Re: Telco / Cable company alarm jack connection problems

["Doug" <not@xxxxxxxx>]

"tourman" <robercampbell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1203c732-9582-4ebe-99ca-f2c59b1a60fd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Oct 4, 10:42 pm, "Doug" <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "tourman" <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> news:39b354f2-d601-401f-95aa-f0c42345dc01@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On Oct 4, 8:29 pm, "Doug" <n...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> > "tourman" <robercampb...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>
> >news:8ad13ee5-edb4-4f20-bf10-6624aa4b3bae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > On Oct 4, 2:55 pm, Jim <alarmi...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > On Oct 4, 2:29 pm, "alarman" <nos...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > tourman wrote:
> > > > > A significant number of my trouble calls are from clients who's
> > > > > panels
> > > > > are beeping because either the telephone company or the cable
> > > > > company
> > > > > went in and during either an installation or conversion, messed up
> > > > > the
> > > > > alarm system line connections. I'd like to know what other
> > > > > companies
> > > > > are doing to resolve this, or how you handle calls like this.
> > > > > The obvious way is to simply charge the client for a service call;
> > > > > however, that seems somewhat unfair since it was caused by an
> > > > > outside
> > > > > incompetent source. But when the client goes back and complains to
> > > > > the
> > > > > phone or cable company, it might catch their attention. I'd really
> > > > > like to get to the source of the problem and stop it (hell....five
> > > > > minutes training on proper alarm jack wiring would solve it....)
>
> > > > > I've also tried billing the phone company in the past, but that's
> > > > > an
> > > > > impossibility, since they don't even acknowledge the bill. I doubt
> > > > > the
> > > > > cable company would respond any differently.This might seem like
> > > > > an
> > > > > obvious question, but I would like suggestions on how to approach
> > > > > this
> > > > > large and growing problem.
>
> > > > > Any SERIOUS suggestions ?
>
> > > > I explain to the customer what has likely happened, and suggest that
> > > > they
> > > > call the telco/cableco back to repair what they have done. Sometimes
> > > > that
> > > > works. This is the best option to me, since the utility company has
> > > > to
> > > > fix
> > > > it's own mistake. The other option I give the customer is that I
> > > > will
> > > > come
> > > > ot and straighten things out. I do charge for the service call, and
> > > > fair
> > > > or
> > > > not, I am providing a service, and repairing a mistake made by an
> > > > incompetent telco or cableco tech. It is outrageous to me that these
> > > > utilities keep sending incompetent people, and disconnecting my
> > > > customers'
> > > > alarm systems. Occasionally, the cable co. will agree to reimburse
> > > > my
> > > > customer for my charges. I have not seen that from the telco,
> > > > although
> > > > they
> > > > generate far fewer problems for me.
>
> > > > Also, I send out a newsletter with my quarterly billing. In the news
> > > > letter
> > > > I explain the pitfalls of VOiP and cable telephone service. I also
> > > > let
> > > > my
> > > > customers know what to expect when calling their telephone provider
> > > > for
> > > > service, and what can happen if they switch from a real telephone
> > > > company to
> > > > a cable phone provider.
>
> > > > --
> > > > js
>
> > > > Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum-
>
> > > I was going to type this .......... but you beat me to it.
>
> > > This is exactly what I do, right down to the newsletter.
>
> > > I always put in the newsletter to call me with any questions about
> > > Cablevision or Verizon FIOS. Lot's of people have switched and some
> > > have switched back. Whatever. Land line has fewer problems than cable,
> > > in my experience.
>
> > > As far as charging for the service call, I charge too. It wasn't the
> > > cable company that made the client switch. They made the decision. Why
> > > shouldn't they pay to have me come out and fix the problem? Otherwise,
> > > they can call the cable company and insist that they correct their
> > > mistake. I tell the clients to test the system to central before the
> > > Cable company tech leaves and don't have him standing nearby when they
> > > are required to give their code word to central. If it doesn't work
> > > then, have him fix it. If the client doesn't do that then he bears the
> > > responsibility and ultimately it's the cable company that should do
> > > the repair at no charge. Me? I get paid for what I do and there's no
> > > objection from my clients.
> > >RHC: Well, I just got back from fixing the customer's phone
> > >connection. It took me about 5 seconds to see that the Telco idiot had
> > >plugged the RJ/ethernet incoming cable into the extension bank of
> > >cables, which feeds the extentions properly, and back feeds the alarm
> > >(so the TLM still sees dial tone voltage), but bypasses the Security
> > >Interface connection.
>
> > >Tell me, what the f*** is so difficult about plugging the incoming
> > >line into a bloody connection that says "INCOMING LINE".
>
> > >So the panel fails to send it's daily test signal in. Then when I send
> > >a manual test to the station, and call in to check it, I get attitude
> > >from a new hire at the station who used to work for the telephone
> > >company, who says this problem is more often the fault of the
> > >alarmco's than the telco !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...............
> > >(WTF)
>
> > I bet you didn't charge the customer for the service call did you?
>
> > Doug
> >RHC: What the hell business is it of yours if I did or didn't ? I'd
> >answer your question if I didn't know you weren't just trying to stir
> >up a little shit on the side ... as usual.
> >Nothing like taking a thread on a problem we all seem to have and
> >diverting it away with a little stupid sarcasm.
>
> So thats a no then.
>
> As long as idiots like yourself continue to subsidize the cable companies
> business by cleaning up their mistakes at your expense, then nothing will
> change.
>
> Doug

>RHC: You know, I've just about had it with you sanctimonious assholes
>who think you have to charge for every little thing you do for your
>customers! Maybe if you had a fucking clue about pricing using a real
>cost to income revenue model, you could set your rate structure such
>that you could make a decent profit without charging like the big
>companies, who do at least have the legitimate overheads that demand
>high monthly rates. I charge one reasonable "middle of the road"
>monthly rate, and that gives my client's a totally trouble free
>service, no matter what the problem is. What little I might lose in
>the short term, I make up in the long term. I get more customers than
>I can count who come to me because my pricing is fair, and service is
>good - many of whom are tired of being "nickel and dimed" to death by
>people like you. Running a small alarm business is the easiest
>business I've ever run, and it doesn't take any kind of genius to do
>so !!  I make a crapload of money each month - far more than I need to
>cover the very few overheads I have, and still leave loads left over
>to cover the small cost each month for service work, plus salaries,
>taxes and profit. If you can't do it without charging for every little
>thing, maybe you better take a hard look at your expenses.

>As it happens, this client was a couple of blocks from my home, and it
>was a quick five minute job to fix the problem. We had a long talk
>afterwards about this ongoing problem, and he said he intends to take
>his particular situation to the phone company, since he seemed to be
>really put out about the whole thing. Maybe he will, maybe he won't,
>but I saw little sense in hitting him with an additional service
>charge for diddly squat's worth of time and work !! Mark was right
>when he said that this issue likely won't ever go away, but I'm sure
>as hell not going to make my customer pay for the phone companies
>mistake (he did give me a fine bottle of wine though.....)

>You are right about one thing (for a change)....in the bigger picture,
>letting customers off the hook IS letting the cable company off the
>hook, and I don't have an answer for that one. I do know though,
>hitting my customer with a service charge for this little job is NOT
>going to solve the problem.

>Why don't you join the discussion when you have something intelligent
>to say instead of just throwing barbs around like you think they
>actually mean something !!

Barbs ??  You mean something like these?

" you sanctimonious assholes who think you have to charge for every little
thing you do for your
customers!"

"Maybe if you had a fucking clue about pricing using a real cost to income
revenue model"

"many of whom are tired of being "nickel and dimed" to death by people like
you"

"If you can't do it without charging for every little thing"

"Why don't you join the discussion when you have something intelligent to
say"

 As for sanctimonious?, that's laughable coming from you of all people.

Doug