'Customer service' on hold forever

[#1]

I called customer service to discuss upgrading my contract. I was told expected waiting time was 15 minutes. 45 minutes later I was still on hold and realised that while the music was there, the 'sorry to make you wait' message had stopped, so I gave up. This is ridiculous! That's 45 minutes I am not getting back. I am not even sure I want to renew my contract now.

[#2 · Accepted solution]

Call Customer Options and choose the "I'm thinking of leaving" option.  They'll be delighted to upgrade you instead of losing you.

[#3]

Hi @glocal

Like @Jonpe mentioned, the best thing to do would be to contact our customer options team on 0800 013 2632 and select option 1 then option 2 and they will be more than happy to run through everything available for you.

[#4]

I just did and we agreed a new contract. Hopefully, I won't have to call CS and be put on hold again for a while Many thanks both.

I understand that waiting times can reduce the number of actual calls made, but is it so difficult to implement callback? Personally, for the vast majority of issues with a company I don't mind arranging an appointment. It shows a company respects my time.

Also, I noticed companies don't like quoting contract expire dates, even in My Account! Very annoying and I am forced to waste CS time raising a ticket.

[#5]

Hi @glocal

I'm glad to hear that you got through and arranged a new deal and thank you for your feedback, I will make sure this passed on to the relevant people.

If you do need any further assistance you can contact us via Facebook, Twitter or chat and we will be more than happy to help.

[#6]

---

@BenB wrote:
If you do need any further assistance you can contact us via Facebook, Twitter or chat and we will be more than happy to help.

Call me old fashioned, but I just don't understand why there is such a "push" for people to contact businesses via these so-called social media (not commercial media) sites. Why does everything have to be duplicated on Facebook or Twitter? Aren't the people who choose to use them capable of typing a company name into a web browser which can connect them DIRECTLY to the website of any organisation you care to mention? With horrendous wait times to speak to Plusnet customer support staff, why would you spread them even more thinly away from the Plusnet site? If I'm dealing with Plusnet, it's to the Plusnet site that I expect to direct my enquiries.

[#7]

It's because social media is seen as trendy, if not useful.

I'm bemused by the yearning for communication via social media. I recall the objections to using emails for contacting Plusnet because "unlike tickets email communications are not linked to your account / CRMS".

Seems the now trendy and hip preferences are totally devoid of any CRM association (and thereby history) what so ever - one might just as well use email!

[#8]

Faceache and Twitface etc. are really mis-described as "social media", they are more accurately anti-social.

[#9]

Bookface is just full of adverts , saying how good Plusnet mobile is

[#10]

Customers should not have to make accounts on 3rd party websites like twitter or facebook in order to get support, i totally disagree with that.

Support should come from the website you sign upto for your services.

[#11]

+1 Ste

[#12]

---

St3 said:

Customers should not have to make accounts on 3rd party websites like twitter or facebook in order to get support, i totally disagree with that.

---

Well, fortunately while we can still go to the Plusnet page directly we haven’t reached that stage, but nevertheless, the growing impact of some “social media” sites on our use and enjoyment of the internet, and our access to information, is insidious and worrying. I so often encounter sites which want me to sign in with a social media identity that I fear for the day when possession of one becomes virtually compulsory. That position, and our being dragged into a money-making advertising machine which has some undesirable aspects, and has been observed to adversely affect many people’s lives, would be unacceptable.

St3 is right that access to the websites of companies with which we have a customer relationship should not depend on our subscription to social media, but what do you do when a company chooses to place information of relevance to its customers on social media instead of making it readily accessible on their own proper website?

A lot of BBC local radio programme support information and supplementary content is now being hosted not on the BBC website but solely on social media. As the payer of a very expensive licence fee, I’ve helped fund the production of that material, yet if I seek to view it on one of these social media sites, 50% of my screen (reducing to 30% if I click on ”not now”) is obstructed by a banner asking me to sign in or join, and I’ve found no way of getting rid of it.

With so much “officialdom” also now considering it part of their role to support and post information on social media, those of us who choose not to sell our souls to these hugely profitable social media companies are in danger at some point in the future of being “left in the dark” on information to which we are entitled. We should not have to make this choice and this is something that needs to be watched.

PS - Mr Moderator, - Apologies that this comment has gone "off topic". Please re-position if considered appropriate.

[#13]

Moderator's note by Mike (Mav)

Duplicate post released from Spam Filter and removed.