end of contract

[#1]

---

@Townman wrote:

The forum coverage is not being provided by dedicated Plusnet staff but by a tri-brand forum triage team.  

So what you are saying is that staff who reply here can't be relied on to give accurate information regarding Plusnet services?

[#2]

In the context of a residential service the advice given was correct.  The advice regarding something which does not exist is simply superfluous in this context, not wrong.

If you’ve never delivered concurrent customer support into parallel channels having broad similarities but detailed differences then you’ll have no experience of how easy it it to offer a correct response which extends beyond the features available in a specific channel.

The answer given was correct for this user - that it what matters.

[#3]

Sorry, but I am astounded! It has never occurred to me that it is common practice to provide information that is not specific to the service being discussed.

How can a customer tell whether information provided relates to them or not?

[#4]

In context, does the customer have a business account?  No, therefore it does not apply.

If in the context of the question the superfluous response gave rise to relevant confusion I’d agree that there’s grounds for concern.  What I’m suggesting here is that there’s no need to shoot someone trying to assist for giving additional information outside of the context, which is not detrimental to the user.

[#5]

Fair enough, but my concern is that if someone is cutting and pasting an answer to a query which isn't specific to the query - and may in fact relate to BT or EE contracts - is it certain that the relevant part of the reply is applicable to a Plusnet contract?

At best the reply is 18 months out of date, at worst it is a BT or EE reply. 

[#6]

Have you ever considered a career shift into politics?