uk-netmarketing Archive
[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Previous in Thread] [Next in Thread]
Subject: | Re: UKNM: BT customer service online: a poor standard |
From: | Steve Mynott |
Date: | Fri, 18 Jun 1999 19:26:00 +0100 |
On Wed, Jun 16, 1999 at 11:39:56PM +0100, azeem azhar, lists wrote:
> Continuing my current bug bear with large corporations trying to get the
> net; viz BT phone net.
>
> I sent a feedback message via their Web site on the 28 May.
>
> Today (jun 16th) I got an acknowledgement that they had received it and it
> was in the queue.
>
> Is 19 days good enough for an acknowledgement?
>
> What kind of standards are commerce site builders insisting on for customer
> services? (automated and human)
You expected better? The web site will have been designed by a web
company (or a web design department of BT), hosted by someone else (or
another department of BT).
The email feedback probably sits in the mailbox of some over worked
secretary, who once every fortnight checks it, prints it out and faxes
finally to the correct department.
I ordered an ISDN line from BT via the web and on chasing the order by
phone found that ordering by the web lengthened the process of getting
one, since it added an extra stage onto the normal procedure.
Already existing organisations generally have problems fitting in with
the web.
I think there are a lot of openings for startups.
--
1024/D9C69DF9 steve mynott stevetightrope [dot] demon [dot] co [dot] uk http://www.pineal.com/
one page principle:
a specification that will not fit on one page of 8.5x11 inch
paper cannot be understood.
-- mark ardis
********************
UKNM is sponsored by Excite UK, visit us at http://www.excite.co.uk.
Email Khalil Ibrahimi khalilexcitecorp [dot] com (mailto:khalilexcitecorp [dot] com) to advertise on Excite.
********************
Change your UKNM subscription use http://www.chinwag.com/uknm.html
Replies
UKNM: BT customer service online: a poor, azeem azhar, lists
[Previous] [Next] - [Index] [Thread Index] - [Next in Thread] [Previous in Thread]