3 is the cheapest, but is it best

gromituk

aliasgrace wrote: »

3 are a nightmare you can only speak to their call centre in India. Their demanding money off me after I closed the account 3 years ago.

So it's because the call centre is in India that they're still demanding money off you, is it? Or are you just being racist?

digitaltoast

gromituk wrote: »

So it's because the call centre is in India that they're still demanding money off you, is it? Or are you just being racist?

Huh?! Did you even read the sentence, or did you just decide to vomit the contents of your closed mind onto the forum? He said nothing of the sort - you're reading a very different and disturbing version of events. Seek help.

Now, back to three: their call centre is a little like this. But without the laughs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M8woC9B30zE

(or is that somehow racist in some people's mind?!) :mad:

aliasgrace

No I'm not racist!! They can't sort the problem and have no contact number for the UK. I don't blame the people in the call centre. The contract was closed three years ago. But two weeks ago I received a letter demanding money. The last bill I received from three is still in credit by the amount they demand but all the call centre can tell me is I have to pay the bill. There's an office in Glasgow but the call centre doesn't have a number.



Thanks for the help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

CM66

I sat as my friend tried to cancel her contract with 3 this morning (it was on speaker phone so i heard the whole conversation). She was on the phone for 1/2 hour as the man just conpletely ignored eveything she asked and was constantly trying to sell her different contracts etc. I know its their job to a point but it was an absolute joke.

When she kept saying no he was putting her on hold each time, sounded like there was someone in the background telling them to keep selling.

A terrible way of doing business from 3 and it was enough to make sure 100% i would NEVER use them!

digitaltoast

CM66 wrote: »

I sat as my friend tried to cancel her contract with 3 this morning (it was on speaker phone so i heard the whole conversation). She was on the phone for 1/2 hour as the man just conpletely ignored eveything she asked and was constantly trying to sell her different contracts etc. I know its their job to a point but it was an absolute joke.

When she kept saying no he was putting her on hold each time, sounded like there was someone in the background telling them to keep selling.

A terrible way of doing business from 3 and it was enough to make sure 100% i would NEVER use them!

I had exactly the same conversation - their call centre is incredibly rude and unhelpful. I have no qualms about saying "can I speak to someone who can understand English" - I used to feel rude asking that, but not any more. The only way to do it is to record the conversation, let them know you are recording it, keep a log of everything, times, who you spoke to etc. Make it impossible for them to lie their way out of it. They'll still pretend you didn't cancel. Then, write it up on a blog and upload the audio (minus personal details of course).
Make sure you log a complaint with OFCOM, OTELO and Trading Standards.
Then write to Three at the address below, and start your letter like this:

3 Executive Office
123 St Vincents Street
Glasgow
G2 5EA

OFCOM reference: XXXXXXXXXX
OTELO reference: XXXXXX
Trading Standards Ref (Glasgow): XXXXXXX

You then link to your public blog post and make it clear that the quicker they resolve it (with compensation for your waste of time) the quicker the blog post will vanish.

Worked for me and someone else I helped with the same trick. It's the only way.

gromituk

digitaltoast wrote: »

Huh?! Did you even read the sentence, or did you just decide to vomit the contents of your closed mind onto the forum? He said nothing of the sort - you're reading a very different and disturbing version of events. Seek help.

Of course I read the sentence - and perhaps you protest too much? Your comical hyperboles do you no favours! As the obvious question has flown over your head, I'll spell it out:

What relevance does the fact that the the call centre is Indian have to the problem that has occurred?

digitaltoast

gromituk wrote: »

What relevance does the fact that the the call centre is Indian have to the problem that has occurred?

It doesn't. No-one said it did. Let's break it down:

aliasgrace wrote: »

3 are a nightmare

Agree or disagree? This is a statement of generally accepted fact. He's setting up the position. We'll assume a new sentence next:

aliasgrace wrote: »

you can only speak to their call centre in India.

Once again, this is correct. Believe me, I've tried. And tried. Their call centre is in India. Statement of fact, and relevant to the 3 cs being a nightmare due to inability to wander anywhere off-script. Next sentence - remember, this is a new sentence, not a "therefore" or "because" clause:

aliasgrace wrote: »

Their demanding money off me after I closed the account 3 years ago.

OK, all I can guess is that you're referring to the fact that the OP used "their" and not "they're" - this still doesn't change the subject of the sentence. And I still can't think how making an interelated statement of facts (not opinions) you can somehow infer "racism" from this! Fortunately, Wikipedia sums up what you just did:

Wikipedia wrote:

Playing the race card is an idiomatic phrase that refers to the act of bringing the issue of race or racism into a debate, perhaps to obfuscate the matter.

gromituk

A very impressive straw man you demolished there: I didn't say Three CS isn't crap, nor did I say the call centre isn't in India. So, after bursting in with your playground insults and accusing me of not reading the post properly, why are you doing the same thing? It couldn't possibly be that you are just trying to cloud the issue, could it?

I'm not trying to obfuscate anything. An irrelevant quote from Wikipedia. I have no agenda to support Three here, so I don't have to play any "card" to support an argument.

Any more irrelevancies you'd like to conjure up, or have you run out of them now?

Perhaps a comparable case might help you. My argument is exactly the same as why Jeremy Clarkson's statement that Gordon Brown is "a one-eyed Scottish idiot" is unacceptable. Just because "one-eyed" and "Scottish" are facts (and "idiot" is arguable) does not excuse them from their context. He was equating physical disability and country of origin with mental disability. The poster whom I criticised was equating Indian workers with incompetence.

But then I suppose if you don't see anything wrong with what Jeremy Clarkson said (and apologised for), you won't see anything wrong with what this poster said, either.

gromituk

Oh, and in case you mention accents: I agree that it can be difficult to understand some of the agents' accents - I have trouble myself. But that is a problem of you understanding them, not them understanding you.

kronas

NEVER EVER in no uncertain or certain terms join 3 mobile EVER EVER EVER, YOU WILL regret it!