Guys any thoughts on the above.... Im compiling my complaint to the ICO and i just need some clarity on information on my account not being factual by the engineer..

Guys any thoughts on the above.... Im compiling my complaint to the ICO and i just need some clarity on information on my account not being factual by the engineer..

You don't explain the misunderstanding the engineer had and how this might have led to a fraud marker being applied.

Therefore difficult to comment.

Virgin did at one time have a real problem with some customers mucking around with boxes, so they obtained some channels for free. But i don't think this is still possible.

I dont understand why you would want to even talk to them?

it was prob a flag on the system and agent said fraud instead of flag

move on

How has the engineer twisted what has been said, if we knew that we could better advise

Sorry for the delay, ive been on holiday and looking through my SAR.

Theres more references to fraud on the telephone, however ive picked some parts out of the sar to show whats listen, the parts is my recent conversations.

also ive included the bit i advised about the engineer twisting things.

Can you let me know your thoughts....

Thanks

virgin1.pdf

hi martin2006

more details added now to advise you., as attachment, but it says attachment pending on my screen. Can you approve.

Cheers

Having read through your attachment it seems to me and its only my opinion, that virgin have took the decision to exclude you from being a customer as they see you as a serial complainer, the fraud marker will probably relate to the fact they think you may try to bypass this by applying for services in your wifes name.

Imho i would knock it on the head and take your custom elsewhere, i dont see a way of getting them to change their minds. Nor do i see it as "fraud" on your part, possibky a very bad choice of word for them to have used.

Hi Martin

Sorry for the late reply Looks like your right somewhat,

I lodged a complaint with CISAS and had a call from Virgin this morning to advise that they will be responding. Had a long chat with the guy and advised I thought Virgin didn't want to talk with me anymore as they have refused communication.

He works on the CISAS complaints. And said as part of your complaint to CISAS I wanted to advise you that we are responding to them and stick behind our decision not to provide you services and CISAS won't be able to make us.

I asked why they decided to take the measure, as it's not as if they have supplied me with Service multiple times an I've complained Every time. I even said that their charter welcomes customer complaints and feedback however on my case they have decided to do this.

Turns out the main reason why is that my they felt all my complaints bypassed their complaints procedures. Rather than use the steps in place I went to the CEO office every time. I told him that's not true and I only escalated things to the CEO office after multiple issues with service that wasn't getting resolved. He said that the CEO office cannot have a customer keep taking their time up and they won't offer me service again as they feel I would bypass the complaint steps again.

He also said that the fraud marker was put on recently by a staff member in error. they have now locked the account off for anyone to use. They also stand by there's no fraud committed and they do not see the problem with that misjudgement by the staff member.

I also told him that engineering specialists / managers shouldn't be sending inaccurate emails which paints the customer in a bad light as I'll happily disprove his comments. He said the email was just opinion by the engineer.

I do find this fairly laughable to be honest - be careful guys with complaints now. Don't suppose apart from CISAS I can lodge a concern with anyone over consumer rights concerns - survey as a consumer your entitled to complain about a service not working correctly. Don't suppose Soga applies?

I think you either decide to move on and obtain services elsewhere or you look to take further in court or media. You might find that few newspapers will be interested, if they take advertising from VM. You have to think about whether you are like those you see online who dedicate the rest of their life on a campaign against a company.

If you have suffered loses as a result of the performance of VM services, then seek advice from those legally knowledgeable, as to whether you would have success with a court claim. If you have a documented history of service failures, for which you informed VM and they failed to resolve, then you might have success.

No point bud, as he said on the phone " we are within our rights to refuse a customer".

Just dont see how they think someone will accept it if something isnt working... Of course people will complain.

Just see what CISAS says, got a feeling they are like other ombudsman and find in the favour of a company more than consumer.

I did start the coversation off with the guy, " i thought you (VM) wasn't talking to me anymore" lol

Well just a update guys, its a bit weird to be honest.

Lodged a complaint with CISAS over VM conduct etc . VM managed to have it dismissed initially as they say its out of CISAS scope. I then emailed saying i received their final position weeks ago about my recent attempt to rejoin. I said that my previous history plays a big part in this too.

CISAS then reopened the case saying its within scope which has annoyed VM.

However there are a couple parts of VM's defence which isn't accurate and/or isn't right, which i wanted your opinion on.

1) They say my account was GS (Group Security ) when my account was closed down in March 2014. However in the notes provided it shows it was added 4 months later. They then also say that the reason fraud was logged (this year) was the call handler interpreted and assumed the GS was fraud and added notes.

I have said that i believe VM should be accountable as Staff shouldn't interpret or assume on a customers account without fact, so i am saying that there must be an issue in their training.

2) Obviously i'm not happy with the engineer sending an email that was incorrect in an attempt to discredit me, especially when i did something nice for my partner. There comment is this.

Virgin Media stands by its technician who provided the feedback as this type of information is vital to get a better understanding of our customers’ needs from someone who has had face to face interaction.

Surely information that is not relevant to the company should not be disclosed without the permission of the individual who is part of the conversation.

My conversation with the engineer involved was talking about me getting some tickets for a concert. They had sold out and I emailed the CEO asking if they had any reserved for corporate etc as my partner does alot for me and i want to do something nice for her. NEC got back to me saying they liked my style and helped me out (I paid full price for them).

The VM engineer felt the need to email in 6 weeks after the visit and twist saying that I complained to, directly to the CEO because I wasn't happy with their process and that i have a habit of going to the CEO to get what I want. I believe he did this because when he changed things on the box he left his number and told me to contact him should the TV fail again. I did contact him but he didn't respond, so I advised VM when i called in to say the TV failed again!

CISAS then sent me VM's defence on Tuesday allowing me a week to add comment, then they emailed Wednesday saying as i haven't made comment its been passed over to the adjudicator. i have told CISAS 24 hours is ridiculous, managed then to rush comments in, but they then said the adjudicator may not accept them if they have started on the case...

ITs a bit of a hash to be honest all this!

Thanks

Steve