We fight management all the time on upfront payments. Too much can happen between the beginning of the day and the end up the day to make the installer responsible for company funds. Maybe once every 6 months management approves a payment on site. Thats shady business if you ask me. If they dont have the money to pay the fee today why would they have the money to pay the fee on the install date. We make it virtually impossible to not get free installation and the minimum upfront payment is one months service. If you dont have it today, yet youre signing up for our service, what kind of customer will you be?
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:59 AM, Ben Royer via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > Very cool concept Jeremy with the portable POE/Router and Tablet. I > tend to agree it seems like extra work in the office to have the paperwork > signed first. Also, one main reason for us is part of our paperwork > relates to them signing that they now take responsibility for the install, > IE: they approve how our technician installed it and are not going to call > me in a couple weeks and say, ‘I never said your tech could drill a hole > into my house and now you’re paying for me to fix it.’ Our techs take > pictures of their completed work, we upload those to the account profile on > our in house software, and then have them for reference. Also the price > can change if they decide they want a router or some other piece of > equipment, so when they sign they sign off on the install, the price, the > equipment, and the terms of service. I would like to however go paperless > with tablets and direct pay via CC, which is what I plan to work towards > now. For cash and checks our employees are pretty responsible. However, > we have a procedure that the employee writes the amount of money and form > of payment on the paperwork that the customer keeps as their receipt, then > when that employee gets to the office the book keeping staff verifies the > amount wrote on the paperwork is turned in. It’s been a pretty simple > process that is very efficient. If the customer wants to say they gave our > employee money, then it will be on the paperwork they signed, and if it is, > then the employee is responsible for losing that money and faces > disciplinary action. That rarely to never happens, so I feel like it’s a > good system. > > Thank you, > Ben Royer, Operations Supervisor > Royell Communications, Inc. > 217-965-3699 www.royell.net > > *From:* Ken Hohhof via Af <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, October 30, 2014 9:38 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Field Paperwork > > Do you guys also require customers to give the installer the upfront > payment? I don’t have the installers handle money (unless the customer > gives them a tip) because I don’t want to be in the situation where the > customer says I gave the installer a check but I didn’t get a check. Or > someone trying to pay the installer in cash or chickens. Or kittens, they > are always trying to give us kittens. > > > *From:* That One Guy via Af <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Thursday, October 30, 2014 9:32 AM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] Field Paperwork > > you dont have a website or email? > They can fill ours out or download them from the website > they can scan and email them back in or postal mail/hand deliver > it would seem to me additional work for office staff whos job it is to > shuffle paperwork would be better than additional work for field crews who > arent paper jockeys. that just my opinion, and thats based on the fact that > we hire retards most of the time, I assume thats where mileage varies. > > but to the original OP if you have mediacom in your area, their vans all > have printers in them, theyre in the back end behind the cage, probably > because of too many mustard packets in the print head. You ought to snatch > one of those guys up off the street and find out what printer theyre using > > On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:27 AM, Jeremy via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > >> For me, having them sign ahead of time would require extra work. I would >> have to have them print it and then I'd either be back on paperwork or I'd >> have to scan it and upload it to their account back at the office. I can't >> 'push' a contract to them if they aren't on my network. >> >> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:24 AM, That One Guy via Af <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> seriously, why do you guys not get your contracts signed ahead of time? >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 9:22 AM, Jeremy via Af <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> We use digital contracts through Powercode. They added this feature >>>> last year. I can 'push' contracts to accounts and they are redirected and >>>> cannot access the net until they are signed. We have them sign at the time >>>> of the install. I have only had two who sat there and read the entire >>>> thing. Of course one of those was an install that went until like 8pm. >>>> Once signed, the agreement is saved in .pdf format to the customer's >>>> account. This has really simplified the process for us. Thanks Powercode! >>>> >>>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 6:46 PM, David Milholen via Af <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> We still use a the carbon copy forms.. No hardware . >>>>> The cost of printing (ink) is approx .25 - .75 cents a print or more >>>>> depending on usage. The carbon prints from a professional printing company >>>>> runs us about 120 bucks for a full CASE of triple copy contracts ready >>>>> to sign. >>>>> I say the writing is on the wall :) >>>>> >>>>> On 10/29/2014 11:43 AM, Ben Royer via Af wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Quick poll question... For those of you still using paper in the >>>>> field for your technicians to have customers sign, do you use printers in >>>>> the vehicles? If yes to that question, which printer do you recommend? We >>>>> use a basic HP Deskjet scanner/copier/printer, so the client can sign the >>>>> paperwork and then we can make a copy for them in the field. However, >>>>> they >>>>> are not very durable to the every day use of our field techs. I’ve even >>>>> had them brought in because they are jammed and we find things like a >>>>> mustard packet inside them. Now, the obvious go paperless argument is >>>>> null >>>>> at this point as we are putting a plan in place to get there someday, but >>>>> until then, what would you all recommend for paperwork printing in the >>>>> field? >>>>> >>>>> Thank you, >>>>> Ben Royer, Operations Supervisor >>>>> Royell Communications, Inc. >>>>> 217-965-3699 www.royell.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the >>> parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you >>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not >>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 >>> >> >> > > > > -- > All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the > parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you > can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not > use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 > -- All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925
