Tweet
Mmmm, call center troubleshooting. I had the joy of dealing with a woman claiming to be a reporter. I could believe it, because if she said more than three sentances... she would wax dramatic. She spoke like a writer badly in search of an editor.
The problem was the kind I love to troubleshoot. Her phone's e-mail wasn't working. Well, we had 2 types of addresses. One was for pictures and one was based on text messaging. The first was covered by a picture messaging plan, the other was its own $1.95 feature. It only took about 12 minutes to fully diagnose the problem. I sent a test message to each address, and only the picture one went through.
It wouldn't have taken quite this long, but... she did tend to rant... veered through discussions about the phone's camera. Needs a flash, but that wears out pretty quick. Also the cheapest cameraphone on the planet. I know, I bought one to learn how it worked, not because I planned on using it directly for a job. Especially photojournalism.
The problem wasn't on her end. Her phone was working fine. So was the network. The trouble was, when the picture messaging was set up, the system had enabled the text e-mail. She gave that out as a contact for work. Didn't really want to go through all the hassle of telling her employer to change "email" to "mms" in her address.
I was expected to "make it work" the way it had when she'd signed up for it. Unlike some ranters, she would come up for breath after a few paragraphs worth. Slow conversation, but gave me loads of time to think.
A few highly relavent details... she had, at no time, actually paid to use the address that she wanted to have working. It wasn't in the contract. I wasn't really under an obligation to restore a function that had been working unbilled for her for... turned out to be a year.
On her end, she had no reason to expect this service to fail. And the system never generates any sort of returned mail message, so it looked to her employer as though she wasn't responding. 35 min on the call...
No, there's no way to enable this without the $1.95 monthly fee. I end up issuing this customer a $25 goodwill credit and applying the feature.
She's not satisfied. She paid us for what she thought included this for about a year. And if she doesn't get her way, why, she'll do a feature on us! Because the public loves hearing about e-mail addresses changing by 5 characters. And her husband's got a chronic illness, he's in the hospital, that's where she's calling from.
Finally, she pauses after saying something useful. "It's the principle of the thing."
"Madam. What principle is this? The credit I've issued covers the feature for the next twelve and a half months. That takes you just past the contract you're claiming this feature should be part of. It'll be a year before we see a dime from this. How, exactly, are we cheating you?"
"Um. So the balance... that's now $xxx.xx? Um. I can pay yy, and then I guess you'll have to get me over to financial to arrange the rest." Ah. This is why I'm worth talking to for... 50 minutes. Great. You're really making me feel teriffic about caving on this. And she had to have been through financial before... she was using the company's phrasings. Ahh, to bend the rules for a "good" customer.
The problem was the kind I love to troubleshoot. Her phone's e-mail wasn't working. Well, we had 2 types of addresses. One was for pictures and one was based on text messaging. The first was covered by a picture messaging plan, the other was its own $1.95 feature. It only took about 12 minutes to fully diagnose the problem. I sent a test message to each address, and only the picture one went through.
It wouldn't have taken quite this long, but... she did tend to rant... veered through discussions about the phone's camera. Needs a flash, but that wears out pretty quick. Also the cheapest cameraphone on the planet. I know, I bought one to learn how it worked, not because I planned on using it directly for a job. Especially photojournalism.
The problem wasn't on her end. Her phone was working fine. So was the network. The trouble was, when the picture messaging was set up, the system had enabled the text e-mail. She gave that out as a contact for work. Didn't really want to go through all the hassle of telling her employer to change "email" to "mms" in her address.
I was expected to "make it work" the way it had when she'd signed up for it. Unlike some ranters, she would come up for breath after a few paragraphs worth. Slow conversation, but gave me loads of time to think.
A few highly relavent details... she had, at no time, actually paid to use the address that she wanted to have working. It wasn't in the contract. I wasn't really under an obligation to restore a function that had been working unbilled for her for... turned out to be a year.
On her end, she had no reason to expect this service to fail. And the system never generates any sort of returned mail message, so it looked to her employer as though she wasn't responding. 35 min on the call...
No, there's no way to enable this without the $1.95 monthly fee. I end up issuing this customer a $25 goodwill credit and applying the feature.
She's not satisfied. She paid us for what she thought included this for about a year. And if she doesn't get her way, why, she'll do a feature on us! Because the public loves hearing about e-mail addresses changing by 5 characters. And her husband's got a chronic illness, he's in the hospital, that's where she's calling from.
Finally, she pauses after saying something useful. "It's the principle of the thing."
"Madam. What principle is this? The credit I've issued covers the feature for the next twelve and a half months. That takes you just past the contract you're claiming this feature should be part of. It'll be a year before we see a dime from this. How, exactly, are we cheating you?"
"Um. So the balance... that's now $xxx.xx? Um. I can pay yy, and then I guess you'll have to get me over to financial to arrange the rest." Ah. This is why I'm worth talking to for... 50 minutes. Great. You're really making me feel teriffic about caving on this. And she had to have been through financial before... she was using the company's phrasings. Ahh, to bend the rules for a "good" customer.
Comment