 newviewEx .. Ex .. ExactlyPremium
join:2001-10-01
Parsonsburg, MD
kudos:1 | Typical Why does it always take the glare of the media spotlight for Comcast to do the right thing? |
|
 BF69Premium
join:2004-07-28
Camden, TN | said by newview:Why does it always take the glare of the media spotlight for Comcast to do the right thing?
why do the right thing if you can get away with doing the wrong thing? |
|
| reply to newview
In all fairness to Comcast, they probably don't have a very good mechanism to provide refunds for over-payment to customers who aren't canceling their service - it doesn't happen at this level very often. They were offering credit to the account because that's all the system is set up to do. I'm no Comcast fan, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on this one. |
|
 MaxoYour tax dollars at work.Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL | said by mdlund0:In all fairness to Comcast, they probably don't have a very good mechanism to provide refunds for over-payment to customers who aren't canceling their service - it doesn't happen at this level very often. They were offering credit to the account because that's all the system is set up to do. I'm no Comcast fan, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on this one. I would tend to agree, but the person at customer service who took the call should have recognized the gravity of the situation and pushed it up. It should have continued to be pushed up until a proper resolution was reached.
One major issue with today's call centers is that they are usually outsource and staffed with people who do not have any authority to perform tasks outside of a little box. Since the people with authority to handle outlying situations like this are so far removed from customer support, the problem never reaches them, and the customer ends up shafted.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.blogspot.com
»www.facebook.com/maxolasersquad |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| That in general is the way that anything service works today.
Its a don't stray from the script, don't offer anything, if the customer wants to escalate, don't make it easy.
Customer support is effectively 2 services:
1. Customer 'service'
2. Cost savings/damage control through process
Problem with #2, is that the people performing the tasks are forced into a corner for what they can/cannot do, and if its something that is not listed, they have to escalate, or give a generic response. |
|
| reply to mdlund0
This wasnt an over-payment of $20, THOUSANDS, get real, and drop the sympathy. The reps should be able to recognize extenuating circumstances, and rectify such situations. |
|
 maartenaElmoPremium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
kudos:1 | reply to newview
Re: Typical said by newview:Why does it always take the glare of the media spotlight for Comcast to do the right thing?
That goes for any company really. The problem is that CSR's aren't trained for scenario's that fall out of their playbook. If someone accidentally pays the same bill twice, pretty much no one would complain about the standard treatment: credit the bill for next month.
This is where supervisors come in, that SHOULD be trained to make decissions on out-of-playbook scenarios, but the reality is that these supervisors are often no more than the senior CSR that was just upgraded to "supervisor" status because he/she has been there the longest. They aren't really given a whole lot more powers, and definitly not the power to give back thousands of dollars, even though it was an honest mistake.
It's the same thing with Comcast - or again, ANY big company - trying to get money out of customers who just lost their house in a fire. Comcast should KNOW that the home owner's insurance will pay back the money for lost equipment eventually, just hold back until then. Don't go haunting customers who just lost everything they owned.
Charter CSR's actually told a customer that had lost her house to a tornado in Alabama to actually "look around the neighborhood" for the cablebox. Can you imagine the scenario? 150+ houses completely demolished and spread over 10 square miles, and you have to search for your broken cable box?
Point and case: CSR's are STUPID when it comes to out-of-playbook scenarios. They just don't know what to do with these 0.01% of calls they get. Big companies should setup a special desk that deals with nothing but special cases.
--
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" |
|
Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
1 edit | reply to newview
I cannot stand Concast and how they treat their customers and employees, derive their revenue (i.e. a monopoly), and operate their organization.
I had a billing error and it took over 6 months to resolve. Whereas, most developed countries have consumer protection agencies, including their own FCC that handles billing issues. Basically, the carrier is fined from the get-go, whenever they fail to fix an issue.
As the issue goes unsolved and is escalated to various levels, the fines increase, well into the thousands for the carrier. Therefore, it's in their best interest to fix this quick-smart. |
|
|
|
 Dude111An Awesome DudePremium
join:2003-08-04
USA
kudos:11 | reply to newview
Because they (As well as most) think they can take advantage of the elderly.......
Im glad they got the matter taken care of! |
|
 veloslaveGeek For GodPremium
join:2003-07-11
Pleasant Hill, CA | reply to mdlund0
Re: Typical said by mdlund0:In all fairness to Comcast, they probably don't have a very good mechanism to provide refunds for over-payment to customers who aren't canceling their service - it doesn't happen at this level very often. They were offering credit to the account because that's all the system is set up to do. I'm no Comcast fan, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on this one.
GULP
REALLY?
One of the largest companies in the freaking world... and they cannot be expected to foresee a mistake made in the payment system? Not even be expected to
Horse doo doo...
It is as simple as doing what is right, and they thought they could get away with it since nobody wanted to bother with figuring it out on how to do it right. Thee is a reason why they have the lowest customer satisfaction ratings... right there with att...
because they don't give a damn about their customers.
They damn near have a legal monopoly which enables them to say "screw it... where else will they go?"
Comcrap sucks PERIOD and that is all there is to it... this time they got caught being themselves.
--
Mom was right.... I NEED fiber! |
|
| reply to newview
said by newview:Why does it always take the glare of the media spotlight for Comcast to do the right thing?
Because doing the right thing is hard even though it is infinitely easier to do. |
|
2 edits | reply to BF69
This is total incompetence on Comcast's part for not being tell that it was an honest mistake. Granted, most companies now a days want to just give a credit, which is stupid in itself, but when you have to go through major changes to get issue rectified, that definitely shows there's a problem with the system that needs to be fixed.
--
The Firefox alternative.
»www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/ |
|
 HankSearching for a new FrontierPremium
join:2002-05-21
Burlington, WV
kudos:1 | reply to mdlund0
This in "In all fairness" mind set is why this country is in real trouble. They may not have a good mechanism, but it obviously did not take to much effort when the media got involved to correct the situation which is something Comcast should have done without the media involvement. |
|
iknowPremium
join:2012-03-25 | reply to mdlund0
said by mdlund0:In all fairness to Comcast, they probably don't have a very good mechanism to provide refunds for over-payment to customers who aren't canceling their service - it doesn't happen at this level very often. They were offering credit to the account because that's all the system is set up to do. I'm no Comcast fan, but I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt on this one.
that don't matter, comcast either attempted theft or conversion. »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conversion_(law) by doing what they did. the money was NEVER theirs, and they don't have the right to dictate how they will give the money back. just giving credit is not giving the money back that they NEVER owned in the first place. no matter how screwed up their system may be, they have an obligation to do the legal thing, and make sure the MONEY is refunded, and not have to be pressured to do it. i'll bet the legal team heard about this, and said "we have to give the money back" and that's right. |
|
Reviews:
 ·Frontier Communi..
| reply to cork1958
said by cork1958:Granted, most companies now a days want to just give a credit, which is stupid in itself Well, not to defend Comcast, but there are two issues at play here:
1) A lower level employee may be able to issue a refund for a few hundred bucks, but when you're talking about four digits the accounting folks will need to get involved. Nobody in a customer service call center is going to have the authority to issue a check for thousands of dollars.
2) The refusal to give a credit in this instance most likely came from a low level employee who was too stupid/scared to apply basic common sense. He has a flowchart, this situation is not on the flowchart, so he's going to do the safest thing, i.e., nothing.
Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity. |
|
 John GaltForward, MarchPremium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:5 | And never attribute to stupidity that which can be attributed to greed... |
|
| reply to Crookshanks
And obviously, you believe that after ONE call to customer service, it then went straight to the news station. Umm, I can assure you, these people made a significant amount of calls to Comcast, and it got them nowhere. |
|
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..
| No, I believe that Comcast, like most large corporations, is staffed with a significant number of poorly trained people who are afraid to take initiative. Combine that with the bureaucracy inherent to any large organization, and it's easy to see how this could have happened. Nothing in this story implies malice on the part of Comcast. |
|
| reply to Crookshanks
said by Crookshanks:Well, not to defend Comcast, but there are two issues at play here:
1) A lower level employee may be able to issue a refund for a few hundred bucks, but when you're talking about four digits the accounting folks will need to get involved. Nobody in a customer service call center is going to have the authority to issue a check for thousands of dollars.
2) The refusal to give a credit in this instance most likely came from a low level employee who was too stupid/scared to apply basic common sense. He has a flowchart, this situation is not on the flowchart, so he's going to do the safest thing, i.e., nothing.
Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity.
If either of the above were the case, then lower level idiot (a viable term here) should have escalated the matter.
Anyone with a single brain cell knew this would go to the press and force Comcast's hand. |
|
