 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General General TopicsGSMBluetoothProviders AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizonManufacturers EricssonNokiaMotorolaCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics PocketPCPalmMore Topics ... |
Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Sprint PCS / September 2007Sprint Service DISASTER.. No bars? We'll change your #.
Service disaster... For several days, I've gotten no bars in an area where we always had good signal with Sprint PCS. Same situation on two different phones. Called *2 "Customer Solutions"... The operator said, "Hold just a minute while I look that up." After a couple of minutes she came back on line... "We're having some service problems there. To get you better service, we'll change your CSA and give you a new number." I rejected this solution. How would a different number solve the problem? No good answer. So, I refused the number change and said good-bye. Turns out the rep had already started the number change, leaving my phone completely inoperative, incoming callers got "this number is not in service" and trying to make calls I got "this phone is not registered to use the Sprint PCS..." Calling *2 again, "The hold time will be 20 minutes." Later, it took a supervisor a full hour to restore my service. Even after that, she says, "Don't make any calls and DO NOT answer any incoming calls for at least four hours. It takes that long for the fix to take effect." I asked supervisor if there was any possibility that changing the # would improve my signal problem. "No, none." To make matters worse, the original service rep had covered her tracks in my record. The record read, "Customer called requesting change in phone number. I was part way through when customer changed his mind. I informed customer that he would have no service but he insisted." All LIES. This is a customer service disaster. I'm now out of contract, I killed one of my Sprint phones, and will start checking my options. -- Sally  SignatureSally Shears (a.k.a. "Molly") SallyShears@gmail.com -or- Sally@Shears.org SallyShears (at) gmail (dot) com as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. that's probably what they were doing- just doing anything to end the call. Service disaster... For several days, I've gotten no bars in an area where we always had good signal with Sprint PCS. Same situation on two different phones. Called *2 "Customer Solutions"... The operator said, "Hold just a minute while I look that up." After a couple of minutes she came back on line... "We're having some service problems there. To get you better service, we'll change your CSA and give you a new number." I rejected this solution. How would a different number solve the problem? No good answer. So, I refused the number change and said good-bye. Turns out the rep had already started the number change, leaving my phone completely inoperative, incoming callers got "this number is not in service" and trying to make calls I got "this phone is not registered to use the Sprint PCS..." Calling *2 again, "The hold time will be 20 minutes." Later, it took a supervisor a full hour to restore my service. Even after that, she says, "Don't make any calls and DO NOT answer any incoming calls for at least four hours. It takes that long for the fix to take effect." I asked supervisor if there was any possibility that changing the # would improve my signal problem. "No, none." To make matters worse, the original service rep had covered her tracks in my record. The record read, "Customer called requesting change in phone number. I was part way through when customer changed his mind. I informed customer that he would have no service but he insisted." All LIES. This is a customer service disaster. I'm now out of contract, I killed one of my Sprint phones, and will start checking my options. -- Sally SignatureSally Shears (a.k.a. "Molly") SallyShears@gmail.com -or- Sally@Shears.org SallyShears (at) gmail (dot) com > as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. > that's probably what they were doing- just doing anything to end the > call. And your recollection would be incorrect. No carrier in the US operates under this urban myth. I was on the line last night with a sprint representative to fix a problem I thought was their error but turned out to be my own miscalculation. In trying to get to technical support the csr I was speaking with remained online with me until Technical support picked up the call. She commented during this time frame that it didn't matter how long it took to resolve the issue, she was to stay on the call until the issue was resolved. I don't think I have ever been in a situation where Sprint has rushed through a call of mine simply to get it done and get off the line. Enjoy getting something for free? Loreal Marie Lavigna Lifestyle Consultant Princess House 213 Front St. Schenectady, NY 12305 Loreallavigna@myprincesshouse.com AIM: Llavigna2 mobile: Skype ID: 518-330-5188 Llavigna Want to always have my latest info? Want a signature like this? I had one rep tell me she couldn't help me and said she would forward my call to the proper department. She didn't. What she did was put me back through to the regular CSR desk and I had to wait on hold for another 20 minutes. I guess my issue was too complicated for her to want to handle. I was on the line last night with a sprint representative to fix a problem I thought was their error but turned out to be my own miscalculation. In trying to get to technical support the csr I was speaking with remained online with me until Technical support picked up the call. She commented during this time frame that it didn't matter how long it took to resolve the issue, she was to stay on the call until the issue was resolved. I don't think I have ever been in a situation where Sprint has rushed through a call of mine simply to get it done and get off the line. Enjoy getting something for free? Loreal Marie Lavigna Lifestyle Consultant Princess House 213 Front St. Schenectady, NY 12305 Loreallavigna@myprincesshouse.com AIM: Llavigna2 mobile: Skype ID:518-330-5188 Llavigna Want to always have my latest info?Want a signature like this? Youre wrong sprint does have a time limit per call to fix youre problems i should know i used to live next to one. SignatureAL'S COMPUTERS > >> as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And your recollection would be incorrect. No carrier in the US operates > under this urban myth. Sprint has the best signal of all cell services. It is the best. > Youre wrong sprint does have a time limit per call to fix youre problems i > should know i used to live next to one. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> And your recollection would be incorrect. No carrier in the US operates >> under this urban myth. Sprint has the best signal of all cell services. It is the best. > Youre wrong sprint does have a time limit per call to fix youre problems i > should know i used to live next to one. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >> And your recollection would be incorrect. No carrier in the US operates >> under this urban myth. Used to live next to what, a sprint customer service representative, or next door to the location of one of their call centers? All I know is I have never personally been rushed off of a call. They have always made every attempt to rectify the problem or transferred me to the correct department where the error or problem could be rectified. Loreal > Youre wrong sprint does have a time limit per call to fix youre > problems i should know i used to live next to one. Well, I should know as well- I've been in a number of their call centers and consulted with those management teams. There is no time limit per call- only an average time which is generally measured in monthly timeframes. Scott, > Well, I should know as well- I've been in a number of their call centers > and consulted with those management teams. There is no time limit per > call- only an average time which is generally measured in monthly > timeframes. Doesn't trying to enforce an average call time still tend to encourage employees to simply not deal with more complex problems? > Doesn't trying to enforce an average call time still tend to encourage > employees to simply not deal with more complex problems? Yes and no. Yes if that's the ONLY metric they are judged on, but usually that isn't the case. Generally there is also some kind of resolution tracking as well. (Monitoring if additional calls come in from the same customer with the same problem, etc.) Also, keep in mind that unlike with sales, where low is "bad" and high is "good," desired call times with CS are generally a target range as opposed to "the lower the better." If the target average is, say, six minutes, then the rep with a two-minute average is likely as big a problem (or bigger!) than the rep with a 10 minute call average, because the short-call rep is likely not providing the desired level of service. I've been with T-Mo so long now that I almost miss surly CSRs that try to rush you off the phone. I swear T-Mo's reps are now paid by the apology- I'm already tired of T-Mo's new "form-letter sympathy" CS scripts: "I can see how [insert problem here] can be frustrating . I'm very sorry you are experiencing a problem with [afore-mentioned issue]. We know how important [service that you're having a problem with] is to our valuable customers, particularly those like yourself, [inset customer's name here] who've been with us since [insert activation date]. I'll do everything I possibly can to solve your problem..." etc. etc. I called a few weeks ago to report a slight problem on their website, just because I figured they'd want to know so they could fix it, and it was comical to hear the rep try to "sympathize" with someone who wasn't actually angry or frustrated. T-Mo: "I'm sorry, Mr. Allcock, I understand it must be frustrating not to be able to find contact information for our website team..." Me: "No, it isn't frustrating- it's really no big deal. I just wanted to let them know the 'T-Mo-mail configurator' on the website isn't working." T-Mo: "I'm very sorry, we know how important the mail configurator is to our customers..." Me: "Really, it's not a problem- it's the first time I've tried using it in six years. I doubt many people even know it's there..." T-Mo: "You can assured that I'll do whatever I can to find you that e-mail address... Your business is very important to us, Mr. Allcock, and we appreciate that you've been a loyal T-Mobile customer since October of 2000..." Me: "Really, that's okay- maybe I'll just write a letter to "Whom it may concern..." T-Mo: "I'm very sorry I couldn't find the e-mail address you're requesting. I realize your time is valuable, so I've asked for my supervisor and our tier-3 data support team to join us..." Me: "Seriously? Fine, I guess- as long as they don't apologi..." Supervisor: "Hello, I'm supervisor so and so, please accept my apology that it's taking us so long to resolve your problem..." Me: "Um, that's ok- it seems to be working now, gotta go, bye!" *click* Signature"I don't need my cell phone to play video games or take pictures or double as a Walkie-Talkie; I just need it to work. Thanks for all the bells and whistles, but I could communicate better with ACTUAL bells and whistles." -Bill Maher 9/25/2003 > I've been with T-Mo so long now that I almost miss surly CSRs that > try to rush you off the phone. I swear T-Mo's reps are now paid by [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > sorry you are experiencing a problem with [afore-mentioned issue].... > [etc.]" Agreed, this is incredibly insulting in my view. I suppose the proper response is, "I'm sorry you can't think for yourself and need a script to help you, even for something as simple as an apology." Nice story, Todd. :-) > Scott, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Doesn't trying to enforce an average call time still tend to encourage > employees to simply not deal with more complex problems? Not if they are also being measured on short calls, calls transferred or returned to queue, calls per hour and availablility. Any one of these metrics (and a variety of others) easily point to someone who is dumping calls. Anyone saying that agents today dump calls after x minutes has not been in a call center environment in quite some time- the tools are much more advanced than they were even a couple of years ago. > Any one of these > metrics (and a variety of others) easily point to someone who is dumping > calls. Very true. Depending on the agent's skills and training, the average call handling time may typically fall within 90% of the target times for 90% of the agents 90% of the time. When a term leads or quality assurance starts seeing really low times, then the agent is "punting" the call. >> as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. >> that's probably what they were doing- just doing anything to end the >> call. > >And your recollection would be incorrect. No carrier in the US operates >under this urban myth. And you are ALSO incorrect. The defacto standard in wireless CS is five minutes with a six second wrap up time after the call is dropped to close the account and prepare for the next one. Yes, calls last longer than five minutes, but once a call hits maybe six minutes I'm starting to find a way to end it and move on. We do have goals to meet and Calls Per Hour is one of the big ones. You try doing 11.8 CPH (an industry standard) if you routinely let your calls go over 5 minutes...and see: 1) how much of a raise you get, and 2) how long you will keep your job. So NO, this is not an Urban Myth. >>> as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. >>> that's probably what they were doing- just doing anything to end the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > So NO, this is not an Urban Myth. Yes it is and you just proved it. newman said that there was a time limit- you said it was an average, which is correct. For every six minute call you take, you probably get three that last less than three. You are operating on an average, not a drop dead time. Thanks for proving the point. Defacto standard is probably not the way to describe it. Depending on the department you work in there is a goal of a certain "average handling time" or "call resolution time" depending on what the company uses for the name of it. When I worked with t-mo a little over a year ago, the average that they wanted us to shoot for was 328 seconds in general care. In the 3 1/2 years that I worked for them my average was about 260 seconds over all. [efficiency in finding the information needed by the customer helps a lot :-)] There were however many reps, that had averages much higher than 328, that had been there longer than I and that are still there. What is more important that how quickly you get to the next customer is how well you resolve their issues. Call center management will gladly give more leeway to a rep that has tight quality and higher handle time, than to a rep that has great handle time but poor quality. They also have a metric that deals with the reps 'commitment to schedule', which measures the percentage of time that they are supposed to be in their seats logged in to take calls based on their schedule. [taking breaks at the right time, and being back from them at the right time, etc] I now work in email customer care which is a lot more laid back, but still stresses quality of service over handle time as a better mark of how well we are doing. > And you are ALSO incorrect. The defacto standard in wireless CS is > five minutes with a six second wrap up time after the call is dropped [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > So NO, this is not an Urban Myth. > as I recall, CS reps have a certain time limit to dispose of calls. that's > probably what they were doing- just doing anything to end the call. Yes and no....For every type of call center environment, you have a average call handling time that is established with experienced agents, say ten minutes. The average call times for an agent should average out to that ten minutes. An agent doesn't worry if a call takes a little longer as the agent will have a proportional number of short calls. When the team leaders and quality assurance looks at the times and see call times for an agent are longer than the average, they might consider additional training for the agent. When the call times are way to short, the agent is "punting" the call. On the other hand, when a system is down and you have a hundred calls in cue when the normal is only twenty or so, then the agents may get a pop-up of sorts to hurry the call along. I got lied to by a CSR too. I was double billed and told them I needed a REFUND. They said they don't do refunds and I would be credited next month. Not good enough I told her. I went on to say that I'm on a structured income and if that refund was not available in the next week my rent check would bounce. She said she put a refund through but a week later, no refund. I called back and was told that she put in my account that I requested a credit. It took over three hours and five reps to finally fix the problem and I got the refund posted to my account the next day. Almost every one I spoke to told me they don't give refunds... another lie, I got one. If service like this doesn't stop, I'll be looking for another carrier. In fact I already did but no other company offers data plans for $10. Everyone I checked is $40 or more for unlimited data. That's the only reason I'm staying with Sprint right now. I even went as far to say that if this is not rectified I'll cancel my account and will refuse to pay the ETF. If they report it on my credit report I'd dispute it citing breach of contract, double billing and refusal to compensate in a timely manner for mistakes made on their behalf. > Service disaster... > [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > SallyShears@gmail.com -or- Sally@Shears.org > SallyShears (at) gmail (dot) com >I got lied to by a CSR too. I was double billed and told them I needed a >REFUND. They said they don't do refunds and I would be credited next month. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >double billing and refusal to compensate in a timely manner for mistakes >made on their behalf. A REFUND is not posted to your account - that's a CREDIT. So the first CSR you mentioned didn't lie and the second one did NOT give you a REFUND. I listen to crap like this every day and listen to callers saying they are leaving left and right. I check back a few months later and they are STILL with us. It's just a method of fishing and trying to get something for nothing. > Service disaster... > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > service problems there. To get you better service, we'll change your > CSA and give you a new number." Why would the rep try to change my phone number? That starts a long process. Is there any incentive for the rep to change the phone number? I read some comments here "new number starts a new 18 month commitment cycle" or perhaps "contract is tied to phone number; new number postpones the date you're eligible for renewall offers." Are there any incentives for the rep to change my phone number? And, is there ANY WAY that changing the phone number (not the phone itself) would sovle a "no signal" problem? -- Sally SignatureSally Shears (a.k.a. "Molly") SallyShears@gmail.com -or- Sally@Shears.org SallyShears (at) gmail (dot) com > And, is there ANY WAY that changing the phone number (not the phone > itself) would sovle a "no signal" problem? > > -- Sally Yes, in some instances. In congested areas, calls can be apportioned among multiple Master Stations nominally serving the same areas, according to subscribers' phone numbers. Service from such multiple Master Stations can be unequal at some locations. If you're not in a congested area, though, it likely wouldn't have helped you. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.