What’s your worst customer service !!!!-up?

Former_MSE_Steve_1

'‘Welcome to fluid viewing’ boasts Sky in its advert for its new Sky Q service. Well, it would help if it worked.'

Read MSE Guy's full blog: 'What’s your worst customer service !!!!-up? Can you beat Sky’s lack of common sense and communication?'

Click reply below to discuss. If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.

[Deleted User]

Financial Service Ombudsman service made decisions on every single one of my cases without the person who made the decision first validating their understanding of the case with the case owner (me), before making the decision - there is no obligation within the FOS's internal case handling procedures for their decision makers to validate their understanding of a case. THE FOS's Quality of Service complaints process excludes case owners making a complaint where the decision maker has, for instance, misquoted (or not quoted at all) significant/critical facts of the case, misunderstood facts of the case, misunderstood the case entirely, made a false statement in justification of the decision, or addressed the case on a basis other than that which the case owner requested. With my first case I was offered £150 in compensation for their mis-handling of my case, meanwhile, during their protracted mis-handling of my case, my contested goods lost more than £10,000 in value. As a case owner, putting a case to the FOS, you are their customer, but if they mess up for such fundamental reasons as above, once their decision is made, there is nothing you can do.

[Deleted User]

Two points:-
1. Landrover dealership sold me a brand new Freelander 2 which locks me out without warning or predictability - the manual key emergency access provision was on the LEFT (passenger) side of the car, which was inaccessible due to proximity to an immovable object - call out technician had to break in by force, damaging driver's door in the process (many other instances on the internet). I pursued a section 75 claim via FOS - ombudsman decided that being randomly, deliberately and autonomously locked out of the car was a 'feature of the car' and therefore the car was, indeed, 'fit for purpose', regardless that I had asked for it to be considered not to be 'of satisfactory quality'
2. Landrover dealership recognised that FOS might take some considerable time to consider my case and offered to keep my car 'safe' in preference to it suffering repeated door damage if I kept it in my garage for the duration. During the case, my car was dented whilst on the dealership's premises. At the end of the case they refused to return my car to me, insisting that I collect it and threatened to apply retrospective storage charges if I did not do so quickly - FOS took so long to (mis-) handle my case that the car exceeded 3 years (no MoT), so I could not legally drive it the 50 miles back home - I had to pay £100 for a motor professional to collect it on trade plates. Also, the car's battery was useless due to neglect by the dealership and I had to provide a new battery at my expense to be able to get it home. The dealership also totally disabled the folding wing mirror function.
It's now 5 1/2 years since I bought the car and 4 1/2 years since I last used it and I'm still fighting - consumer rights? - pah ! Just you try and enforce them.....

[Deleted User]

Same Landrover dealership as the previous post - mis-sold me the car on the basis that the camshafts were not driven by a vulnerable rubber belt (I've previously had a cam belt break and never want a car with a cam belt again). I took another section 75 case to the FOS - the ombudsman has just decided that my submission cannot be faulted and is not fraudulent but that misrepresentation would not have occurred solely because the dealership would know the product and therefore would not have misrepresented it - and this in spite of the dealership providing no evidence whatsoever that their involved personnel were knowledgeable to advise on this engineering detail and in spite that the dealership provided false testimony that the Freelander 2 has never had its camshafts driven by a chain when, in fact, every Freelander 2 ever made has a chain driving its camshafts - an erroneous fact that the ombudsman has quoted in the decision to justify declining my claim. Now my car has lost circa £15,000 in value whilst it's not been used for 4 1/2 years.

JJ_Egan

Odd place to put the OP . Phones and TV .

[Deleted User]

JJ_Egan wrote: »

Odd place to put the OP . Phones and TV .

To make matters worse, the link to the original blog about Sky Q is dead

Try here
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/team-blog/2016/09/23/whats-your-worst-customer-service-!!!!-up-can-you-beat-skys-lack-of-common-sense-and-communication/

MothballsWallet

That alternate one doesn't work either, I'm getting a "404 Not Found" error page. However, if you replace the "!!!!" with a slang name for a rooster, it works then.

[Deleted User]

MothballsWallet wrote: »

if you replace the "!!!!" with a slang name for a rooster, it works then.

Ah, it's the MSE swear filter "at work".