Some people are just stupid (II)
Apr. 22nd, 2004 11:07 amaka. the continuing saga of just HOW stupid PowerGen are.
We transferred from PowerGen to Scottish Power in the middle of December. Because they weren't the cheapest, they were incapable of registering the fact that we'd PAID, and they were obnoxiously over-zealous at passing apparently overdue bills to their collections department.
On Jan 7th, for reasons that seem to escape everyone, INCLUDING PowerGen, our electricity supply was erroneously transferred back to PowerGen.
Note those words: "erroneously transferred". They are Magic Words if you're a utility company customer service operative, and they Mean Something Specific.
So. I phone, I say the magic words, I supply my details. They promise to call back inside 24 hours.
48 hours later I call, and ask why no-one's called. The bloke at the other end discovers that, despite me saying the Magic Words about SIX times, the previous call went to Cancellations (i.e. new customer changed their mind) not Erroneous Transfers, who were so confused they sat on their thumbs and Did Nothing.
He was duly chastised (to the extent that Anne almost fell off her chair laughing while listening to my end of the call).
We got a letter on the 30th Jan confirming that we would be transferred back to Scottish Power as though it had never happened, and that PowerGen would not bill us for the electricity. We got another on the 20th Feb confirming this had happened, and indeed Scottish Power think we are a Dual Fuel customer and have billed us accordingly.
In the post this morning: a bill from PowerGen for electricity supply from 7th Jan to 14th April.. I'm currently waiting for someone to call me back, having gone away to check, and explain to me precisely what the fuck they are playing at. I will not be paying this bill, and if it winds up with their collections department, I am going to go quite unbelievably ballistic.
We transferred from PowerGen to Scottish Power in the middle of December. Because they weren't the cheapest, they were incapable of registering the fact that we'd PAID, and they were obnoxiously over-zealous at passing apparently overdue bills to their collections department.
On Jan 7th, for reasons that seem to escape everyone, INCLUDING PowerGen, our electricity supply was erroneously transferred back to PowerGen.
Note those words: "erroneously transferred". They are Magic Words if you're a utility company customer service operative, and they Mean Something Specific.
So. I phone, I say the magic words, I supply my details. They promise to call back inside 24 hours.
48 hours later I call, and ask why no-one's called. The bloke at the other end discovers that, despite me saying the Magic Words about SIX times, the previous call went to Cancellations (i.e. new customer changed their mind) not Erroneous Transfers, who were so confused they sat on their thumbs and Did Nothing.
He was duly chastised (to the extent that Anne almost fell off her chair laughing while listening to my end of the call).
We got a letter on the 30th Jan confirming that we would be transferred back to Scottish Power as though it had never happened, and that PowerGen would not bill us for the electricity. We got another on the 20th Feb confirming this had happened, and indeed Scottish Power think we are a Dual Fuel customer and have billed us accordingly.
In the post this morning: a bill from PowerGen for electricity supply from 7th Jan to 14th April.. I'm currently waiting for someone to call me back, having gone away to check, and explain to me precisely what the fuck they are playing at. I will not be paying this bill, and if it winds up with their collections department, I am going to go quite unbelievably ballistic.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 05:43 am (UTC)That is all.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 05:53 am (UTC)It may make for a really rather entertaining letter.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 07:11 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 08:00 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 08:20 am (UTC)Can't wait to see what happens with PowerGen....
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 12:26 pm (UTC)A Penfold-o-gram tends to be more of the form:
They get results too, in a different way.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 08:22 am (UTC)That is the first time I've seen it in it's entirety I think.
So, what happened next?
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 09:44 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 12:09 pm (UTC)One Land Rover part number, checked against catalogue with pretty picture of the specific part.
One wrong part...
When Ford bought Land Rover they said they were going to improve the quality of manufacture and service.
It's the second time the specific part, a switch, has failed in three years. It's only 25 years old and ypou'd think they knew how to make the parts by now.
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 08:45 am (UTC)Trying to stop the transfers however is extremely difficuly and involves endless phone calls, listening for ages to their mindless music on hold, and then dealing with staff of truly Microsoftian incompetence. I found that repeated use of the Magic Words "I'll see you in court" helped to get their attention.
Just as one example, when I explained that blaming everything on 'the computer' was a bad excuse in the 60's and is certainly not valid in a major company these days, they offered to tell me how to contact their computer people to tell them. Not the slightest shred of comprehension that maybe *they* should sort out their computers.
if it winds up with their collections department, I am going to go quite unbelievably ballistic.
The following quote seems to be specifically about goods, but if you can track down the full text of the act then presumably the section on services is similar - it wasn't quoted in the place I checked.
Unsolicited Goods and Services Act 1971, s2
*2 Demands and threats regarding payment*
(1) A person who, not having reasonable cause to believe there
is a right to payment, in the course of any trade or business
makes a demand for payment, or asserts a present or prospective
right to payment, for what he knows are unsolicited goods sent
(after the commencement of this Act) to another person with a
view to his acquiring them, shall be guilty of an offence and
on summary conviction shall be liable to a fine not exceeding
[level 4 on the standard scale].
(2) A person who, not having reasonable cause to believe there
is a right to payment, in the course of any trade or business
and with a view to obtaining any payment for what he knows are
unsolicited goods sent as aforesaid-
(a) threatens to bring any legal proceedings; or
(b) places or causes to be placed the name of any person on a
list of defaulters or debtors or threatens to do so; or
(c) invokes or causes to be invoked any other collection
procedure or threatens to do so,
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable on summary
conviction to a fine not exceeding [level 5 on the standard
scale].
(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 09:01 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2004-04-22 02:23 pm (UTC)Bleh.