Threatening legal letters...

Lostman1990

I actually posted this experience to a thread already without known that Eircom had a customer service thread on here. So I will post it here to see if I can get a response.
My parents have been customers of your service for many years. They left about 4 weeks ago to try a new land-line provider. They continued to pay their final bill as usual. Today, they had the wonderful experience and privilege of getting a letter from your "Head of Credit Risk" demanding payment of a sum less than 3 figures, threatening legal recourse, and recommending prudence in this matter. On phoning Eircom, my dad was told that he should relax the "attitude" and that this was normal automated procedure. If a customer is 7 days overdue, they get an automated letter threatening disconnection. As they were not customers anymore, the process goes this route. But in all their years with Eircom, they never got a reminder letter. If a residual was left on a bill it was just added to the next one. So my first question is: Why did the customer service rep clearly state a falsehood here. My second question is: Why would Eircom's process go straight to a seriously threatening legal letter when half the remaining bill has already been paid and by evidence of many years, the remaining bill would be paid? My final question is: Is this the procedure Eircom uses to regain customer who they are losing to competitors? If it is, it will not work.

Thanking you in advance for your reply.

eircom: Alan

Lostman1990 wrote: »

I actually posted this experience to a thread already without known that Eircom had a customer service thread on here. So I will post it here to see if I can get a response.
My parents have been customers of your service for many years. They left about 4 weeks ago to try a new land-line provider. They continued to pay their final bill as usual. Today, they had the wonderful experience and privilege of getting a letter from your "Head of Credit Risk" demanding payment of a sum less than 3 figures, threatening legal recourse, and recommending prudence in this matter. On phoning Eircom, my dad was told that he should relax the "attitude" and that this was normal automated procedure. If a customer is 7 days overdue, they get an automated letter threatening disconnection. As they were not customers anymore, the process goes this route. But in all their years with Eircom, they never got a reminder letter. If a residual was left on a bill it was just added to the next one. So my first question is: Why did the customer service rep clearly state a falsehood here. My second question is: Why would Eircom's process go straight to a seriously threatening legal letter when half the remaining bill has already been paid and by evidence of many years, the remaining bill would be paid? My final question is: Is this the procedure Eircom uses to regain customer who they are losing to competitors? If it is, it will not work.

Thanking you in advance for your reply.

Hi[font=Calibri","sans-serif] lostman1990

I'm very sorry to hear of the disappointing level of service offered to you by the agent who you were speaking to, I can understand the level of disappointment and frustration such communication this can create and I apologise for this.

The process does not go straight to a legal letter right away after closing the account rather a final bill is send and if payment is not made within 14 days the letter is then arranged. I would not be able to offer operational reasoning behind such decision but I do understand your feelings on this and I will of course make your feelings aware to operations. Although payment might have always been perfect I can confirm that this is not put in to consideration of such letters as a standard procedure is followed for all customers - I completely understand the opinion that previous good history should be brought in to account in consideration of the arrears however this is not accounted for. I fully understand that this process is not very encouraging to returning customers.

Thanks
Al[/font]

Lostman1990

eircom: Alan wrote: »

Lostman1990 wrote: »

I actually posted this experience to a thread already without known that Eircom had a customer service thread on here. So I will post it here to see if I can get a response.
My parents have been customers of your service for many years. They left about 4 weeks ago to try a new land-line provider. They continued to pay their final bill as usual. Today, they had the wonderful experience and privilege of getting a letter from your "Head of Credit Risk" demanding payment of a sum less than 3 figures, threatening legal recourse, and recommending prudence in this matter. On phoning Eircom, my dad was told that he should relax the "attitude" and that this was normal automated procedure. If a customer is 7 days overdue, they get an automated letter threatening disconnection. As they were not customers anymore, the process goes this route. But in all their years with Eircom, they never got a reminder letter. If a residual was left on a bill it was just added to the next one. So my first question is: Why did the customer service rep clearly state a falsehood here. My second question is: Why would Eircom's process go straight to a seriously threatening legal letter when half the remaining bill has already been paid and by evidence of many years, the remaining bill would be paid? My final question is: Is this the procedure Eircom uses to regain customer who they are losing to competitors? If it is, it will not work.

Thanking you in advance for your reply.

Hi lostman1990

I'm very sorry to hear of the disappointing level of service offered to you by the agent who you were speaking to, I can understand the level of disappointment and frustration such communication this can create and I apologise for this.

The process does not go straight to a legal letter right away after closing the account rather a final bill is send and if payment is not made within 14 days the letter is then arranged. I would not be able to offer operational reasoning behind such decision but I do understand your feelings on this and I will of course make your feelings aware to operations. Although payment might have always been perfect I can confirm that this is not put in to consideration of such letters as a standard procedure is followed for all customers - I completely understand the opinion that previous good history should be brought in to account in consideration of the arrears however this is not accounted for. I fully understand that this process is not very encouraging to returning customers.

Thanks
Al

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your reply.

I completely understand the need for the option of legal recourse for companies when dealing with customers where credit has been issued. It must be remembered though that if customer relationships are going to be dealt with partially through an automated system that this system should minimize the occurrence of threatening letters of this nature. A CRM system should be able to apply a more detailed scenario analysis than just a jump to legal recourse(especially with the nature of language used in this letter.) It was an extremely upsetting letter to be received by people who have never got one before by any company. A CRM system worth its salt would also determine my parents as an opportunity to regain as customers. It was only last week that my mam questioned changing providers due to an early issue she had with the billing of the new provider. The cognitive dissonance she felt with this change has now been completely quenched. 

Thanking you

eircom: Alan

Lostman1990 wrote: »

eircom: Alan wrote: »

Lostman1990 wrote: »

I actually posted this experience to a thread already without known that Eircom had a customer service thread on here. So I will post it here to see if I can get a response.
My parents have been customers of your service for many years. They left about 4 weeks ago to try a new land-line provider. They continued to pay their final bill as usual. Today, they had the wonderful experience and privilege of getting a letter from your "Head of Credit Risk" demanding payment of a sum less than 3 figures, threatening legal recourse, and recommending prudence in this matter. On phoning Eircom, my dad was told that he should relax the "attitude" and that this was normal automated procedure. If a customer is 7 days overdue, they get an automated letter threatening disconnection. As they were not customers anymore, the process goes this route. But in all their years with Eircom, they never got a reminder letter. If a residual was left on a bill it was just added to the next one. So my first question is: Why did the customer service rep clearly state a falsehood here. My second question is: Why would Eircom's process go straight to a seriously threatening legal letter when half the remaining bill has already been paid and by evidence of many years, the remaining bill would be paid? My final question is: Is this the procedure Eircom uses to regain customer who they are losing to competitors? If it is, it will not work.

Thanking you in advance for your reply.

Hi lostman1990

I'm very sorry to hear of the disappointing level of service offered to you by the agent who you were speaking to, I can understand the level of disappointment and frustration such communication this can create and I apologise for this.

The process does not go straight to a legal letter right away after closing the account rather a final bill is send and if payment is not made within 14 days the letter is then arranged. I would not be able to offer operational reasoning behind such decision but I do understand your feelings on this and I will of course make your feelings aware to operations. Although payment might have always been perfect I can confirm that this is not put in to consideration of such letters as a standard procedure is followed for all customers - I completely understand the opinion that previous good history should be brought in to account in consideration of the arrears however this is not accounted for. I fully understand that this process is not very encouraging to returning customers.

Thanks
Al

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your reply.

I completely understand the need for the option of legal recourse for companies when dealing with customers where credit has been issued. It must be remembered though that if customer relationships are going to be dealt with partially through an automated system that this system should minimize the occurrence of threatening letters of this nature. A CRM system should be able to apply a more detailed scenario analysis than just a jump to legal recourse(especially with the nature of language used in this letter.) It was an extremely upsetting letter to be received by people who have never got one before by any company. A CRM system worth its salt would also determine my parents as an opportunity to regain as customers. It was only last week that my mam questioned changing providers due to an early issue she had with the billing of the new provider. The cognitive dissonance she felt with this change has now been completely quenched. 

Thanking you

Hi Lostman1990

I fully understand your feelings on this and what you have described above -  I will ensure that your feedback reached operations.

Again, I would like to apologise for any inconvenience and disappointment created by this letter.

Thanks
Al