm
> certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change the
> fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if you
> don't investigate this, shame on you.
>
>
>
> When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone number
> and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third
> line
> on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this out
> during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your call
> center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new
> phone
> was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
> early termination charge. Tell me, are you familiar with the term
> "Slamming"
> ? Well, as someone who has worked for a telephone provider, I am very
> familiar with the term. My state Attorney General's office is as well.
> They
> have asked me to make every effort to solve this problem amicably, which I
> have done.
>
>
>
> My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my
> position;
> she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had no
> intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She has
> proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
> illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
> exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
> nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
> subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
> mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of someone
> with a little less ice water running through his or her veins. I had asked
> to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
> further. From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand
> why.
> In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
> encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
> character. She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much
> less
> proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you want
> someone like that representing you?
>
>
>
>
>
> I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual,
> had
> she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
> resolution. I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
> had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG and
> the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
> person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada, identified
> only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
> they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather
> than
> offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the process,
> she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
> back to Square One. You can tell me "That's policy," until you're blue in
> the face. Such policies stink. And this situation has begun to stink so
> bad
> it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this virtual
> poisoned pen. But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.
>
>
>
> Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked [x]
> to
> review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
> told me to call back after twelve hours.
>
>
>
> TWELVE HOURS.
>
>
>
> The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already spent
> almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would take
> that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
> remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
> sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
> complex conundrum.
>
>
>
> Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
> privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
> "P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who also
> was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of
> professionalism
> which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I
> have
> no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
> confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two
> weeks
> in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.
>
>
>
> In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience of
> dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
> several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
> simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
> communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity in
> the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be attributed
> to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
> personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions to
> even the simplest of problems. I find your company name to be rather
> ironic.
> It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll
> follow
> its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
> forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,
>
>
>
> Shadow
>
>
Anonymous
September 13, 2004 6:59:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.sprintpcs (More info?)

Agreed... AT&T is the WORST...

Gregg Hill wrote:

> Shadow,
>
> I know this response is few weeks past your post, but it sounds as though
> you have been dealing with my AT&T reps! I recently sent a very similar
> letter to AT&T.
>
> If you do "sprint" to another carrier, run away from AT&T, unless you like
> pain.
>
> Gregg Hill
>
>
> "Shadow" <snape-like-meREMOVE@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04...
>
>>Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
>>finally
>>get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
>>customer
>>service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
>>draft...
>>
>>Just a note: I've left names and employee IDs out of the version I'm
>>posting. No need to smear these people on a permanent Internet archive, I
>>don't guess...
>>
>>Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],
>>
>>
>>
>>I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
>>personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
>>employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often appear
>>to be made up as they go along by same).
>>
>>
>>
>>On August 23, 2004 I visited your Sprint store in [x]. For the second
>>time,
>>I was issued an LG-1200 phone that was defective. The first one was
>>replaced
>>without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I
>>was
>>assisted by an overweight woman who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
>>procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to be
>>able to give a name. I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
>>wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the obvious:
>>the phone didn't vibrate. It also froze in screen-saver mode and could
>>only
>>be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
>>back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though the
>>phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
>>"user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
>>re-created.
>>
>>
>>
>>But the problem was clearly being caused by me.
>>
>>
>>
>>I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your call
>>center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke
>>to
>>[x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the Sprint
>>store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
>>citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
>>"assisted" me there. I was offended. I was spoken to like I was an
>>imbecile
>>by the personnel at that store and was denied a replacement for my phone
>>on
>>the grounds that the phone was likely not the problem. After stating my
>>intention to leave Sprint PCS at the end of my contract in October if the
>>issue was not resolved to my satisfaction, [x] placed me on hold
>>interminably and then came back with the following offer:
>>
>>
>>
>>[x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone as
>>there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it.
>>When
>>the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated and
>>activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number
>>and
>>would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my
>>account
>>that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do. I don't
>>necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first
>>language
>>is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place.
>>I'm
>>certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change the
>>fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if you
>>don't investigate this, shame on you.
>>
>>
>>
>>When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone number
>>and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third
>>line
>>on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this out
>>during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your call
>>center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new
>>phone
>>was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
>>early termination charge. Tell me, are you familiar with the term
>>"Slamming"
>>? Well, as someone who has worked for a telephone provider, I am very
>>familiar with the term. My state Attorney General's office is as well.
>>They
>>have asked me to make every effort to solve this problem amicably, which I
>>have done.
>>
>>
>>
>>My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my
>>position;
>>she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had no
>>intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She has
>>proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
>>illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
>>exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
>>nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
>>subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
>>mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of someone
>>with a little less ice water running through his or her veins. I had asked
>>to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
>>further. From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand
>>why.
>>In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
>>encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
>>character. She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much
>>less
>>proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you want
>>someone like that representing you?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual,
>>had
>>she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
>>resolution. I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
>>had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG and
>>the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
>>person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada, identified
>>only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
>>they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather
>>than
>>offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the process,
>>she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
>>back to Square One. You can tell me "That's policy," until you're blue in
>>the face. Such policies stink. And this situation has begun to stink so
>>bad
>>it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this virtual
>>poisoned pen. But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.
>>
>>
>>
>>Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked [x]
>>to
>>review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
>>told me to call back after twelve hours.
>>
>>
>>
>>TWELVE HOURS.
>>
>>
>>
>>The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already spent
>>almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would take
>>that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
>>remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
>>sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
>>complex conundrum.
>>
>>
>>
>>Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
>>privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
>>"P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who also
>>was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of
>>professionalism
>>which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I
>>have
>>no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
>>confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two
>>weeks
>>in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.
>>
>>
>>
>>In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience of
>>dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
>>several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
>>simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
>>communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity in
>>the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be attributed
>>to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
>>personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions to
>>even the simplest of problems. I find your company name to be rather
>>ironic.
>>It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll
>>follow
>>its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
>>forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,
>>
>>
>>
>>Shadow
>>
>>
>
>
>
!