Daniel’s complaint
Many months after moving house, Daniel came to the TIO reporting difficulties disconnecting his old service. Further, he had experienced a delay connecting the new service at his new address, a process which took three weeks. Three months after having moved, Daniel was still receiving bills for his old phone service.
In addition to investigating the connection delays, the TIO needed to explore whether Daniel’s phone company had adhered to industry rules regarding complaint handling and whether it had assessed Daniel’s eligibility for compensation for the delay in connecting the new service. The industry code requires phone companies to demonstrate a commitment to the prompt resolution of customer complaints through its processes and procedures. The Customer Service Guarantee Standard sets out compensation that phone companies must pay to customers for delays in the connection or repair of phone services.
The investigation revealed that a “system error” resulted in the phone company continuing to send him bills for his old service, although it was technically disconnected. His phone company applied a credit of $142.65 to cover the incorrect charges, confirmed he was entitled to $750.20 for the delay in connecting the new service, and paid him an additional $200 for all the inconvenience.
However, to Daniel’s frustration, instead of receiving bills for his new service, he continued to be billed for his old service. He returned to the TIO and further investigation revealed the phone company had an ongoing problem with its billing system, and could not say when this would be fixed. However, the TIO noted that the industry code on billing states the phone company was not entitled to bill Daniel for charges which were more than 190 days old.
Eventually, Daniel’s complaint was resolved when his phone company started billing him for his new service, stopped billing him for his old service, and provided a further $200 credit for the ongoing inconvenience. The company also offered him a payment plan for the remaining charges.
The lesson:
It is not enough for a company to propose a resolution to a complaint - it is important that it also takes steps to check that the resolution has been undertaken. While the company was clearly attempting to solve Daniel’s problems, it did not actually ensure that the problems were solved. This meant that the responsibility fell to Daniel to continue to follow it up. Under the circumstances, it was appropriate that the company recognise the significant inconvenience and frustration involved for Daniel by providing him with goodwill credits.