We have been contacted by a Post Office Broadband customer that is unhappy with the customer support they have received.
Ms. Arnaudy of Bristol states that she has been charged incorrectly for her broadband connection- an error on the part of ‘Post Office Broadband’ – and that despite numerous phone calls over several months, and an admission that the charge is an error on their part, the Post Office Broadband team have now issued a letter threatening to terminate telecom service for the single mum, as well as negatively impact upon her credit report.
The following is a brief outline of the events leading up to the most recent, rather threatening letter:
Post Office Broadband – The Catalogue of Errors And Complaints
- Initially, when the broadband connection was booked the Post Office Broadband team scheduled an engineer to come and connect a new line, even though this was not needed. This would have meant a charge of over £100 for Ms. Arnaudy, for a service that was not in fact needed nor appropriate. BT confirmed that there was an existing line present, and that a ‘New Line Provide’ was not necessary, so there should be no charge applied.
- The Post Office Broadband team were contacted, and agreed that this was an error on their part, and that the engineer has been cancelled, and no charges would be made.
- The engineer arrived, despite being ‘cancelled’. He said he was not needed, and that this happens regularly and that Ms. Arnaudy would NOT be charged.
- Not satisfied that a charge would not be made, the Post Office Broadband team were contacted the same day that the engineer arrived, and they confirmed that no charge would be made for connection, as it was an error on their part (again).
- Ms. Arnaudy received her first bill, complete with the New Line Provide charge that was stated on several occasions to have been cancelled
- On contacting the Post Office Broadband team, a representative of Ms. Arnaudy was informed that it would take up to 2 weeks for the issue to be ‘investigated’, and that Ms. Arnaudy would be contacted when this had happened. Unsatisfied with this situation, when the caller asked to speak to a supervisor or manager in the call centre, the customer service operator said the manager was not willing to discuss the matter further. A credit of £5.00 for compensation was offered.
- During the 2 week waiting period, a further request for payment was received, demanding payment. Again, the Post Office Broadband team were contacted… this time it was advised that Ms. Arnaudy pay the money owing, except for the disputed connection charge, which she did.
- The next bill was then received, at this point several weeks AFTER the 2 week ‘investigation’ period had lapsed, it still had the payment for the connection charge as owing.
- Yet again, the Post Office Broadband team were contacted. The customer support person (name available) said he would transfer the call to the person dealing with the issue, but then the call disconnected.
- Upon calling back, the correct person was reached. They said that a ‘credit’ of the charge had been applied to Ms. Arnaudy’s account, and that she should go ahead and actually pay the fee, and it would be ‘credited’ on the next bill.
- It was felt by Ms. Arnaudy and her family that paying the fee, on a ‘promise’ that it would be credited the following month was unacceptable, given their previous record of ‘achievements’. A compromise was met when the customer service operator (name available) agreed that if Ms. Arnaudy simply paid the balance owed, excluding the connection charge, the following month the bill would correct itself as there was a credit applied. Prior to ending the call, it was noted that the Post Office Broadband team had in fact given a credit of the fee, minus the VAT – when there was VAT levied on the actual fee on the bill. The customer service operator said they would ask for (another) investigation of this.
- Around a week after this final telephone conversation, on 30th September 2009, a letter arrived addressed to Ms. Arnaudy demanding payment yet again, threatening to restrict her telephone services, and suspend her broadband, as well as impact negatively on her credit rating, (thus affecting her future chances on credit, for a mistake made by their team).
All in all, we can see why Ms. Arnaudy is unhappy with the treatment she has received from the Post Office.
As most of the letters she received were signed (all-be-it a scanned and printed copy) by a Mr. Tim Ferguson, the director of the Post Office telecom ‘customer care’ team, it would seem appropriate that he contact Ms. Arnaudy about the issue, with an explanation of how this catalogue of errors has happened, and on why there was a refusal to transfer calls to a supervisor or manager on two separate occasions (the names of the customer service personnel that refused to do this are available.)
Ms. Arnaudy can be contacted via this email address
Ms. Arnaudy has now stated that in light of the most recent, rather threatening letter, she will lodge a formal complaint to ofcom about the Post Office Broadband team – unless she receives a written apology stating that the fee has been removed from her account, and that no further action will be taken as regards credit reference agencies.
It would also seem appropriate that some level of compensation be offered, over and above the £5.00 credit that has been given so far.
Again, Ms. Arnaudy can be contacted via this email address
This post will be updated detailing the Post Office Broadband’s response to the complaint, and any outcome – positive or negative.