The actual conversation was:-
Adrian Kennard (12:00:40):
OK, can you confirm - even though this is 7 hour fix, BT plc have no controls in place to ensure you meet that 7 hour fix - is that the case?
Kumar Gundecha Sheetal (12:01:24):
Yes that in case when we are depended on OR for appointment
This seems to me to be a clear statement that BT do not have the necessary controls in place to actually meet the 7 hour fix targets they SELL to us. To me that appears to be a simple matter of criminal fraud to sell such a service.
We'll be taking this up with our account manager.
Update: After several staff (including myself) spending hours on echat and 4 attempts to book appointments, and involving senior people in BT, we finally get an engineer with minutes to spare. He has now left site with the line not working at all (rather than just ill) and hence has missed the 7 hour fix. What a surprise. This was a BT confirmed line fault so should have been "fire and forget" for us, not something using many man hours.
Update: Some people asked why I consider it fraud. If I offered to fix all faults within 5 minutes for only an extra £100 a month - would that be fraud, as I know I will almost never meet that target, even if I have a £5 SLG for not meeting it. Clearly selling a guarantee you quite simply have no intention (or means) to meet has to be fraud - it is a lie to extract money from us.
Update: They finally fixed it, late. But the notes suggest there are serious issues. Someone from BT said that as the engineer was working no it that they would "sleep" the fault until 8am tomorrow!
Update: More fraud? BT diagnosed this as faulty in the first place (i.e. not "right" when they tested) and have confirmed an "E-side change" to fix, but have had the cheek to clear this as a "Right When Tested" clear code meaning they will charge us for the engineer visit. That is a total lie and clear to me that it is a deliberate lie to get money from us, i.e. criminal fraud. How much of this do we have to take before just reporting to the police?
Update: I sent the fault back saying they need to correct the clear code, and they said to book an engineer. Seems excessive just to fix a clear code, but as they asked I have booked one. What a waste of (their) money?!
Update: BT actually stated in an email "please cancel the appointment as we never requested this action" which is clearly a lie as BT send a message "Please book an appointment with your End User."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Don't use UPS to ship to UK
I posted about shipping and importing and tax and duty - general info. But this is specific. DON'T USE UPS! I had assumed the UPS issue ...
-
Broadband services are a wonderful innovation of our time, using multiple frequency bands (hence the name) to carry signals over wires (us... -
For many years I used a small stand-alone air-conditioning unit in my study (the box room in the house) and I even had a hole in the wall fo... -
It seems there is something of a standard test string for anti virus ( wikipedia has more on this). The idea is that systems that look fo...
BT say there are no controls when "depended on OR for appointment", whatever "OR" is. This implies that there are controls when this condition is not met although that's not explicitly stated.
ReplyDeleteOR is BT plc t/a Openreach, and to be honest, when it is not an engineer appointment like this they are far less likely to meet the 24/7 nature of the contract as "back office" type work is not usually available out of hours.
DeleteSo my leased lines on 7-hour fix SLA are really not 7 hours?
ReplyDeleteNot the same package, and I think 5 hour, but that may be sane, no idea yet,
DeleteOR = BT OpenReach
ReplyDeleteThink I made a similar point in a different blog post but as long as the money taked in for providing these "guarantees" is /more/ than any "fines/penalties etc" they pay out then they will keep doing it.
ReplyDeleteThe fines need to be more punitive - perhaps you could get them to agree to an addendum to the contract whereby YOU specify the penalties they have to pay :)
Agreed - sorry for repeating myself, but it is getting silly!
Deletes/taked/raked
ReplyDeleteBT times are usually 'clock hours' - not end-to-end fault-reported-until-fault-fixed times, but the time the fault spends 'with' BT. So if you as an ISP raise a fault to BT and they clear reject it back to the ISP with 2 minutes, that counts as 2 minutes out of the 7 hours. If it spends 30 minutes 'with' the ISP then the ISP clear rejects back to BT, who then clear reject after 5 minutes, total BT clock time counts as 7 minutes. And so on.
ReplyDeleteNot condoning or condemning this practise, just passing on what I've found to be the case. I spend most days at work dealing with ADSL faults, BTW/BTO repair processes are something I've taken a keen and detailed interest in as a result, as I know you have. It really would help everyone involved if times quoted and reported on were end-to-end....
Completely understand, and in this case there was a 4 minute and 59 second extra period where BT asked us to make an appointment and we made one and sent back. As first available appointment was not until hours later that really should not change the time but I suspect it does. Even with this they missed the 7 hour target. However, in this case, BT did not take back the fault on that occasion or the other three times an appointment was made, so there will be a billing dispute and we will insist on the tiny SLG being paid. The fact BT leave faults "with us" when they are working on them (especially when with HLE) is a serious complaint we have with them and it also causes faults to close (not response from CP) when we are talking to them.
Delete