Do you think this is too harsh?

Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
draft...

Just a note: I've left names and employee IDs out of the version I'm
posting. No need to smear these people on a permanent Internet archive, I
don't guess...

Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],



I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often appear
to be made up as they go along by same).



On August 23, 2004 I visited your Sprint store in [x]. For the second time,
I was issued an LG-1200 phone that was defective. The first one was replaced
without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I was
assisted by an overweight woman who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to be
able to give a name. I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the obvious:
the phone didn't vibrate. It also froze in screen-saver mode and could only
be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though the
phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
"user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
re-created.



But the problem was clearly being caused by me.



I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your call
center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke to
[x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the Sprint
store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
"assisted" me there. I was offended. I was spoken to like I was an imbecile
by the personnel at that store and was denied a replacement for my phone on
the grounds that the phone was likely not the problem. After stating my
intention to leave Sprint PCS at the end of my contract in October if the
issue was not resolved to my satisfaction, [x] placed me on hold
interminably and then came back with the following offer:



[x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone as
there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it. When
the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated and
activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number and
would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my account
that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do. I don't
necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first language
is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place. I'm
certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change the
fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if you
don't investigate this, shame on you.



When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone number
and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third line
on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this out
during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your call
center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new phone
was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
early termination charge. Tell me, are you familiar with the term "Slamming"
? Well, as someone who has worked for a telephone provider, I am very
familiar with the term. My state Attorney General's office is as well. They
have asked me to make every effort to solve this problem amicably, which I
have done.



My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my position;
she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had no
intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She has
proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of someone
with a little less ice water running through his or her veins. I had asked
to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
further. From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand why.
In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
character. She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much less
proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you want
someone like that representing you?





I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual, had
she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
resolution. I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG and
the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada, identified
only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather than
offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the process,
she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
back to Square One. You can tell me "That's policy," until you're blue in
the face. Such policies stink. And this situation has begun to stink so bad
it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this virtual
poisoned pen. But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.



Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked [x] to
review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
told me to call back after twelve hours.



TWELVE HOURS.



The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already spent
almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would take
that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
complex conundrum.



Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
"P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who also
was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of professionalism
which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I have
no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two weeks
in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.



In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience of
dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity in
the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be attributed
to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions to
even the simplest of problems. I find your company name to be rather ironic.
It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll follow
its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.







Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,



Shadow

---

› See More: Do you think this is too harsh?

Shadow wrote:

> Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
> get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
> service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> draft...

I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word "overweight" as
it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think it's a
well-worded, rational letter. Send it!

I'm sorry you've had so much trouble with Sprint...


--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.

Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
> "overweight"

.....and replace it with "fat *****."

Neon Knight wrote:
> Steve Sobol <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
>>"overweight"
>
>
> ....and replace it with "fat *****."
"stupid fat *****"... I agree... drop the "overweight"...

"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Shadow wrote:
>
> > Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
finally
> > get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
customer
> > service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> > draft...
>
> I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word "overweight"
as
> it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think it's
a
> well-worded, rational letter. Send it!

I figured it was the only thing that would single her out since she was the
only overweight one in the bunch. But yeah, it might seem a bit pejorative
in context. Thanks for the input.

filing a complaint with your state's attorney general wouldn't take very
long and that might provoke some response. I know I always get an official
signed response from companies I have complained about. Sometimes it is
even drafted from their legal department.

Captainkrunch


"Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:MXwYc.338442$%_6.183364@attbi_s01...
>
> "Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Shadow wrote:
> >
> > > Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can
> finally
> > > get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of
> customer
> > > service. Do you think it's too harsh? Heh... ya shoulda read the first
> > > draft...
> >
> > I absolutely do not think it's too harsh. Eliminate the word
"overweight"
> as
> > it's irrelevant to the discussion at hand, but quite frankly, I think
it's
> a
> > well-worded, rational letter. Send it!
>
> I figured it was the only thing that would single her out since she was
the
> only overweight one in the bunch. But yeah, it might seem a bit pejorative
> in context. Thanks for the input.
>
>

"Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04>...
> Here's the text of a letter I'll be firing off to Sprint when I can finally
> get a name for someone who is the actual head/president/whstever of customer
> service. Do you think it's too harsh?

No. You hit on the important issues: inconsistency, rudeness, hassle
(long hold times, having to call back multiple times), general lack of
accountability for getting the job done, surprise increases in your
phone bill. Like the others I think "big" or "large" would identify
the individual about as well as the perjorative "overweight."

I found that bringing in the Better Business Bureau seems to help in
getting the attention of Sprint management. Haven't tried using the
state Attorney General's office, which may be even more useful.

Why are you still a customer? Are you locked into a contract?


Don Doumakes
Email: doumakes at loganet.net (do not mail [email protected])
My own Sprint PCS story: http://www.loganet.net/~doumakes/sprint.html

> Why are you still a customer? Are you locked into a contract?

Yeah, but the contract is up in October and T-Mobile has already offered me
the same rate with 2 free Samsung phones. I know the local management and
they say they'll look forward to hearing from me in November.

You asked for a critique, so here you are.


"Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04...
> Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],
>
>
>
> I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
> personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
> employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often appear
> to be made up as they go along by same).

If you need to make the point in parentheses clear, then it should be its
own sentence. Parentheses make you look, well, pompous. I should know, I
use them too often myself.

[SNIP]
> without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I
> was
> assisted by an overweight woman

Why does the person's weight have any bearing at all on their ability to be
competent in assisting you? Too many times have I seen complaints from
people that start with "this fat woman," "this black woman," "that indian
man," "that skinny white trash woman." Generally that sets a red flag in
any complaint, no matter how valid that complaint may be, because it hints
that you had a prejudice against the person helping you before they even
said a word. And that tends to hurt your credibility.

A person's bodily features, even if they are distasteful to you, should not
have a bearing on any complaint related to their comptence, unless of course
it's totally outside of reason (extremely poor hygiene, wearing tattered or
inappropriate clothing, etc.).

My suggestion is to leave it out.

> who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
> procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to be
> able to give a name.

See? That's all you had to say.

> I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
> wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the obvious:
> the phone didn't vibrate.

Was your phone taken and you were told that a technician would look at it,
first? Or were you just let out to dry without any info at all? This is
important.

> It also froze in screen-saver mode and could only
> be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
> back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though the
> phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
> "user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
> re-created.
>
>
> But the problem was clearly being caused by me.

It's not clear here whether you're being sarcastic, or whether you're
acquiescing. Leave the last sentence out.

> I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your call
> center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke
> to
> [x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the Sprint
> store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
> citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
> "assisted" me there.

Are there other Sprint stores in the area? If so, give a reason why you
didn't go there.

[SNIP]
> [x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone as
> there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it.
> When
> the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated and
> activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number
> and
> would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my
> account
> that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do.

What were the notes?

> I don't
> necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first
> language
> is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place.
> I'm
> certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change the
> fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if you
> don't investigate this, shame on you.

I read this and went, "huh?" The person who gets your letter will probably
do the same, and ignore it. I'm not sure what you were trying to get across
here that directly relates to your complaint. Are you angry that the x
couldn't speak English? If so, then just say so.

And the "shame on you" bit contributes nothing, really except makes you look
overly emotional.

> When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone number
> and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third
> line
> on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this out
> during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your call
> center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new
> phone
> was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
> early termination charge.

This paragraphs is good as is. Except for..

> Tell me, are you familiar with the term "Slamming"
> ?

Clearly, you are not. Slamming is a term that relates to someone changing
your landline long distance provider. Sprint did nothing of the sort here.
What they did do is add a new line to your account without your consent.
Call a spade a spade, especially if you threaten to get the authorities
involved. Otherwise, you look silly to both Sprint and to the Attorney
General.

[snip]
> My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my
> position;
> she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had no
> intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She has
> proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
> illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
> exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
> nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
> subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
> mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of someone
> with a little less ice water running through his or her veins.

You felt the conversation was going nowhere, and so you hung up.

I just summarized the above paragraph in one sentence. You should do the
same. I don't see why people insist on making grandiose accusations and
getting over-emotional. It gets people nowhere. If you feel they did
something illegal., then assert so in a concise manner. If you're direct,
you get better results. in fact, I daresay that this kind of emotionalism
is probably why people reacted to you with "ice in their veins."

> I had asked
> to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
> further.

How did you do this if you "disengaged the call?"

> From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand why.

Leave this out. If it was unacceptable behavior, then it was unnacceptable,
and there's no need to "understand" it. To "understand" is to excuse.

> In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
> encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
> character.

Yes, yes yes, every bad customer service experience is always the worst.
Leave this out.

> She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much less
> proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you want
> someone like that representing you?

More emotionalism. Trim it out.

> I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual,
> had
> she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
> resolution.

In other words, "y next conversation with customer service was equally
fruitless." Next.

> I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
> had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG and
> the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
> person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada, identified
> only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
> they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather
> than
> offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the process,
> she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
> back to Square One.

"Your computer system went down before your representative was able to
complete the ESN swap and correct the probem to my satisfaction. I take
issue with the fact that your systems are this unreliable." Next.

> And this situation has begun to stink so bad
> it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this virtual
> poisoned pen.

Yes, I'm sure you're going to win the nobel prize for literature. Leave the
above out. Next.

>But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.

"And yet, the bad experience continued." Next.

>
> Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked [x]
> to
> review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
> told me to call back after twelve hours.

Okay.

> TWELVE HOURS.

"This timeframe was unnacceptable to me." Next.

> The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already spent
> almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would take
> that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
> remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
> sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
> complex conundrum.

I'm not sure whether this paragraph is clear or not. Mainly because you
have so many x's, I'm not sure which x is which.

> Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
> privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
> "P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who also
> was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of
> professionalism
> which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I
> have
> no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
> confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two
> weeks
> in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.

"Finally the problem was fixed." Next. You might also want to describe how
it was done.

> In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience of
> dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
> several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
> simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
> communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity in
> the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be attributed
> to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
> personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions to
> even the simplest of problems.

Melodramatic, but okay.

> I find your company name to be rather ironic.
> It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll
> follow
> its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
> forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.

This is about as bad as referring to someone's appearance (as you did
earlier). So many people think this kind of paragraph, where they make fun
of the company's name, is witty. It really isn't. And it detracts from
your message.

> Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,

About as unwitty as above. I usually end complaint letters with
"respectfully," or the old standby, "sincerely." Such closings emphasize -
in just one word - that I have kept a cool head through this matter and
command nothing less than the same. Doing the above, on the other, just
further bolsters the idea that you're a kook, so anyone who is inclined to
believe so.

Anyway, that's my critique. You can take it or leave it as you wish.
Unedited though, I think your letter will end up in the trash bin,
regarldess of whether you were writing this letter to Sprint, Verizon,
T-mobile or any company for that matter.

Isaiah's comments are to the point. I would:
1. Have an introductory/summary paragraph indicating same letter is being
sent to State AG and BBB.
2. Have a conclusion stating how much money he has to give you to make you
happy based upon above.

Good luck!
John

--
Remove FLY to reply
"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You asked for a critique, so here you are.
>
>
> "Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:RJtYc.204655$8_6.37772@attbi_s04...
> > Dear [insert name of person-responsible-for-all-this here],
> >
> >
> >
> > I am writing to you to express my dissatisfaction with your company, its
> > personnel and its policies (the likes of which precious few of your
> > employees or contractors seem to know, or adhere to and which often
appear
> > to be made up as they go along by same).
>
> If you need to make the point in parentheses clear, then it should be its
> own sentence. Parentheses make you look, well, pompous. I should know, I
> use them too often myself.
>
> [SNIP]
> > without question less than a week previous. When I entered the store, I
> > was
> > assisted by an overweight woman
>
> Why does the person's weight have any bearing at all on their ability to
be
> competent in assisting you? Too many times have I seen complaints from
> people that start with "this fat woman," "this black woman," "that indian
> man," "that skinny white trash woman." Generally that sets a red flag in
> any complaint, no matter how valid that complaint may be, because it hints
> that you had a prejudice against the person helping you before they even
> said a word. And that tends to hurt your credibility.
>
> A person's bodily features, even if they are distasteful to you, should
not
> have a bearing on any complaint related to their comptence, unless of
course
> it's totally outside of reason (extremely poor hygiene, wearing tattered
or
> inappropriate clothing, etc.).
>
> My suggestion is to leave it out.
>
> > who appeared to be new and unfamiliar with
> > procedure. She also did not wear a name tag or any other ID for me to
be
> > able to give a name.
>
> See? That's all you had to say.
>
> > I was treated poorly by this person and was asked to
> > wait up to THREE HOURS for one of your technicians to confirm the
obvious:
> > the phone didn't vibrate.
>
> Was your phone taken and you were told that a technician would look at it,
> first? Or were you just let out to dry without any info at all? This is
> important.
>
> > It also froze in screen-saver mode and could only
> > be refreshed by removing the battery, replacing it and turning the phone
> > back on. Your employee refused to order me a replacement, even though
the
> > phone was still under warranty, stating that the problem was more likely
> > "user error." Well, between myself and your employee, both problems were
> > re-created.
> >
> >
> > But the problem was clearly being caused by me.
>
> It's not clear here whether you're being sarcastic, or whether you're
> acquiescing. Leave the last sentence out.
>
> > I then went home and called customer service. I was connected to your
call
> > center which your representative would identify only as "V-28" and spoke
> > to
> > [x]. [x] was helpful but was rather insistent that I return to the
Sprint
> > store with the phone and have it checked out again. I refused to do so
> > citing the absurdity of the explanation I was given by the person who
> > "assisted" me there.
>
> Are there other Sprint stores in the area? If so, give a reason why you
> didn't go there.
>
> [SNIP]
> > [x] told me that he had been authorized to send me a Nokia 3588i phone
as
> > there was a current promotion that would allow an instant rebate on it.
> > When
> > the phone arrived I would have to call Sprint, have my LG deactivated
and
> > activate the Nokia free of charge. I would keep my current phone number
> > and
> > would not have to return the LG. Carlos apparently left notes on my
> > account
> > that were quite contrary to what he told me he was going to do.
>
> What were the notes?
>
> > I don't
> > necessarily blame [x] for this debacle because, you see, [x]' first
> > language
> > is not English and it was hard for us to communicate in the first place.
> > I'm
> > certain that he did what he thought was right, but that doesn't change
the
> > fact that it wasn't. It also doesn't change what happened next and if
you
> > don't investigate this, shame on you.
>
> I read this and went, "huh?" The person who gets your letter will
probably
> do the same, and ignore it. I'm not sure what you were trying to get
across
> here that directly relates to your complaint. Are you angry that the x
> couldn't speak English? If so, then just say so.
>
> And the "shame on you" bit contributes nothing, really except makes you
look
> overly emotional.
>
> > When the Nokia arrived, it was already activated, had its own phone
number
> > and, I found out talking to customer service, had been added as a third
> > line
> > on my plan and carried an additional $20/month fee. I found all this
out
> > during a conversation with [x] who claimed to be a supervisor at your
call
> > center identified only as "P04". [x] made it clear to me that the new
> > phone
> > was now part of my plan and if I removed it I would be subject to a $150
> > early termination charge.
>
> This paragraphs is good as is. Except for..
>
> > Tell me, are you familiar with the term "Slamming"
> > ?
>
> Clearly, you are not. Slamming is a term that relates to someone changing
> your landline long distance provider. Sprint did nothing of the sort
here.
> What they did do is add a new line to your account without your consent.
> Call a spade a spade, especially if you threaten to get the authorities
> involved. Otherwise, you look silly to both Sprint and to the Attorney
> General.
>
> [snip]
> > My conversation with [x] got nowhere. I kept trying to explain my
> > position;
> > she remained icy and detached and made it perfectly clear that she had
no
> > intention to bend on this issue. This individual should be fired. She
has
> > proved herself to be a liability to your company by standing behind an
> > illegal practice and refusing to put the situation right. She also
> > exemplifies the antithesis of good customer service and clearly cares
> > nothing for your customers or the issues heaped upon them by her
> > subordinates and their incompetence. I eventually conceded defeat to the
> > mighty [x] and disengaged the call, opting to seek the counsel of
someone
> > with a little less ice water running through his or her veins.
>
> You felt the conversation was going nowhere, and so you hung up.
>
> I just summarized the above paragraph in one sentence. You should do the
> same. I don't see why people insist on making grandiose accusations and
> getting over-emotional. It gets people nowhere. If you feel they did
> something illegal., then assert so in a concise manner. If you're direct,
> you get better results. in fact, I daresay that this kind of emotionalism
> is probably why people reacted to you with "ice in their veins."
>
> > I had asked
> > to speak to her immediate superior and she refused to escalate the call
> > further.
>
> How did you do this if you "disengaged the call?"
>
> > From a self-preservation standpoint I can certainly understand why.
>
> Leave this out. If it was unacceptable behavior, then it was
unnacceptable,
> and there's no need to "understand" it. To "understand" is to excuse.
>
> > In all my dealings with customer service personnel I have never before
> > encountered an individual of such insolence and contemptible lack of
> > character.
>
> Yes, yes yes, every bad customer service experience is always the worst.
> Leave this out.
>
> > She refused to so much as empathize with the customer, much less
> > proactively work toward an agreeable solution. Why on earth would you
want
> > someone like that representing you?
>
> More emotionalism. Trim it out.
>
> > I may have been able to offer a bit of praise for this next individual,
> > had
> > she simply taken ownership of the issue. I was within minutes of a
> > resolution.
>
> In other words, "y next conversation with customer service was equally
> fruitless." Next.
>
> > I was on the phone with her for the better part of an hour and
> > had been told that they were going to do an "ESN Swap" between the LG
and
> > the Nokia and bring me back down to only two lines on my account. This
> > person called herself [x] and works in a call center in Canada,
identified
> > only as "V-31." Between her and her supervisor (identified only as [x]),
> > they had worked a solution for me...then her computer went down. Rather
> > than
> > offer to complete the transaction and call me back to finish the
process,
> > she left it to me to start over with yet another representative. Welcome
> > back to Square One.
>
> "Your computer system went down before your representative was able to
> complete the ESN swap and correct the probem to my satisfaction. I take
> issue with the fact that your systems are this unreliable." Next.
>
> > And this situation has begun to stink so bad
> > it's a wonder I can keep my head clear enough to keep pushing this
virtual
> > poisoned pen.
>
> Yes, I'm sure you're going to win the nobel prize for literature. Leave
the
> above out. Next.
>
> >But I will, because this odyssey is still not over.
>
> "And yet, the bad experience continued." Next.
>
> >
> > Enter [x]. [x] works for your call center code named "V-30." I asked
[x]
> > to
> > review the notes. She did. She claimed to have deactivated the Nokia and
> > told me to call back after twelve hours.
>
> Okay.
>
> > TWELVE HOURS.
>
> "This timeframe was unnacceptable to me." Next.
>
> > The reason I was given for this further inconvenience (I had already
spent
> > almost four hours of my day making these calls) was because it would
take
> > that amount of time for the phone to deactivate at which time they would
> > remove the LG and activate the Nokia with my current phone number..this
> > sounds strangely like [x]' original solution to this ever-increasingly
> > complex conundrum.
>
> I'm not sure whether this paragraph is clear or not. Mainly because you
> have so many x's, I'm not sure which x is which.
>
> > Finally, on day five of this journey, a solution is presented. I was
> > privileged to speak with a representative named [x] at vendor location
> > "P-11" who was not only courteous and responsive to my issue but who
also
> > was able to complete the process swiftly and with a level of
> > professionalism
> > which is, unfortunately, the exception to the rule for your company. I
> > have
> > no doubt that this issue is now resolved. Yes, after all this she won my
> > confidence. This representative deserves a raise, a promotion and two
> > weeks
> > in Cancun on the company dime. I'd send her there myself if I could.
>
> "Finally the problem was fixed." Next. You might also want to describe
how
> it was done.
>
> > In conclusion, with few obvious exceptions, I have found the experience
of
> > dealing with your customer service personnel in general over the past
> > several years to be a strenuous experience and a recipe for stress that
> > simply has to be experienced to be believed. There is a brazen lack of
> > communication between your call centers, a startling level of disparity
in
> > the implementation of policy and procedure and what can only be
attributed
> > to a sadly lacking training program which leads to incompetent support
> > personnel answering customer calls and providing sub-standard solutions
to
> > even the simplest of problems.
>
> Melodramatic, but okay.
>
> > I find your company name to be rather ironic.
> > It means, "to run at top speed." When my contract is up, I think I'll
> > follow
> > its advice and "sprint" to one of your competitors. It is a day I look
> > forward to with great eagerness and breathless anticipation.
>
> This is about as bad as referring to someone's appearance (as you did
> earlier). So many people think this kind of paragraph, where they make
fun
> of the company's name, is witty. It really isn't. And it detracts from
> your message.
>
> > Looking Optimistically into a Sprint PCS-Free Future,
>
> About as unwitty as above. I usually end complaint letters with
> "respectfully," or the old standby, "sincerely." Such closings
emphasize -
> in just one word - that I have kept a cool head through this matter and
> command nothing less than the same. Doing the above, on the other, just
> further bolsters the idea that you're a kook, so anyone who is inclined to
> believe so.
>
> Anyway, that's my critique. You can take it or leave it as you wish.
> Unedited though, I think your letter will end up in the trash bin,
> regarldess of whether you were writing this letter to Sprint, Verizon,
> T-mobile or any company for that matter.
>
>
>

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> You asked for a critique,

No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
for your input now shaddap.

"Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01...
>=20
> "Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> You asked for a critique,
>=20
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind =
of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. =
Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.
>=20
>
A commendable effort by Isaiah, spurned by a potential beneficiary. :-\

"Shadow" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:tkTYc.344026$%_6.285722@attbi_s01...
>
> "Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > You asked for a critique,
>
> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
> for your input now shaddap.

You asked for input, and you got it ... and you have the audacity to tell
someone, who's been on this newsgroup for years, this crap?

Get a friggin life ...

Bob

>> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
>> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up. Thanks
>> for your input now shaddap.
>
> You asked for input, and you got it ... and you have the audacity to tell
> someone, who's been on this newsgroup for years, this crap?
>
> Get a friggin life ...


Eh, it's all right. 90% of the problems I've seen here get worsened by the
fact that people don't keep their cool. And the above spurning pretty much
made it clear that this guy is incapable of remaining calm. *shrug* I wish
him luck, he's gonna need it.

"Isaiah Beard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> >> No, I asked if it was too harsh. This requires a "yea" or "nay" kind of
> >> response, not the anal retentive pedantic ramblings you served up.
Thanks
> >> for your input now shaddap.
> >
> > You asked for input, and you got it ... and you have the audacity to
tell
> > someone, who's been on this newsgroup for years, this crap?
> >
> > Get a friggin life ...
>
>
> Eh, it's all right. 90% of the problems I've seen here get worsened by
the
> fact that people don't keep their cool. And the above spurning pretty
much
> made it clear that this guy is incapable of remaining calm. *shrug* I
wish
> him luck, he's gonna need it.

Let me just clue you into something Mr.
I'm-superior-to-you-and-everyone-else-on-this-rock-as-well: you can poke fun
at me on any number of levels and you and I will get along famously. The
moment you insult my intelligence you find your way onto my **** list. Oh,
and thanks for admitting that all you were doing was trying to push my
buttons. You succeeded.