As I blogged previously, for three engineer visits to fix faults in broadband (FTTC) services BT had charged us a total of £39,744.00, when in fact no charges should have applied.
Naturally we disputed the charge (and withheld payment).
We finally have the response from BT, and admittedly this is just the first response, but this is it...
The response is that there was an error and BT should not have charged us, so a total of £397.44 has been graciously "waived" and will be credited.
Yes, BT are crediting £397.44 after over charging us £39,744.00
We'll try for a second dispute on this one I think - well done BT - up to the usual standard of dispute resolution there I see. We have had numerous cases where BT have agreed a dispute, and credited a different amount to that originally charged and disputes, but never before this magnitude of discrepancy. We have also had cases where BT have agreed a dispute but never actually credit us.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Fencing
Bit of fun... We usually put up some Christmas lights on the house - some fairy lights on the metal fencing at the front, but a pain as mean...
-
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...
An impressive discount ;) Have you had to explain to BT about decimal points yet?
ReplyDeleteOh no not the Sprint 0.002c/MB thing all over again... :-)
DeleteYou'd have thought you wouldn't need to explain elementary maths to them, but, well, looks like you do!
DeleteI remember a similar experience when, on moving into a flat, we got a gas bill for two thousand quid, with a series of meter readings going back 5 years to zero.
ReplyDeleteMy partner found this quite alarming, but I'd much rather have a ridiculously wrong bill than a subtly wrong one. If the issuers of the bill persist, eventually you'll end up in court in front of a human who will take one look and go "no, that's ridiculous".