Dogs. Roofers that didn't move the "satelite dish" that happens to be laying on the ground facing 180* the wrong way. Gardeners that thing the black line going up the wall is a root or something.
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:19 AM, CBB - Jay Fuller < [email protected]> wrote: > > We have never charged for tree growth. We do charge for customer related > issues....bad routers....weed whacking etc. > > Sent from my Verizon 4G LTE Smartphone > > ----- Reply message ----- > From: "Paul Stewart" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [AFMUG] charging for service calls > Date: Fri, May 22, 2015 10:10 AM > > I would say that the major competitor would be out of business at some > point..... > > For tree growth and other stuff that's a much more grey area and my > experience has been not to charge customers. Having said that, if the > customer is insistent on a specific location that you have already suggested > them not to use, we would have them sign a special sheet stating so - then > future calls would become billable. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 9:32 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] charging for service calls > > Good points. However, there's no contention over charging for bullet holes > in the equipment (AFAIK). Really it seems like nobody disagrees that if the > customer broke it, the customer should pay for it. > > The specific case that's causing disagreement is tree growth which requires > us to move the antenna. It's probably nobody's fault. It's conceivable we > could have put it in a poor location the first time. > It's also possible the customer pressured us to put it in the poorer > location. Most likely nobody could have known what was going to happen with > the trees a few years down the road. Trees pretty much grow like weeds > around here by the way....if you stop mowing a field it eventually becomes a > forest. There are lots of other circumstances where fault isn't clear. > > What if you had a major competitor who doesn't typically charge for service > calls? > > > > > > If all service calls are chargable, but you waive where it's your fault, or > > otherwise indicated, you're an awesome business doing right by your > > customers. > > > > If you roll for free, then charge when you find the customer's been using > > the radio for target practice, you're a greedy bastard who's out to squeeze > > every last penny out of innocent, hard-working regular folk, who just made > > a simple mistake, aren't smart with all that computer stuff, and didn't > > realize that electronic equipment works best without holes in it, and > > shouldn't be punished because YOU didn't explain that to them. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Adam Moffett > > Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 1:31 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: [AFMUG] charging for service calls > > > > There have been some discussions at the office recently on this topic. > > One camp feels that the default action should be to charge for all service > > calls, and make an exception if necessary. The other camp feels that we > > should reserve the right to charge for a service call, but we should only > > do so if the problem is somehow the customer's fault (like hitting the > > cable with the weed whacker). The discussion in our office is only about > > fixing internet service by the way, not about fixing computers or other > > customer equipment. > > > > I was wondering what the peanut gallery thinks today. > > > > > >
