~~~~

31 DECEMBER 2003 

NCLC TELEWEST COMMUNICATIONS 

PLC EVOLUTION HOUSE

1 CHIPPINGHAM STREET

ATTERCLIFFE SHEFFIELD

Re:  Official Complaint Over Charges Of £405.23

Dear Sir or Ms:

With reference to  our telephone calls of today, your letter (unsigned) from Matt W. and previous telephone calls.  I wish to make an official complaint in relation to the treatment received.  A copy  of this letter will be sent to your head office, Ofcom, our M.P.'s and via the Internet to various national newspapers and magazines. This is how incensed I am regarding Telewest and their policy.

My complaint reads as follows:

1.  At the beginning of November a call was made to your Broadband Sales Dept, requesting the installation of your 1mb service.   My wife and I were given the date as 20th November 2003.  

2.  On the 20th November 2003, your installation engineers duly appeared.  They installed the cable modem but had difficulty getting everything up and running. 

3.  No sooner had the engineers left than the computer crashed and through a cycle routine of memory dump then close down, restart with no chance of running a proper close down procedure.  The only way this could be achieved was by using the on/off switch.

 4.  I contacted your Broadband 1mb and was advised to switch the modem off and run a restore routine on the computer.  This I carried out by restoring the system to earlier that day.
We asked that our “Surf Unlimited” connection be reinstalled until we could sort out the broadband.  This was agreed.

5.  I disconnected the modem from the computer and boxed it up.  Your Customer Services was contacted and advised us that as we had asked for the service we were bound to keep it for twelve months.  I asked why we were not informed of this at the beginning, why there was no contract and that nothing had been signed when the engineers had called.  I was told by Colin (?) in a very nasty way that the ordering and acceptance of the engineers was their contract.

6.  A further call was logged to Customer Services and your representative registered my first official complaint over this.

7.  I received a telephone call from Customer Services and was told that for someone to come out that it would cost me £75.00.  However, technical support had assured that a phone call to them would clear the matter up in few a minutes.  This call would not be charged and could be done at my convenience.

8.  I eventually contacted technical support on 28th November, this being the earliest available time.  I spoke to Philip S who looked at the details.  He said that our problem was that the USB driver on the cable modem was conflicting with the USB drivers on the computer.  He said that although the technical support did not cover this problem, the solution to this was to install a network card in the computer and connect this to the cable modem via a router.  The other computer we had could also be connected to the router.

9.  My wife and I went to our local PC World where we purchased the relevant parts totalling £70.00.  This was an additional cost we had not expected.

10.  On Sunday 30th, I installed all the relevant parts connecting as per the instructions. However, although all the parts were functioning properly I could not connect through.  I contacted your technical support and spoke to John H.  I was fortunate again to locate another tech support associate who knew what he was talking about.  We discussed what I had done and he agreed it was correct.  He suggested that possibly the network card driver although installed correctly was possibly conflicting.  He recommended that the driver be removed and reinstalled.  I did this and everything came to life.

11.  Now we had broadband connected.  This was the 1st December.  The original install date, was the 20th November.  Eleven days and no broadband.  In this interim time my wife and I carried on using the surf unlimited service.  When our bill arrived there was a charge for £12.46, which was supposedly partial months service.  I contacted your customer services people and told them about this.  I was told that this would be credited and a pro-rata amount for surf unlimited would be charged.

12.  I was also informed there was a charge of some £200 plus for telephone calls, which were in relation to the internet.  I was informed these would be credited as well.

13.  Two days later an “unsigned” letter purportedly from a Matt W, saying that charges would not be credited and that they are due and payable.  I telephoned customer services again and spoke to Alan M who put me on hold and then apparently spoke with the supposed signatory of the letter.  Alan M  said that he had been informed that all charges were payable. This included the £200 +.  Alan M was very abrupt in the way he answered me and his customer service skills left a lot to be desired.

14.  My wife also called Customer Services on the same day.  The person who spoke with her was Rachel H.  She told told my wife that our account had been updated and that there was a balance due of about £78.  She said there was no £200 + due.

15.  At no time were we advised that if we used any other method we would be charged normal telephone rates.  We were told that while matters were being sorted out our surf unlimited would be connected and that broadband would only be charged when fully connected.

16.  I telephoned today to pay the current bill £110.83.  I spoke with your customer service and after dealing with the bill payment I asked what was outstanding.  I was given the figure of £405.23.  This therefore contradicts every call that had gone before.  I was advised that I needed to speak with Regional Headquarters and was placed on hold.  My wife then took the phone  and spoke to Simon S.  She briefly explained the situation and he told her that he would telephone back in one or two hours.  He never returned the call.

17.  My wife called back at 20.45 and eventually got through to Simon S and he was very discourteous, he would only repeat the following words, “the charges are standing, the charges are standing, and that no return to surf unlimited was asked for.” 

18.  My wife then redialled and this time spoke to Mr. S. A. who apologised for the way we had been treated on the telephone.  He said that this type of incident has happened before.  He said that if we wanted to speak to his manager, Lynette, she would be there between 6pm and 11pm. 

19.  We received a telephone call this morning from Sarah M. who said in as much that the charges stood.  

20.  My wife telephoned twice.  First time she spoke to Georgina who said she would contact Sarah M. and then telephone back.  Again, no call had been received.  This was followed by a further telephone call and my wife spoke to Phil C.  Once again they kept us hanging on but came back with the same answer.

 21.  We informed your Customer Services that we were not going away and that we were prepared to take this to the very top.  Any further telephone calls after this will be kept as a separate log.

My wife and I are totally confused by this whole matter and feel we have been very badly treated.  Your Customer Services needs urgent overhaul, as there seems to be very few staff that seems to know what they are doing.

Can you imagine the distress that now reigns in our house?  If you want us to remain as your customers then you need to do the right thing and withdraw your exorbitant charges.

   Yours faithfully,

   John Eversley

OFCOM, Contact Centre, Riverside House, 2a Southwark Bridge Road, London SE1 9HA

Ms Joan Ryan, MP, The House of Commons, London SW1

~~~~

Update:  26 March 2004

We did receive a reply to our complaint.  In this reply which I consider a nothing event Blueyonder said the charges were due and payable.

We have spoken to the signatory Martyn V, twice.  Both Anne and I have explained our position to him again.  On the first call, Martyn V gave the company's position but said he would talk to his Manager then telephone us.  He asked us to leave it with him.

He did telephone us back and informed us that he had to spoken to his manager and that as a matter of goodwill they would reduce the bill by half.  Anne explained to him that we did not owe anything, therefore if we agreed to remit the 50% we would be admitting that Blueyonder was correct, not just paying money we did not owe.  Martyn V said he would call back tomorrow (Friday).

He did so and said that the matter had been discussed with his manager again and Blueyonder's position had not changed,  I told him I would speak to my wife and let him know.

Anne and I are determined to take this all the way.  We are not going to retreat.  We are telling THE TRUTH.  Each time we speak to someone at Blueyonder's customer service, their story changes.  Prior to Friday, Blueyonder claimed that we did not ask to return to "Surf Unlimited" and now they're claiming in their customer service notes we were advised that if we returned to "Surf Unlimited" the broadband would be cancelled and we would be charged a full 12 months for the broadband.  Isn't it amazing how "magically" these notes have appeared?!?  This looks and sounds like Blueyonder is attempting to cover their arse.  

This also shows that Blueyonder is not listening to their customers.  We did not ask them to cancel the broadband.  We asked them to postpone it while we sorted out the problems in connecting the broadband.  Finally, after a week of hell as a result of customer service associates and tech support associates who did not know what they were talking about, I happened to locate two tech support associates, Philip S and John H, who actually knew the correct advice to give me.  This is all documented in my letter above, therefore it is unnecessary to repeat it here.  

If the first tech support person, I had spoken to knew what to do and had advised me to obtain a router and network card, there would have been no need for the week's postponement.  Better yet, if the technician who came out to our home to install the broadband knew this information, and had remained a few minutes to see how things functioned, he would have seen the computer crash, and if he didn't know, he could have telephoned tech support, and possibly then, the advice to purchase a router and a network card would have been provided which would have avoided the following hellish week and we would not be in dispute with Blueyonder.  This entire situation is a result of Blueyonder's ineptness.

~~~~  

Update:  2 April 2004

The situation has gone from bad to worse.  It appears that Telewest not only want their £352 pounds but they want two months broadband charges on top of this.  A total now of £422.  They have further said that we will be charged six months for the broadband.  The last four months being eventually credited back.  They certainly have screwed us.  The ironic thing is that they have offered us this 50%.  The figure they give for this percentage is £152.00.  Where the hell do they get that figure from?  The disputed amount is £352.00 therefore, half would be £176.00 or of the current amount they say we owe (£422.00) it would be £211.00.  It is obvious that someone cannot count and needs to go back to school.  Blueyonder/Telewest's accounting practices are as defective as their customer service, technical support, and their  engineers.  

Anne knows that I was at one time all for a compromise.  Not now, Telewest Communications are a company in trouble.  They will probably merge with NTL and produce one conglomerate.  This would be the same method via which Verizon was created.  Until then Telewest is having to find any means possible to keep its head above water.  So who is the first they dig at?  You and me.  Corporations are not persecuted by other corporations.  The 'man in the street', the average consumer, is the way to their salvation. 

Well b*****ks to you Telewest (Teleworst)!  Blueyonder, we suggest you change your name to "Blue Moon".  It'll be a blue moon before you collect a pence from us!  This 'man in the street' will have his day in court with you.

~~~~

Update:  15 April 2004

After waiting nearly 3.5 hours to be seen I eventually saw one of Enfield C.A.B. people.  It was as I thought a waste of time.  The person I saw felt that we had covered everything they would normally say should be covered.  The only advice they could offer was to write to Telewest and refuse their initial offer advising them we would be contacting The Institute of Arbitrators.  This weekend I shall be doing exactly this.

John Eversley

~~~~

Update:  30 June 2004

We have placed the matter before The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.  Today, an acknowledgement from this organisation arrived in the post stating they were waiting for Telewest's defence to our claim which must be submitted in duplicate no later than 14 July 2004.  A copy of Telewest's report will be forwarded to us.  We have seven days to submit our comments.

~~~~

Update:  1 July 2004 

There was a surprise on Thursday when a Ms Emma L. from Telewest's Chief Executive's office telephoned.  She is apparently a trouble-shooter when customer complaints reach
The Chartered Institute of Arbitrators.

Her brief was that she wanted our permission to re-investigate our complaint.  She admitted that it could have been handled better and should not have reached the point we are at now.  She said that she fully understood why we had taken them on and the lengths we had gone to.  She said that this sort of thing had occurred before and that they had credited the original charges and charged a pro-rata amount for the appropriate service.  If the investigation proves a similar result then the same would happen.

I pointed out that being on a limited income, we obviously wanted  to return to our original service of Surf Unlimited while broadband  was sorted out.  She also understood that to correct matters we had to lay out approximately £70 for the necessary router.

She said that she would let us know the outcome of her investigation on Wednesday.   My wife then spoke with her and obtained her agreement that should we still disagree with their findings they would accept intervention by the Arbitrators.

~~~~

Update:  9 July 2004

This is proof one can beat the establishment.

Today, we received a telephone call at lunchtime from Ms. Emma L. of the Chief Executive's office of Telewest to say that the charges they tried to take from us are being cleared and therefore we do not owe anything.

She informed us that the collection agency who was assigned the debt will be notified and dismissed.

She admitted we had been treated badly and that matters could have and should have been handled better.

Needless to say we are very relieved and thrilled.

~~~~

Last Updated:  Sunday 19 November 2006