It’s totally fine that you’re in India (or anywhere else)!

Sometimes my phone rings. People call me for some reason that I cannot hope to understand, and I eagerly answer it thinking that I’ll be asked how it is that I keep my pubes platted so tightly as evidenced by the photo I uploaded to in 1998.

Recently I answered the phone and was greeted with these words after a perceptible delay after me answering and vocalising a grunt or passable greeting into my phone:

“Hello, my good name is Dave!”

This statement tells me a few things:

  • “Dave” speaks at least two languages and quite possibly more than 2 given the observed application of grammar to English (because English grammar rules are basically horrible).
  • “Dave” hasn’t been beaten into presenting a facade by his managers and/or supervisors completely as yet as he still speaks in a manner that feels natural to him.
  • “Dave” is definitely working outside of the country where I took his call and in a call centre very likely staffed by people native to the locale of said call centre
  • “Dave” may not actually be named “Dave”.

Regardless of the intent or reason for this particular call, there’s a trend that is very worrying. In the last 24 months, I have received over 100 calls from people who are working from call centres in India, Sri Lanka, The Philippines and other countries and on the vast majority of occasions the name presented by the caller has been chosen to attempt to make representations of being situated in the “West”. Technically it is quite trivial to determine where a call originates from, however the idea that a person is simply a tool to make a bunch of statements on behalf of an organisation who thinks their potential customers stupid is most worrying.

As big an Arsehole as I am, the only criteria that I grade a customer interaction by is the manner in which my concerns are addressed. If the person handling the phone and/or keyboard takes ownership of the situation and shows that they’ve every intent of making things right then that is an excellent outcome.

I’m not sure which is more worrying when reflecting on this development. The idea that companies have decided that deception serves a purpose at the cost of their employees and agents surrendering their own name or that such thinking is justified by some section of the public, no matter how small, judging a person by their location and/or heritage.

In this case (and this is likely to be extremely rare), I’m not the Arsehole here.

Either the companies insisting on this practice have zero basis in insisting on such actions, and they’re a complete pack of arseholes or there is some subset of the public that engages in racism and stereotyping that is used to justify this idiocy. In which case that subset is complete and total pack of arseholes.

Both of these outcomes are manifestations of personal attacks being entertained by accommodation. Seriously, Don’t Be An Arsehole!



How many times do you need to cancel a credit card?

Credit cards are wonderful things. They enable bogans to acquire far more cask wine than is advisable, interest rates above 20% to be published and give inarticulate big people work as debt collectors.

They’re also terrible things. They enable bogans to acquire far more cask wine than is advisable, give people named Brad work at call centres demanding payment on one call whilst offering credit limit increases on the next, show how incredibly pathetic the RBA is at understanding payment systems and attempt to meld customer-focused intentions with systems and processes that were carved onto stone tablets by The Flash when he last ran back to the time of Jebus.

For those that know how to exploit them, there are ways to make usage of a credit card an excellent source of value. Insurance, purchase protection, extended warranty and various status perks are all nice, but the biggest benefits are, in ascending order of shiny:

  • Earning points/miles/currency for spend on travel/vouchers/experiences
  • Sign up bonuses of the above quantity

As UA is entirely contributed to by Arseholes, seeing an offer for a credit card that sees the perks and points earn significantly offset the fees charged is like a beacon for our kind. When there is no fee associated, the offer is akin to one’s mobile provider of choice offering to telling all scammers to fuck off on your behalf and broadcast the call recordings.

In January 2016, I decided to take up the Tuatara and Opal Lending Collective on their brilliant offer of ejaculating enough frequent flyer points to fly more than 16 metres at all who apply whilst levying no fees. As soon as the bonus frequent flyer points were exonerated from the clutches of this banking corporation, I ensured that my resolve to not pay any fees would be hard and unshakable, to almost the same extent that a bloke caught driving a ute above the speed limit resolves to educate anyone who will pretend listen about his baseless opinion on the irrelevance of speed in road accidents.

As being a professional Arsehole requires that one must never forgo the opportunity to be an Arsehole, I called the Bank of Mordor and indicated that I was as likely o accept an annual fee as a Mormon would be willing to accept that Trey Parker is the second coming of Joseph Smith.

This particular Arsehole’s former partner attempted to impress upon me that there was no way that Sheering Shed Financiers would ever provide any concession in terms of fee waivers, reductions, loyalty recognition or other retention incentives.  I decided to take this information as a challenge to my skills.

Upon explaining  my thinking to the underpaid staffer who had the misfortune of answering my phone call, they graciously offered to halve the published annual fee! Almost a victory, like convincing people at a new school you have a date at a school social by slow dancing with your sister.

A 50% discount is normally a cause for celebration, however there were alternative offers to be had.  Upon explaining that I could pay a slightly higher amount than the discounted annual fee and receive a new shiny thing that would allow me to fly all the way from Sydney to North Sydney using the bonus provided by said product, the apologies were only drowned out by the apathy and surrender that the intonations of the bureaucratic victim betrayed. In an attempt to prove that I’m capable of empathy, I thanked them for their efforts and promised to call back within 48 hours.

I’d successfully applied for an alternative shiny thing that offered far more in the way of perks and sign up bonuses than what the Russell Crowe Extradition Financier Organisation had initially waved in front of the public and calledback to ensure that I would not be expected to suffer under the indignity of paying a fee for something I had no intention of using. After convincing another future refugee from cognitive dissidence that I was definitely closing the account I asked the following questions:

  • Will the account be closed immediately? (Yes, yes Mr Arsehole)
  • Will the annual fee be charged? (No, definitely not Mr A!)
  • Will I need to do anything beyond paying the final balance to finalise the account? (Of course not sir/ma’am, the account will be finalised at that point)

Three simple questions with three simple, emphatic, definite, unambiguous answers. I had been mostly happy with the conduct of this provider of imaginary dollars up until this point and had every reason to believe that they would do entirely was said.

Being wrong is terrible

A physical mailbox is a very odd thing. Sometimes the results of tree murder appear within, promising amazing deals from a local pizza purveyor, salvation from the newest delusional nutter religionist or statements from someone you didn’t vote for telling you about how they’ve wasted your rates and/or taxes on things you couldn’t care less about.

On this particular afternoon I received an envelope containing a journal of all the irrelevant crap I had spent money on as well as a line reading “Annual Fee”. I was puzzled for a moment, thinking that I was told by a wonderful person named Bertha that I would definitely not be charged an annual fee.

A crisis developed. What had I done to offend Bertha? Had I split the infinitive in conversation? Had I failed to observe correct subject-verb agreement during our verbal discourse?

Then I remembered that I was dealing with a bank, and that Bertha had probably hung up the phone, wrapped up the call and thought that she’d done the right thing in spite of the obstacles to customer satisfaction and front line staff performance placed in front of well-meaning staff who are graded on how well they dodge and frustrate the infrastructure they’re required to work within. She may have also said, “Thank fuck I don’t need to talk to that Arsehole anymore,” but I don’t think I made that much of an impression.

Of course that’s how it works? Are you stupid?!?

Again I was subjected to the impost of exchanging syllables with a brow-beaten person, with the particular person this time being a bloke named Bruce. Bruce and I did not exactly have a happy conversation.

I was told that having a closing balance results in “the system” charging an annual fee. I was also told that I should pay the balance immediately. And I was told that I should call back once I had done so to ensure that the account was closed.

As eager as Bruce clearly was to finish the call so his carer could get him home so he could play horizontal Jenga with a partially-dressed geriatric manikin, I thought it beneficial to his career that I impress upon him the facts of the situation such that he could reassess his response and improve his level of empathy with the people who provide reason for his employment.

This did not go well

“You need to call back!” Bruce said. “You need to finalise the account now so the system can reverse the annual fee!” he said. “What’s a credit score and comprehensive credit reporting?”

As is detailed in the first installment of the manifesto, time is important. Bruce clearly had little regard for his own, and zero regard for mine. Telling Bruce that the Coin Counter Collection Collective of Christchurch either needed to sort this out with no further waste of my time or otherwise pay for my time must gotten his attention and he undertook to ensure that this would be the last I would hear of this particular issue after the final payment was made on the due date (a concept he had massive trouble with).

Hooray! Closure! Success! We can move on with our lives and watch that episode of Gigolos where Brace rolls around with a transexual again!

3000 – 3000 = 594

Either Bruce made a promise in desperation or he was distracted by the pattern on his shoelaces prior to following through. Again my mailbox was polluted by a document stating that I had paid off everything I had spent and that I had failed to pay an annual fee for a product that had been cancelled. And that enables said bank to charge interest on the full amount (funds spent and imaginary annual fee).

At this point there’s no option other than to be an Arsehole. Writing to this particular bank resulted in the following message the next day:

We are experiencing a very high volume of complaints. We will respond to your complaint within 10 business days.

One of these statements was true. The other was not. 13 business days later, there was a wonderful conversation with someone who claimed that the bank had done everything they promised to do (they hadn’t) that no issues had occurred (they had), none of my time had been wasted (it had) and that no compensation for my time would be offered (no spoilers…). Admittedly the annual fee and associated interest had been waived, however it is insulting to hear that an amount has been waived due to an organisation levying said amount via actions that are in direct contradiction to stated intent.

There will be article on this specific type of response at some point, but suffice to say, we were not amused. An escalation path was requested and provided.

The customer advocate says you can fuck right off

This particular bank has a customer advocate department that is charged with being the active and vocal representative of the customer. Surely one would expect that presenting all facts to this department would result in some reasonable assessment and consideration of the case in question?

This was, now unsurprisingly, a terribly false assumption. The response from this customer focused department was summarised thusly (yes, there will be a scan uploaded):

Our systems impose fees automatically. You should have known this and ignored the statements made to you by our staff. We think your time is worthless. We are of the opinion that you have no basis to call our actions and misrepresentations into question. Go to the Ombudsman if you want, but we reckon you’re too lazy to call us out on our lies.

Pick a number between 1 and 1000

Print to PDF is an amazing thing. As are scanners. As is the fact that all bank interactions with customers are subject to retention requirements under law.

Providing the various statements issued by the bank in question throughout this idiocy, the responses to stated grievances and specific time and date references to the verbal interactions with the bank to the supervising authority as well as a randomly chosen number for a compensation amount resulted in a few wonderful outcomes.

The bank did indeed apologise, admit the failures and shortcomings in their processes and systems and paid out the requested compensation. Having a PS4 Pro and new SSD to go with it was a very decent outcome.

Why is this so hard?

The complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service alone would have cost the organisation a significant amount. The internal charges at this particular bank are well in excess of the FOS, staff and compensation amounts achieved.

It’s a terribly hollow victory. That said though…



My favourite C word

There’s a wonderful word that works wonders when dealing with belligerent merchants who have failed to deliver. It’s a filthy, horrible word that is highly offensive, typically results in serious professional ramifications and will have multiple parties cursing your name in response.

That word is the following:


In every case where some company has refused to acknowledge issues they have caused, the mere utterance of this word results in near-immediate escalation and demonstration of empathy in most cases, or flat out offers of a full refund otherwise.

To understand why this is the case, there are a few facts that most cardholders aren’t aware of that need to be understood:

  • Chargebacks are expensive for card issuers to handle – the process is still quite labour intensive and long-running
  • Chargebacks are expensive for merchant banks to handle – the process is tedious and has high administrative overhead
  • Chargebacks are extremely expensive for most merchants – the fees levied against merchants are very high (greater than $25 / chargeback in many cases) and result in transaction fees being “reviewed”.

For this reason, think long and hard before using something other than a Scheme Card (Visa/MasterCard/American Express/Discover/JCB/Diners Club) to pay for anything.

The first time I used this word, hilarity ensued….


No, I will not pay your parking fine!

One weekend I had to bugger off to another city to hit some servers and network gear with a hammer, so another Arsehole decided that they’d crash at my place and buy a bunch of questionable stuff online (including Savage Garden’s entire discography).

In exchange for this rapacious exploitation of my abode and internet connectivity, it was agreed that this other Arsehole would arrange for some professional cleaners to be admitted to my abode such that they could delouse my apartment in my absence.

Upon my return, I was greeted by a very clean apartment and the news of “Those cleaners are idiots. They parked in a no parking zone and asked who was going to pay for it.” I suspected that the spotlessness of my home was about to be offset by a quagmire of stupidity on the part of the cleaning company. Much to my disgust, my suspicions were correct.

I received an e-mail with an invoice attached. This e-mail explained that the amount charged as $125.00 higher than the amount quoted because of the parking fine that was incurred when the staff parked their vehicle “where I told them to.”

We are not amused!

Suffice to say, I was not going to put up with such impertinence.  I responded to said e-mail thusly:

Dear Dodgy Cleaning Company,

The parking fine was levied by the council that administers the area and was applied due to the rules of the area not being followed by your staff and said staff choosing to park illegally. I do not endorse illegal behaviour and neither suggested nor enabled it in this instance (as I actually was not present). You are not to take a payment from my card for this amount and any attempt to do so will result in all amounts deducted by your company being subject to chargeback requests.



At this point I would have settled for acknowledgement and agreement on the issue of the parking fine, however I was clearly dealing with someone who was certain they were right, like those nutters that reckon the Earth is younger than the fossil fuel products sloshing through their Falcon’s oversized engine whilst insisting petrol would be cheaper if their racist views on immigration were made law.

Dear UA,

Your representative told our staff where to park, therefore we have decided that you are responsible for the parking fine.

Yours in Cricket and Cheesecake,

Dodgy Cleaning Company (DCC – part of the Fully Half Dodgy Group)

I spoke with my fellow Arsehole, and they recalled their conversation with DCC with wonderful alacrity.  They stated that their words were, “I don’t live here, I don’t drive, I don’t know the parking rules so I can’t really help you out beyond looking at the street signs.” How exactly this translates to telling someone where to park puzzled me, but I was concerned that providing this information to DCC would be as helpful as using 700mL of vodka in place of Viagra. With that in mind, I took the logical path:

Dear DCC,

The fine has been levied to the registered owner of the vehicle as the empowered enforcement officer involved determined that the party in control of the vehicle had committed an offence. Your company and their representatives have no legal (or other) basis for determining that another party is responsible for the illegal conduct of your staff.

For the avoidance of doubt, I will be issuing chargebacks should these words be ignored.

Say hello to your mum for me,


Some brilliant prole at DCC decided that they’d escalate to a bloke named Igor to try and deal with me, still insisting that they were correct.


This issue has been escalated to me. I am the General Manager of Operations here and have a very nice office under the stairs and one of those newer model C64s to send e-mails with.

It is my job to determine who is responsible for the fine and thus who will pay it. Why should you not pay this fine?

I think there’s a splinter in my buttocks,


One thing that makes me laugh and cringe simultaneously is the thought of an issue being escalated to someone who claims to be important and said person not knowing a single thing about the situation they’ve been asked to resolve. I decided that I should actually check my account to see whether the “good” people at DCC had been as dodgy as their parent company’s name would indicate. It turns out that a charge was present for both the cleaning service and the parking fine amount.

Advantage: Arsehole! Chargeback FTW!

I wrote back to Igor in a very balanced, considerate fashion.


I would have expected that someone with your lofty station properly equip themselves with an understanding of the issue they are attempting to address prior to making contact with a customer. I have explained the way law actually works and I am disgusted by the idea that your organisation conducts business in a fashion that is grossly unprofessional and fraudulent. Your only course of action should you have a concern with the levying of the fine against your staff is to appeal the issuing of said fine with the council.

Additionally I have noticed that my instructions have been completely discarded by your staff and a payment was processed by your company for both the cleaning service and the parking fine as a single amount. At no point did your representatives relay this, instead focusing on paltry attempts to have me accept responsibility for your staff having a blatant disregard for law and/or an inability to read.

As originally stated, I have instructed my card issuer to commence the chargeback process for the transaction initiated by your company. The fees involved and the increased MSF that will be levied against you should serve as timely reminders of the grossly inappropriate conduct that your organisation has decided to engage in.



At this point, my mobile rang, my desk phone at work (!!) rang, a rambling SMS landed on my phone and another e-mail from Igor landed in my inbox:


Please do not be raising the chargeback. We will talk to the driver about the parking fine. You are a valued customer and we do not want to have to deal with chargebacks.


At this point, poor Igor had failed to grasp that it was too little, too late:


I provided a specific, detailed response to the initial statements by your staff with regard to this issue and have been ignored at every turn. Your company’s ingrained malfeasance has been appropriately recognised by the chargeback process being initiated.

Do not contact me again unless the time that I have already spent on this issue is going to be paid for by your company (2 hours at $200 / hour, but I charge a 4 hour minimum) and additional recompense provided to accompany your company’s written apology.



Igor begged some more whilst completely failing to comprehend the actual issues and was told to kindly bugger off lest I raise chargebacks for the previous services his company had provided to me whilst encouraging my friends (yes, I have friends – don’t laugh!) who I had referred to his employer to do the same.

Igor did attempt to dispute the chargeback that was raised. Igor did not succeed. Igor’s company had to change banks.

And this particular Arsehole got their house cleaned for free. Victory!

Apartment living

There are many benefits to living in an apartment. Invites to parties are easy to come by, home-delivered entertainment in the form of door-to-door religionists is frequently provided and there’s quite often an exhibition of balcony coitus on display if your evening plans fall through.

There are, however, some downsides to this assortment of varied delights being so conveniently packaged. Between yourself and the various tradespeople who take care of things related to the building sits an ogre calling themselves a Building Manager. Often this person is actually very good at what they do, but this is not always the case.

Due to constant issues with the garage door on the property, the electronics that drove the door were replaced. As well as the motor the electronics controlled. As well as the door that the motor moved. All at once.

In response to this, the following delightful communication was sent by the Building Manager (who we shall call Bob) to all residents:

On the day of replacement, Theo from SomeDoorCompany will be present in the building from 4:45pm through 5:00pm to provide replacement door remotes. Please note, if you have model X of the remote currently, you do not require a replacement.

Lucky me! I was in possession of a model X remote so I didn’t need to hinder Theo in his quest of getting to the pub by 5:15! Bob had ensured that I could spend my Thursday afternoon at work whilst also ensuring he didn’t need to bother himself with considering the convenience of the people who paid his salary via exorbitant Body Corporate fees! Thanks Bob and Theo!

Little did I know that at both Theo and Bob were professional, fully-trained idiots.

Upon my next attempt to leave my abode in my metal chariot, my model X door remote was as effectual as a Taser at a hair removal salon – the lights turned on but the results were fury and disappointment as opposed to a clear avenue for excursion being revealed.

Thankfully SomeDoorCompany’s contact details were recorded on the wall near the impassable door, so I did what any reasonable person would do and called them. Lo and behold, Theo himself answered and began the most futile conversation I had that week to date:

UA: Hi! My remote no longer works with this new door. I’ve got a model X remote that matches the photo provided by Bob and was told in writing that it would work fine.

Theo: You must be using the remote wrong.

UA: The remote has one button. I am pressing it. How exactly is that using it incorrectly?

Theo: It must work. I tested them all before I gave them out. It’s not my fault you didn’t come collect a new remote.

UA: How exactly did you test the remote I’m holding Theo? It hasn’t been out of my possession for 2 years and this door has been here for less than 2 days. Did you break into my apartment? Do I need to call the police?

At this point, Theo begrudgingly admitted that there was a problem “with something” and that he would arrange for a remote to be made available to me via Bob. At this point a queue formed behind me, with several other residents discovering their model X remotes were also impotent despite promises made to the contrary. Thankfully Theo had provided details of how to manually open the door – he’d put a placard containing the super-secret, super-secure 2 digit override code in plain view of the public.

As Friday started, I realised that I didn’t particularly feel like being home and listening to the new neighbours knock their pot plants off their third floor balcony whilst attempting to imitate whatever pornography they had last streamed so I called Bob to get my hands on a new remote. At this point I discovered that, not only was Bob a professional idiot, he was quite an aggressive one as well!

UA: Hi! Theo told me he was going to pass along details so I could get my hands on a new remote, as the model X one I have does not work.

Bob: Yep, Theo told me about you. You should have just shown up and gotten a new remote. I’ve only got spares left so you’ll need to wait a week and pay $50 for a new one.

It’s your fault for thinking my instructions were accurate

Let’s just analyse that statement shall we? Paying thousands of dollars per year in Body Corporate fees, including payments into a fund dedicated to building improvements and maintenance and management fees that pay Bob’s salary entitles me to neither a replacement remote nor remotely competent instructions? At this point Bob was not my most favourite person in the world, to the extent that I would serve him $3 wine from Aldi and say he was drinking it wrong when he remarks it tastes like paint thinner.

Of course, I could only respond kindly to that brilliantly reasoned statement from Bob:

UA: Bob, I followed your instructions, I’ve paid my Body Corporate fees and I expect the door I am one of the owners of to open when I need it to. Where is the remote that was allocated to my property?

Bob: Mate, do you want to be able to open the fuckin’ door or what?

Profanity! Diversion! Impropriety! Advantage: Arsehole!

UA: I have made my expectations with regard to the door very clear. I have also made my expectations with regard to management of the property quite clear. Answer my questions, have a remote in my hand today delivered to my office or I shall have to act on the presented information indicating your company’s inability to perform the tasks you have agreed to undertake. If yourself and/or Theo have failed to keep records of who you dispensed replacements to and how many you gave to each property, you’ll need to sort that out – I’m not paying for it.

Bob: *assorted stuttering* Yes Mr Arsehole. I’ll have a remote to you today.

UA: Good. I’ll have a spare set of keys for the common doors whilst you’re at it.

2 hours later one of Bob’s colleagues showed up at my office with a remote that was neither a model X nor inoperative. I thought this was the end of this interlude and a victory. I was only partially right.

I received two letters the following week, both from Bob’s employer. The first was addressed to “The Resident”:

Theo and SomeDoorCompany will no longer be servicing our doors. SomeOtherDoorCompany will be taking over – new contact details have been placarded around the building.

The second, however, was actually addressed to me directly:

Bob has moved on from our Property Management practice. Reginald will now be handling all inquiries and has taken over Bob’s desk and mobile numbers.

Yep – victory!




Don’t be an arsehole!

There are a few rules that should always be followed when dealing with an entity that has done the wrong thing. Counter-intuitively, they’re summed up thusly:

Don’t be an arsehole!

This is, of course, a complex statement.

There are a few simple rules that should be followed.

Never make things personal

The person you’re dealing with is another human being, attempting to do their job and deserves the presumption of their intent being to do everything they can to help you. It’s extremely unlikely that the person answering your questions had any intent of actually causing you inconvenience (or worse) and they’re in a position that is charged with assisting you in spite of the difficulties that the bureaucracy they operate within. A modicum of understanding goes a long way here – help them help you.

Avoid the word “you” where at all possible. Use the name of the company and use the word “we” when asking about next steps and getting a resolution.

Facts only

Keep the conversation on point, focused on what has happened and what has been done thus far. Don’t confabulate or otherwise embellish the situation as this actually weakens any position you hold and will give any detail-focused manager the means to draw an aspect of your case into question.

Keep emotion out of it

Getting angry, aggressive or otherwise emotive is unlikely to lead to any outcome other than the conversation being terminated. Customer service staff are generally given the option of terminating a call or interaction in response to profanity, aggression or any form of threat (amongst other things).

Acknowledge.  Resolve. Right.

Three simple words, and the easiest template to go into a situation with when correction is required.

For the avoidance of doubt, the company’s representative should acknowledge the problem that their conduct has caused, resolve the issue that you have been afflicted with and right the relationship with their customer. The last of these is the most variable, with some companies refusing to accept that the time of their customers has any value, which conveniently leads to…

Keep track of your time

The only reason you are spending any non-zero amount of time is due to a misstep on the part of the provider in question. Should you not comply with the expectations of a bank, airline, insurance provider or any other of a multitude of professional organisations the penalties involved are specific, punitive and executed with efficiency. The basis of said actions is the additional cost or loss of revenue the provider claims to be subject to.

The reverse is very rarely acknowledged by large organisations without specific prompting, and said specific prompting is an incredibly powerful tool.

Prepare, prepare, prepare

Have all of your facts, research, previous communications and expectations in front of you, a pen/keyboard to record proceedings as they progress and to take notes regarding developments in the company’s position. Do not allow any statements to go unchecked or unrecorded.

Listen very carefully, for they shall say this only once

The person you are interacting with may make mistakes or misrepresent the intentions of the company inadvertently. Recording these aberrations when they is important as to demonstrate the lack of coherency in the company’s approach and reinforce the need for your time to be appreciated.

Set your goals early

As fun as it is to hear your drunk mate (who we shall call Theo) tell you that “I paid my bloody bill on time! Those bastards at Telstra are going to pay for cutting off my internet!”, there are a few things wrong with that statement.

  1. In all likelihood, there was a poorly constructed process that resulted in Theo not being able to participate in some odd fantasy football league for 20 minutes and no “bastards” were involved.
  2. “My internet” is incorrect usage of the term. If Theo has any sort of private network containing things he has obtained via an Internet connection, I’m betting that cutting it off from the rest of the world may save the eyes and mental health of many.
  3. The statement is entirely qualitative and unactionable

Technically Theo has made the provider “pay” if they promise to deduct one cent from the balance of his next bill. Of course it’s highly likely that Theo will return to the local pub at the next reasonable opportunity and call a bunch of people at his provider of choice bastards again for only paying him such a paltry amount whilst drinking VB and waiting for the nearest pool table to be free in the hopes of making his mate Keith circle the room sans pants for being a crap shot.

Know what you want in terms of restitution from your target prior to picking up the phone, typing an e-mail, searching for the company via Facebook Messenger or Tweeting at them with a profane hash tag.

Ask why

Things happen for a reason. Theo drinks VB because it helps him forget that barracking for Melbourne in the AFL is about as rational as expecting proper journalism from A Current Affair.

There will be some reason for whatever egregious transgression you’re enduring being inflicted upon your person. The question of “Why?” is incredibly powerful and tends to result in escalation and awareness from staff with greater means and/or latitude in helping you get a resolution and/or compensation.

Be gracious

The most important aspect of any interaction is the outcome. If an awkward date results in you eventually marrying the love of your life, that’s surely infinitely more preferable to having an awesome date that featured free drinks and roaming midgets carrying lines of cocaine for your enjoyment that led to warts and 3 different restraining orders.

If the company you’re speaking to has done everything they can to make things right, met your expectations and shown their clear intention to keep you as a customer then there should be due consideration given to said intent.

Fuck telemarketers and scammers

Telemarketers are a whole subject in and of themselves that will be gotten to in due course. None of the above apply to scammers – the more psychological trauma you can bring yourself to inflict, the better.

31 cents

We reject your reality and substitute our own

Telecommunications providers are odd creatures. The vast majority are hell bent on placing customers on 24 month contracts, selling additional services of questionable value and treating existing customers with indifference whilst typically offering significant incentives to new customers to shift loyalties.

Even though mobile technology is constantly evolving and mobile networks are constantly being upgraded and expanded the back end systems of some providers seem to have been manufactured in 1976 and regularly need a bloke named Keith to hit them with a shifting spanner to keep things running.

After cancelling a credit card I provided this particular telco with my new credit card details via their online portal. To my surprise, I received a delightful SMS indicating that immediate payment was required to maintain my service as the company was unable to “Direct Debit” my credit card.

Of course Direct Debit isn’t possible against credit cards, but what the provider was actually trying to tell me was that the payment had not been approved. I made a manual payment in response to this delightful revelation and made a note to chase up the card issuer to ensure there wasn’t a problem on their end.

Shortly thereafter, the cause became clear. The provider in question decided that supplying my new card details were not in line with whatever revenue or operational policy was in place at that time, with repeated attempts resulting in the old (now cancelled) card details being retained and no error being provided. To add to the ridiculousness of this, I had been charged a surcharge for making a manual payment. Up with this I did not put!

Online chat makes things happen

I’ve generally found that attempting the conventional Contact Us form or call centre paths are simply futile with this particular telco as a consumer. A little known fact is the increased level of access provided to staff who take care of web chat and social media channels and one that often provides a quicker, simpler and more optimal outcome for those of us who won’t put up with things going wrong and shoulders being shrugged in response.

After explaining the situation to “Dave”, the situation was resolved in his mind as I would not need to make future manual payments and would not receive SMS messages alleging that I was incapable of operating a credit card correctly.

Acknowledge. Resolve. Right.

When a supplier stuffs something up, I have the following simple expectations:

  • Take ownership and acknowledge the issue
  • Resolve the issue
  • Make things right with the customer

Excellent companies do all of these in one seamless motion and should be praised for it. In this particular case, none of these were done – the surcharge being an issue was not acknowledged, the time involved in sorting this issue out was not appreciated and no refund was offered for the surcharge.

At this point, I had to tell “Dave” that he needed to make things right and the company needed to pay me for my time. Deflection resulted, with the telco’s payment service provider being blamed, “Dave” claiming he could not give me what I was asking for and being told that I would need to invest more of my time to get any further action on the issue.

Stating that my next communication would result in fees being levied against the company due to the complaints process, “Dave” very quickly changed his tune. A request for a $40 credit and a refund of the surcharge was very quickly granted, however “Dave” managed to ruin his attempt at getting positive feedback for his resolution with a single statement. Specifically that future failures to pay will result in a late fee being applied and no waiving of said fees or surcharges.

If we bugger it up again, we’ll charge you for our ineptitude

This may be a canned response to issues involving waiving of fees, but it exemplifies the issue with far too many companies. The only reasonable response to this is (of course), “If the company does fail to follow my payment instructions again, complaints will be filed and the TIO will charge the company handsomely.”

For some strange reason, “Dave” disconnected at this point.

All in all, I’ll count that as a win.