In reply to a post by paddyclark:

Alternatively PN are dealing with the issues directly with customers and not being distracted by people without a relevant interest.

But we have seen that when customers contact support on the issue then they are given incorrect information. Be that accidental or deliberate it is easily corrected by making the facts available online, as we have seen the page is still on the servers.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 18-Mar-09 16:13:58)

Alternatively PN are dealing with the issues directly with customers and not being distracted by people without a relevant interest.
-----
The point which you seem to be missing, or turning a blind eye to, is that they seem to be only "dealing" with those customers who make enough noise to cause them trouble. How many are misled and hoodwinked by the 1st line support staff? How many just retire hurt, or don't even know that they have been fleeced?

As you know, there are plenty of PlusNet customers who read this board - probably more than read any of the internal boards - and only an ostrich would dare to say that they don't deserve answers to the issues raised in this thread. It's no good telling them to contact the support team with their questions because, as we have witnessed, the support team is either not properly briefed on the 90-day MBG or has been briefed to mislead. Customers deserve some public answers so that they all know where they stand.

Simon

In reply to a post by pr100:

As you know, there are plenty of PlusNet customers who read this board ...... Customers deserve some public answers so that they all know where they stand.

I don't see many customers standing alongside you demanding the answers that they deserve. So either there are less of them reading these boards than you believe, or they do not feel strongly enough about the need for answers to comment.

Do not forget than any customers who joined under the MBG and who were quite happy with the service that they were provided, and I am sure that there are many of them, will not have any interest in how to leave as they have no wish to do so.

There seem to be plenty of contributors to this thread who have expressed their shared concern for the way in which PlusNet is mismanaging its 90 day MPG scheme. Whether they are customers or not is difficult to tell -- but PlusNet should be concerned whether they are customers or not. The longer they hide behind the parapet on this, counting their money, the worse they look. How many of the people reading this board are potential customers? How many of them will be impressed with PlusNet's silence?

In any event, if someone highlights something rotten in PlusNet Towers, what does it matter whether that person is a customer or not?

Do you think PlusNet are handling things properly? Would the majority of customers think so if they knew about it? Do we need a poll to prove that PlusNet are wrong? Surely, in the interest of all PlusNet customers, you would like to see the company behaving in an open and honest way?

Simon

Once again stirring for stirrings sake.... emotive language to portray Plusnet in as bad a light as you can. A couple of badly handled issues and out comes the conspiracy theory. TBBS front page news shows PN as third in Large ISPs. As I've said before PN is not perfect but your juvenile scaremongering is pathetic and does not portray anything other than your own twisted opinion of Plus Net. Most of the interested parties in this thread are observers and hardly likely to become a Plus Net customer.

Inane ramblings and assumptions do not make an evil ISP Simon, get some proportion in your postings for gods sake or find a new obsession. Either way try and involve some concrete facts from time to time you used to be good at that.

Why haven't Plusnet reinstated the deleted link, and why are upgraders not informed that they can reduce the new contract to 12 months not 18? Why does the 90-day getout not continue into that new contract as per its very clear wording?

No disparaging of Simon or questioning of his motives answers these questions that you are all refusing to reply to.

Edit - a "not" was missing.

Edited by RobertoS (Wed 18-Mar-09 20:07:38)

On the second point I concur fully. PNs original position that to switch from a legacy product (out of contract) would incur a new 18 month contract was inexcusable and having bowed to exisiting customer pressure reduced that to 12 months. Which I still feel is indefensible.

On the first point a simple search for 90 days from the front page provides the results that are needed. Being a legacy offer surely means that its logical that the original path does not exist.

With regards to PR100, Less said the better.

...juvenile... ...pathetic... ...twisted... inane...
-----
Tsk, tsk - trying to get the thread closed are we? It's a good job I don't take offence at your constant insults.

Focus on the issues please.

Simon

Unfortunately the horrendous PlusNet still think I'm a customer despite the fact that I cancelled. I had direct debit and cancelled that so they took the next month's money from the details they had kept from my crefit card so after 28 years with the same bank, I closed that account. I don't even live in the house where I was when with this diabolical isp and the phone is cut off but they still try to take money from me.

Yeah, it all went a bit mental and uncomfortable about a week or two after I signed my parent's house up. Up popped the new packages and they really seemed to have either not considered or not cared about the existing customer base. Almost every concession took a long huddle to be approved and all were the minimum that might keep half the complainers happy. On top of that almost none of the new webpages or any of their internal systems were commissioned in a way that feels from outside like they supported the integration of the old and new customers. Thus all of the concessions have to be retro fitted to accounts after migrations and package feature you can keep have to be re-provided manually, etc, etc. There is a short thread on their own forums which encapsulates the concessions but as you rightly point out the majority of the customer base is not forum aware and will probably be accepting any old rubbish they are left with. I don't think anyone has been tasked to assist existing customers in getting the best offer!

The most concerning thing was that originally they expected to lock BBYW subscribers to their existing sub-package (ie. 1-lite, 2-medium, 3-heavy, pro) and not let them change within BBYW when that was the whole modus operandi of the BBYW scheme. The concession to do this came back eventually - but its mostly manual I think. The suspicious thing here (as with the 90 day offer) was that the existing terms and conditions for BBYW were preserved online as per their normal practice BUT the key terms about changing option were explicitly deleted. Previously they had always been clear that you could stay on an old package with all its T&C good/bad but here someone tried to tweak the T&C and kill off that bit.

They still don't seem to have fixed the "extra usage billing emails" which were altered to only reflect the billing of the new packages and not the actual billings of almost all the other packages they still have customers on. All very shabby really. Its only supporting old schemes, integration and migration that makes this sort of customer portal (and the packages you present on it) hard to define and develop and they seemed to miss every aspect of it.

Like the changes at Enta you get the sense of a new head honcho coming in and making change for change sake to prove their own value/importance and having so little grasp of the fundamentals of internet provision and customer management that almost everything good (including the company's reputation) gets trampled within weeks if not days.

Ho-Hum.