Mis-leading BT Engineer Charges!!! BEWARE!

colin79666

Ok a few things:
1. Plusnet are a BT company.
2. You can try claiming the charge back off the builder.
3. As a new built you will have a nte5 socket with the test facility. You don't need to be a telecom engineer to remove 2 screws and plug a phone in.
4. You were advised you could be charged and you rightly were as the fault was within the internal wiring/setup.

I really don't see the problem with what BT did. They advised up front of the charge, they turned up and fixed the issue.

duchy

I work on tech support for another provider not BT but the criteria as mentioned earlier is the same for all when it comes to the OR engineers charging.

Remembering that all calls are recorded so likely to be checked if you challenge the charge....... were you asked to remove the front cover of the master phone socket (where the line comes into the house). If you weren't you might have some comeback. Certainly with my company it's SOP but if the customer refuses to do it-then the only option is to offer the mandatory statement stating the charges . As you say you *assumed* you knew where the problem was...and gambled on it and sadly lost.

Poc

I had a similar problem with BT a few years ago. They told me my fault was an internal one and that they could send an engineer out BUT they didn't tell me that there would be a charge.

When I queried the bill I asked them to check their recording to confirm that I hadn't been quoted a fee. The operator was rude and lied saying I had agreed to the charge. After many phone calls they admitted they hadn't kept a record of the call but still wanted to charge me a fee.

Eventually I googled the email address of the CEO and sent him an email outling the problem. A member of his team contacted me within an hour and within a few days the problem was sorted to my satisfaction.

If you believe you have a valid case I suggest you contact the CEO by email.

Buzby

Roland_Sausage wrote: »

So if an end user asks me whether they will get charged for the visit, I pretty much have to tell them that it is not up to me and it is the service provider's decision.
.

Slightly disingenuous - the visiting engineer will know full well whether this will be a chargeable visit, after all, he has to note whether to flag the Job as chargeable to the supplier or not.

So it would me more honest t say to the end user that Openreach WILL be charging he provider for the call out, BUT cannot confirm whether this will be passed on or what the amount will be.

Refusing to answer simply because the engineer doesn't know what the cost will be or if it will be passed on is a smokescreen and doesn't answer the question - if a network fault does exist, will the answer be the same, for the same reasoning.

jb66

Buzby wrote: »

Slightly disingenuous - the visiting engineer will know full well whether this will be a chargeable visit, after all, he has to note whether to flag the Job as chargeable to the supplier or not.

So it would me more honest t say to the end user that Openreach WILL be charging he provider for the call out, BUT cannot confirm whether this will be passed on or what the amount will be.

Refusing to answer simply because the engineer doesn't know what the cost will be or if it will be passed on is a smokescreen and doesn't answer the question - if a network fault does exist, will the answer be the same, for the same reasoning.

I never tell the customer they are getting charged, some folk become very aggressive

Buzby

jb66 wrote: »

I never tell the customer they are getting charged, some folk become very aggressive

Which is a different issue. At the very least the cause of the fault (whether before or after the NTP) should be disclosed. On the odd occasion I have had issues and asked directly, I've been told the cause. Since I always check the line at the socket before a call out as I want confirmation that I'm not going to see a charge (because of an erroneous job completion report). This happened on 2 occasions.

One of the reasons I left BT - I disliked the way business was being done.