Three Cancellations , Shocking !

This is one of those issues that I have heard other complain about, but assumed the people involved were simply not being firm or clear enough. Now I have experienced it first hand (well , second hand) I am absolutely shocked and amazed at the level of rudeness , unhelpfulness and general resilience of not one but 3 Three cancellations operators !

Wife has a contract that has expired and telephoned to terminate. the contract is identified ,details confirmed that it is due for termination, then I hear the wife say "No thank you , we no longer need the line" (as expected) ... Of course this was to be expected and I knew full well they would not take her first "No thank you" .... I sort of zoned out at this point.

15 minutes later I realise that the wife is still on the phone saying "No thank you , I just want to end the contract" - She switched to Speakerphone , and the guy was absolutely waffling, he would talk rubbish for about 20 seconds , then ask my wife to confirm why she called , then he would tell her she did not NEED to cancel , all she had to do was find a friend to transfer the contract to .... she then explained that she knew no one and just wanted to cancel - he then said "but I am explaining you do not need to cancel" - then the cycle would repeat, for some reason he kept asking if we were ringing from Carphone Warehouse. (?) I told her to hang up and try another rep.

So she tried a second time, different rep , exactly the same problem. At this point I tweeted @ThreeUKSupport , for , well , support.

Third time lucky she got through to a Rep who actually did his Job ! Of course she was still subject to the same retentions stuff , but at least she got there in the end.

I am absolutely amazed at this ! It is pretty clear that Reps #1 & #2 were not going to cancel the thing.

As regulars will be aware I a actually quite a big fan of Three's and we 3 active contracts in the house (well , 2 now ) Really not impressed by this though. I had no idea the situation was so bad !

Is this something OFCOM need to enforce ? If I am arrested on suspicion of a crime , as I understand it the Police have a limited time (48hrs ? ) to either charge me or release me , they have no right to imprison me any longer .... so how come when I take out an agreement with three , completely fulfill my part of the obligation without so much as a late payment , they feel they can keep me (or my wife , as it were) on the line for an unreasonable amount of time when attempted to close the agreement ? effectively refusing to release me ?

Perhaps just as the Police only have a reasonable amount of time to question a suspect , Mobile operators should be "nannied" into making sure they are able to fulfil simple obligations within a reasonable time (say , 10 minutes ? )

I understand they want to try and turn it into a retention, but this is ridiculous ! ....and has actually had the opposite effect WRT my remaining two contracts !

Had the second rep been forthcoming I wouldn't have been half as angry and would have put it down to a bad rep. but the fact that the second one did the same suggests to me this is actually procedure.

I ported a number out of Three recently and managed to get it done in the first call - was given all of the retentions stuff about the one plan and transferring the contract to somebody else, but once I pointed out that I couldn't since I wanted to transfer my number the rep seemed to relent and give me my PAC. Took around 25 minutes if I remember correctly - though for most of that time I was just zoned out and letting them ramble on.

I can quite believe it ! To give them their due Rep#3 was fine , and also I must add that I recently contacted CS to get my iPhone unlocked and the experience was excellent. I think thats half the reason I am so annoyed as it feels like Three have come so far ..... then suddenly a step back to the Bob fuller years ! :D

I have long, ever since 2003, said that Three's CS are their Albatross around their otherwise splendid necks. The CS team really have a complete knack of snatching failure out of the hands of success. And I have been fortunate enough to have been able to relate that sentiment to senior managers at Three UK who have taken the time and trouble to actually listen to me, as well as others with strong opinions.

If there is one thing that rattles people more than anything else it is the unpleasantness that is the Three Retentions process. And I do believe, along with Miffed, that it is a process and not a few aberrant CS representatives. The patter is exactly the same, scripted, repetitive and wearing to the point of being upsetting and abusive.

Three Retentions have got to change this pattern of behaviour because it is intensely annoying, and has a damagingly negative effect. Miffed has already suggested that the experience has put the two remaining contracts in jeopardy. Is that really and truly Three's intent? Because if it is then it is a completely suicidal tendency that would land a mere mortal in the funny farm with one of those fashionable white jackets that fasten up at the back.

Seriously? Three's Retentions process is designed to offend and upset anyone who happens across it? By design? I really and truly do not think so.

But the big question is "Who exactly is it that is controlling Retentions?". If it really is the UK office then they are not doing sufficient to curtail that nasty practise of theirs. And if I were Dyson I would be mortified to realise that all of the UK staff's outstanding efforts are being trashed by this rabble of Retentions clerks.

There can be no one in Three UK who doesn't know this goes on. They've only got to surf the web forums, check out the grumble sites or spend half a morning on Twitter to see the constant stream of offended ex-customers who will, in all likelihood, never return to Three even if Hell itself freezes over.

What a crying shame that this persists. It could so easily be solved with the right management control put in place, within a week.

I am pretty sure that all the interactions were with non-uk call centres , and my guess is that its a simple case of wages, Getting enthusiasm out of any call centre operative is usually pretty difficult , yet all of a sudden there is this overwhelming enthusiasm not to carry out this simple procedure - I think it fair to assume that retaining a customer is very worth the Reps effort , and (curiously) I get the impression that they would rather you hung up on them, than terminted ? I wonder if somehow they are penalised for losses !
pad a
I have to say , especially now a bit of time has passed , it is more disappointment than anger that I'm feeling over this.

My own thoughts are that they are in some way incentivised to retain customers. The speech patter, as described by anyone who goes through it, is far too similar for it to be random conversations. They all suggest you pass the phone on to a friend or relative, and there is the systematic grinding away through the looping script in an attempt to break the individual down into submission.

The thing is, any junior psychologist or sociologist will tell you that this behaviour is received very negatively. It is tantamount to a lack of respect to the individual calling in. And of course, in that respect it will guaranty to generate ill will towards Three.

This may very well be best business practise in the Indian continent, but it is very rude in the UK.

I have to say I am glad I was present , Although I don't think the wife would have crumbled ! I do however know plenty of people that would have buckled to the pressure and kept the line on against their will.

got a strong feeling the India out sourced operator is Wipro.

edit: a quick google shows it is

seen it before, if the customer hangs up before confirming cancellation, the agent gets paid for "retaining" the customer.

Hmm, interesting. I'm sure that I saw a tweet recently that claimed that the call centre was Three staff. I didn't believe that at the time. Wipro sounds entirely right. And that kind of incentivising will be guaranteed to cause the behaviour being reported all over the place.

It really is not right, and terribly damaging to the Three brand. I just wish the management of Three would get the message.

Three things you should never outsource:
1. Your product design/development.
2. Your sales team.
3. Your customer services.

They're three fundamental pillars of business and you skimp on them at your peril.

@Handson. A very good posting and sorry to say I have been faced with that same issue twice once over mobile BB and second time over a contract. Three is a good network for myself as the one plan covers everything I need and with the 10ppm roaming rate in south of ireland I cant really ask for much more.

I tottlay agree their CS centres which I admit can and in fact do work sometimes dont work all the time and let the user down so much. while they have taken steps to inprove things including their blog and other social networks, no one should be put through what you have highlighted. I hope one of the three team looks that this fourm and reads your post.

[QUOTE=Ben;46212]Three things you should never outsource:
1. Your product design/development.
2. Your sales team.
3. Your customer services.

They're three fundamental pillars of business and you skimp on them at your peril.[/QUOTE]

That should be writted large on the wall of every single boardroom in the UK.

Unfortunately, the UK is at that place in time where all listed companies are nothing but financial vehicles to generate dividends into the shareholders trouser pocket. Staff are "human Resources" to be dealt with as you would a cardboard box, discard when no longer required. Assets are to be disposed of as quickly as possible, stripping away until there is a bare skeleton left. Then the company folds or is acquired.

Melodramatic? Cynical? Probably as expressed, but the reality is it is exactly that. Having worked for the financial district for a few decades I've seen the rot set in. Gone are the days when large organisations are run by enthusiastic directors, executive managers and the like who were attuned to the actual business itself. The mantra now is "shareholder value".

Three sent me quite a long survey today about why I left Three and it had a section about my experience with retentions - I wonder whether they actually pay any attention to these?

Interestingly, there was a check box for 'bad experience with retentions' in the 'reasons for leaving' section so they must know this is an issue...

I have a reasonably good impression that Three are well aware of the CS reputation and, worse still, the Retentions bad practises. It seems that the survey is quite good indication that evidence is being gathered to understand the consumer sentiment. Lets hope the writing is on the CS wall and that we see Three bring this operation back into the UK where it truly belongs.

I'm not in the least surpried by this discussion. 3 are not about customer service, they are about building numbers by whatever means so HWL can get something back for the £12 billion or so they have invested back into the UK.

Look around, see what is happening. 3 are playing the peoples champion card appealing with all you can eat data in an effort to attract high paying smartphone customers. But do they care if they can deliver? They have they worst customer satisfaction rating in the UK for mobile networks already. I am guessing they are not bothered about customer satisfaction and what their network can deliver. They have been in the UK market with 3 for 10 years and have not made much of an impact and the established networks seem quite happy for them to soak up all of the data hungry customers. HWL have big issues with 3 UK as it's now being sidelined by indirect distributers and as expected has no place in the business market due to reliability of service. I suspect there is a land grab happening now but it's one the major palyers are not getting involved in, probably for customer service reasons. 3 is being slowly but surely backed into a corner with high expectation customers demanding unlimited fast data for both home and mobile use and they have limited bandwidth to provide it.

[QUOTE=3GScottishUser;46315]as expected has no place in the business market due to reliability of service.[/QUOTE]
Rubbish. It'll be because it's not cost-effective for Three to support Business customers. I don't buy that the Three service is inherently 'unreliable' anymore; no, it's not great everywhere, but we're talking about, what, 98% population coverage now and the UK's largest, fastest 3G operation? I have three business data connections with them, they're my first choice for business-class connectivity on the move. Vodafone's shambles of a 3G network pales by comparison.

[QUOTE=3GScottishUser;46315]I'm not in the least surpried by this discussion. 3 are not about customer service, they are about building numbers by whatever means so HWL can get something back for the £12 billion or so they have invested back into the UK. [/QUOTE]

That is quite a sensational leap to make from the OP and this topic. It is completely acknowledged, and supported by OFCOM's own investigations, that Three's Customer Service ranks extremely badly against the competition - it is by no means the worst in the UK across businesses, however. So I do want to maintain sensible perspective.

[QUOTE]Look around, see what is happening. 3 are playing the peoples champion card appealing with all you can eat data in an effort to attract high paying smartphone customers. But do they care if they can deliver? They have they worst customer satisfaction rating in the UK for mobile networks already. I am guessing they are not bothered about customer satisfaction and what their network can deliver. [/QUOTE]

And that would be a guess error of epic proportions. Again, you must not confuse customer services with the physical network and its capabilities, that outstrip any of the incumbent 3G operators. Three has, measurably, the greatest 3G core and back haul capacity of all the UK network providers. They also have the largest deployment of 3G airtime of all of the incumbents. Where the network is available, and all networks have areas where they are not, the performance and quality is unsurpassed.

"Do they care if they can deliver?", well, the simple fact is that if they do not there are certain regulatory requirements in place to ensure that they actually do. Three is not the tiny little bucket shop that its detractors like to portray. It is lighter and leaner because of its lack of legacy; no grinding PTT-minded state-owned mentality and bureaucracy to maintain. That makes it more manoeuvrable, able to respond to changing market conditions, clearly demonstrated by its climb to UK leader for mobile data for both smartphones and data-only devices.

[QUOTE]They have been in the UK market with 3 for 10 years and have not made much of an impact .... [/QUOTE]

It is impossible to let that negative assertion to pass unchallenged. Factually it is wronger than a box full of very wrong things. Despite the greatest scepticism Three have led the way in any number of areas. The wholesale impact that Three have had has been to keep the incumbent operators (four, now reduced to three) on their toes. Having it all their own way we would not be "enjoying" the liberalised market that we see today, especially with a view to mobile data that all of the "old school" operators have sold to us as a premium product. Even today the likes of Orange and O2, Vodafone not excluded, sell us mobile data by the eye-dropper measure. Only of late has any of the MNOs responded with "unlimited" smartphone data that gets even close to the dictionary definition of the word.

Don't forget, it was Three that jettisoned the use of the word "unlimited" to purposely differentiate from their All You Can Eat mobile data that truly was dictionary-definition unlimited. Yet the other MNOs hang on to the abused English word to continue conning the UK public.

It is Three that has the largest deployment of 3G in the UK - while one of the largest MNOs has had to be censured at least twice by OFCOM for not meeting its 3G licence obligations in this respect. That MNO was happier selling tickets to events in the white plastic tent on the Greenwich peninsula rather than focus on core business. It has the weakest UK network coverage of the lot, disgracefully.

So as a measure of impact that Three has made I do not believe that the assertion holds any more water than a bucket with a very large hole in the bottom.


[QUOTE] ...and the established networks seem quite happy for them to soak up all of the data hungry customers. [/QUOTE]

They can do little else, given their own 3G and core network problems. Its not that the other MNOs are "happy", they simply cannot support customers that want to use their smartphones as they were intended and designed, that is for data on the move. Instead these legacy-bound MNOs are looking to off-load their 3G demands on to WiFi. That is not mobile data, that is partial tether to a specific location. And it is a technology move that is entirely over sold, given the nature of WiFi deployment, typically back-hauled using ADSL services!

[QUOTE]HWL have big issues with 3 UK as it's now being sidelined by indirect distributers .... [/QUOTE]

Wait! What? Are we talking here about the Three that has in fact orchestrated the shut down of its deals with indirect distributers and brought the sales function in-house? Not the other way round?

[QUOTE] ...and as expected has no place in the business market due to reliability of service. [/QUOTE]

Ben has already picked a hole in this one. Suffice to say, there is no reliability of service issue any more than with any other MNO. In fact the opposite would be true where the service is available (this is radio technology, it has constraints and limitations). The issue is entirely around customer service, as is this topic. Three have made a tactical withdrawal, I believe, and time will tell one way or another. When and if Three develop a credible UK customer service deliverable they will be in a position to return to business sales. If I were Three's CEO I would have made exactly the same tactical decision all the while keeping a strategic eye on business for the future.

[QUOTE]I suspect there is a land grab happening now but it's one the major players are not getting involved in, probably for customer service reasons. 3 is being slowly but surely backed into a corner with high expectation customers demanding unlimited fast data for both home and mobile use and they have limited bandwidth to provide it.[/QUOTE]

All networks have "limited bandwidth", so lets not make that an excuse to beat Three with. The simple fact is that Three have very much more of it for 3G data than the others, evidenced by the fact that they can not only sell to such high demand but actually meet it also. Even while they are still deploying the capability out to the UK while at the same time expanding coverage. They are using an Agile methodology to get product out into the field, even if it is not ubiquitously available rather than spend years building out before launching. Economically that is the only way to run this kind of business, despite some of the angst it can cause.

Three are not the weak disenfranchised MNO that its major detractors would have us believe. Three do have an atrocious customer services operation, made all the worse by its contrast with everything else Three is capable of doing. That, and that alone, is where the focus of attention is required. Fix that major issue and some of their "quaint" business rules, and there will be no stopping Three's successful growth and good reputation.

Right now that cursed albatross persists.