September 27, 2010 11:57 AM PDT

An AT&T customer service horror story

by Elinor Mills
News.com

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20017634-245.html?tag=topStories2


What came first: the bad customer service or the hard-to-find deal?

I ask this for a reason: After more than three years of paying for AT&T 
phone service solely for the purpose of getting DSL, I have come to 
learn that the phone service is completely unnecessary. My aggravating 
(and embarrassing) path to that knowledge should serve as a lesson for 
companies in how not to do customer service if you want to retain your 
customers. It's also a valuable lesson for consumers, who have to stay 
vigilant in order to get the deal that's right for them.

Here's what happened: A few days ago I called AT&T for the umpteenth 
time to complain about my bill and, as usual, I mentioned my resentment 
over being charged for phone service I don't use because I have a mobile 
phone. After getting bounced to four different representatives, one of 
them said the words I've waited years to hear: "Do you want Internet only?"

I was then transferred to the Internet-only department, where someone 
took my order to cancel my phone service. Curious how long they've been 
offering DSL-only service, I searched the Web while I was on the phone 
and uncovered an article from November 2007 on our very own CNET News 
site entitled "AT&T quietly rolls out reasonably-priced unbundled DSL." 
Ouch. I also saw it on AT&T's Web site, which I didn't expect to offer 
me information that I couldn't have gotten from numerous calls to 
customer service rep.

OK, I should have been a more diligent consumer. Lesson learned. 
Nonetheless, it's not overly demanding to expect that someone at AT&T 
should have told me about the DSL-only service before that day--we're 
talking about 9 or 10 calls to customer service since spring 2007. So 
why didn't they?

I wasn't able to ask that question to the customer service rep who was 
helping me cancel my phone service because right around then we got 
disconnected and she didn't call me back. So I called AT&T again and was 
shuffled between several departments before getting to someone who could 
help me. I looked at the clock and realized that I had spent over an 
hour on the phone with AT&T.

When I asked why I was never told about this DSL-only service before, 
the rep said he didn't know. Annoyed that I had wasted so much time and 
energy on the phone with AT&T and frustrated at the notion that I had 
been charged for service I didn't need, I told him to cancel both my 
phone and DSL services.

Later that night an AT&T customer service manager called to discuss my 
decision to dump AT&T. I asked him why in my numerous calls to AT&T I 
was never told about the DSL-only option. Instead I was offered 
"low-use" phone line service, or they tried to get me to sign up for a 
U-verse package that works with the TV, another device I don't use at 
home. The manager's reply: "I don't know the specifics of the 
conversations." When I pressed him I was told, "I hear what you are 
saying, but there's not an obligation for us to advertise that service."

He then told me that the DSL-only service wasn't available when I had 
signed up. Later, an AT&T spokeswoman confirmed that was not accurate. 
AT&T began offering the service in my area in 2006.

The manager admitted my phone account showed "very minimal use" and 
noted that the last time I had used my landline was in May. (Ironically, 
that was when I still had an iPhone and couldn't get coverage on AT&T's 
wireless service while working from home, so I was forced to use my 
landline. I got rid of my iPhone shortly after that.)

I suggested to the manager that AT&T should repay me the $600 or so that 
I had spent on phone service over the years since I had barely used it. 
Instead, he offered to refund the amount I had paid since I last used 
the phone, which came to about $60.

Infuriated at the notion that I had been effectively forced to pay 
hundreds of dollars for a service I didn't need, I contacted an AT&T 
spokeswoman to get official comment. After spending two days diving into 
my account, she told me that the customer reps probably didn't mention 
DSL-only to me because they actually charge more for the unbundled 
service than they do for the bundled service. In other words I would be 
paying about $5 more for the so-called "naked" DSL, or DSL Direct.

Got that? They were doing me favor, even if they were inexplicably 
unable to tell me about it.

"We're not sure why it wasn't offered, but we're very sorry," AT&T 
spokeswoman Jenny Bridges said. "We're very sorry you've had this 
frustration."

She asked if I wanted to reconnect my DSL only and pay about $45 a month 
after taxes and fees. (New customers can pay $14.95 per month for a 
year, according to a promotion that the company began offering in 
August, she said.) I declined, explaining that after what I had gone 
through I would prefer to try another company.

I told her I was baffled at the customer service I had received. Any 
number of customer service reps could have halted my complaints and 
calls by telling me that there was a DSL-only service but it would cost 
me more than I was paying. I had mistaken incompetence for sneakiness.

"You definitely should have been told there was a standalone (DSL) offer 
and that you were eligible for it and what the price was so you could 
have made your own decision," Bridges said, sounding truly apologetic. 
"Based on your situation, we are going to do some re-education with our 
customer service reps."

While I am heartened to hear I didn't lose money by not knowing about 
the unbundled DSL service, I am amazed that AT&T's billing practices are 
so confusing and its customer service reps so unhelpful. I have an 
advantage as a reporter to be able to pick up a phone and (hopefully) 
get answers from a spokesperson. Other people don't have that leverage. 
And judging from an informal survey of friends and acquaintances, many 
people are surprised to learn that they don't need their AT&T phone 
service to get DSL.

After doing some digging into the unbundled DSL issue I think I see why 
the company wouldn't necessarily want to encourage customers to cancel 
their phone service.

Offering an unbundled DSL was a concession AT&T and Verizon made to the 
FCC in order to get approval to merge with SBC and Bell South (AT&T) and 
MCI (Verizon). They were only required to "offer" unbundled DSL, but 
there was no language in the agreements that they had to actually tell 
customers about the new offering.

"These companies continue to bundle services together to protect their 
legacy service, which is voice," said Joel Kelsey, a political adviser 
at the tech and media policy nonprofit Free Press, a frequent critic of 
telecommunications companies.

AT&T's landline service is in decline as mobile phone usage increases. 
So, desperate to stem the tide of phone service cancellations, AT&T is 
making phone-plus-DSL cheaper than DSL alone.

I asked AT&T spokeswoman Bridges if there was some technical reason the 
company needed to charge more for standalone DSL than for bundled 
service, or if it was merely an economic strategy. She admitted that it 
was the latter. "The bundle is what helps you get the better price," she 
said. Yes, it's counter-intuitive and it's terrible customer service to 
not explain it, but then, to paraphrase the comedienne Lily Tomlin: 
They're the phone company. They don't care. They don't have to.

Still, there are a few lessons learned in all this: If you are 
communicating with customer service at any carrier, be prepared to take 
good notes that you can refer to later if necessary. Ask for the 
customer service rep's name and direct phone number in case you get cut 
off. If you want something particular, ask directly if they have that 
service type or anything similar to it. Find out exactly how much more 
or less you will save or spend if you change your plan. And if you 
aren't satisfied with your service and it's not going to change, 
threaten to cancel your account. That is more likely to get results than 
anything else you could say.

So where does that leave me for Internet options? I've had people 
suggest Sonic.net, which offers DSL-only at prices starting at $18.95. 
Their customer service is excellent, according to Broadband Reports and 
several friends of mine. Another friend suggested I check out the Virgin 
MiFi wireless router, which offers unlimited access for $40 a month 
without requiring a contract. The hardware costs $150.

I also hear about this thing called the Web, where you can find out 
about all the best deals all the time. Mea culpa


Read more: 
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20017634-245.html?tag=topStories2#ixzz10lBJ35mR

-- 
========================================
George Antunes, Political Science Dept
University of Houston; Houston, TX 77204
Voice: 713-743-3923  Fax: 713-743-3927
Mail: antunes at uh dot edu

_______________________________________________
Medianews mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.etskywarn.net/mailman/listinfo/medianews

Reply via email to