I think I have posted further up, but the first MAC was valid, it had just not been used and expired.
When the customer contacted us to request a new MAC the cs person clicked the request MAC button and put a note in to check back for it (this is how we do things here and is the correct process)
when the cs person dealing went back to check for the MAC in our portal he copied and pasted it back to the customer, not realising it was the same one already sent (unless he was looking for it, he would not have seen it as it was a new ticket, not the original ticket for the first MAC) the customer contacted us back saying the MAC was invalid (this is the second one that was sent) when looking into the matter it was found that the customers line was part of a bulk regrade from 20CN to 21CN, the customer was informed of this and the date the modify order was due to complete, an option was given to cancel the modify. Before a response was received on this the customer contacted us to say they had lost broadband, and this is when it was found the PSTN line was ceased, and the rest you all know.

I'm sure you just have some axe to grind as you can see (if you look) we have posted in this thread a number of times to different people, so your point scoring does not really work here. How can you say we have burred our head in the sand!

We have contributed in the thread, right from the very start (third post in I think) several times to different people.

The PSTN line was ceased, so no matter how much we shout the cease cannot reasonably be disputed, you of all people should know that.
The cease was not placed as part of the DSL side but was a PSTN cease.

The reason for disputing it is this, your wholesale provider one assumes has a relationship with BT Wholesale or Openreach, and can then raise the issue with them, who also have a relationship with Orange, and thus the issue can bounce back down the chain into Orange, who may just go and put their hand up and say ooops our mistake and offer the customer a credit.

All this said though I'll add a few words

1. Vivaciti have shown me evidence that it was a WLR3 cease that was placed.
2. In terms of time taken on this matter, and that the original MAC confusion may in part have lead us to this point should perhaps Vivaciti waive charging the customer as a good will gesture.
3. The alternative may be that the customer enters ADR, disputing the charge.
4. Alas in business while one wants to chase every debt, there are times, when taking the hit can result in a better view, and a customer leaving on good terms.
5. Handing over the debt to a collection agency within two weeks of it being due, may be seen as unduly hasty, particularly if the customer is disputing the charge.

I doubt Orange is doing migrations like this all the time, as we'd see a lot more posts about it, so something went awry.

As you can read there is a lot of prejudice and discrimination with certain illnesses! Cant help with who is to blame and who did what etc I'm confused as you and likely kept so to benefit all but the customer , However I would get back in contact with Vivaciti to keep it away from other parties with reagrds this cease charge, explain where you are at with it also with yourself with your health etc, it�s up to you how much you disclose to them, as most of us can see we have to be careful!

Don�t be fobbed of by the first person you talk too, ask to talk someone senior (manager), under the Equality Act 2010 they have to adapt their procedures, as you touch on this, any credible company should have official debt and Mental Health Policy ask to be pointed in the direction of it!. Also it goes without saying keep notes of who you speak too.

In reply to a post by JohnR:

In reply to a post by Fastriver:

I work in customer services. And know as soon as someone throws a line like you did ( if it was not important, why add it... ) It has no inpact on what has happened. Other than delay you doing what the rest of do everytime we migrate.

I suggest you read up on the Equality Act 2010, you will end up in hot water very soon if you keep applying the narrow view of everyone who mentions an illness is worming their way out of paying.

In reply to a post by vivaciti:

I'm sure you just have some axe to grind as you can see (if you look) we have posted in this thread a number of times to different people, so your point scoring does not really work here. How can you say we have burred our head in the sand!

I said on past experience, not this thread.

Never got a reply on this thread. there are other threads where you have not explained yourself.

Why you think i have a axe to grind with you i don't know, in fact on some occasions i have stuck up for you and recommended you if i think you are the best option.

On this occasion i think your in the wrong, why was an invalid MAC ( a duplicate one ) forwarded to the customer the second time one was asked for?

In reply to a post by vivaciti:

Was not confirmed invalid, the MAC generated in Dec WAS valid, but expired after the 30 days.
The replacement MAC issued was invalid, and did not get spotted by the CS person who sent it as the same as the old one,

So basically someone who works for you made a mistake?

Enough said, lose the money and learn from the mistake as a company. That's the decent thing to do.

In reply to a post by vivaciti:

As said elsewhere in this thread, the MAC issue is a red herring, if you ignore the issues around the MAC

So you want us to ignore the mistake made by Vivaciti? lol, classic