View Full Version : Telecom hassles

16-07-2004, 12:32 AM
Has anyone else had this hassle?

Here is a copy of a letter I sent Telecom/Xtra recently.

__________________________________________________ _______________

I have subscribed, for many years, to a limited internet service (top speed 128 kbps) provided by Paradise.net.nz.

You will be aware that this company depends upon Telecom New Zealand for IP services.

We recently made the decision to switch across to Xtra due to the fact that we did not need the 10 gigabytes of traffic provided each month by that company.

In shifting to a 3 gigabyte plan, we found that with Xtra we no longer needed to pay $30.00 per month to Telecom for IP services.

This charge was billed separately by Telecom New Zealand under an arrangement with Telstra clear/Paradise.net.nz.

When I recently spoke with Telecom I needed to organise the following:

• Shifting my Telecom phone connection to a new address as at 30 July.
• Shifting my high speed internet service
• Establishing if I could retain my same telephone number

I am happy to advise that all three of the above listed items were able to be changed over with a minimum of fuss.

For that you are to be congratulated.

That, however, is where the congratulations stop.

I indicated to the young lady with whom I spoke that I wished to take advantage of the promotion which ran until July 11 2004 whereby those persons who were setting up new JetStream accounts could take advantage of 2 months free of payment (with conditions applicable).

She very quickly advised me that this was not possible as I was an existing JetStream customer.

I replied that indeed I was not and that my high speed connection was provided through Telstraclear with IP services provided by Telecom New Zealand and that the arrangement that Telstraclear had with Telecom New Zealand was of no concern to me.

She then advised that she would now register me as a, “new Xtra JetStream customer”.

I then advised her that as a, “new Xtra JetStream customer” that I wanted the new connection to be set up under the promotion.

Again I was told that this was not possible as I was an existing customer who had simply become a, “new Xtra Jetstream customer”.

I then told the young lady with whom I was speaking that if Xtra/Telecom New Zealand wished to advance the numbers of those taking up broadband services in New Zealand, then the practice of alienating existing customers by precluding them from any and every promotion that Xtra/Telecom New Zealand ran for new customers would have to cease.

You will no doubt remember the recent furore where Telecom New Zealand offered a discount to new customers who had moved away from Telecom and were now enticed to return with the offer of a discount. Existing customers started to ring Telecom and were initially told that this was not possible as it was only for new customers. However due to the weight of public pressure Telecom New Zealand eventually relented and the discount was made available to all Telecom New Zealand customers.

Having taken particular notice of the JetStream offer made I can advise that the wording is as outlined below:

(relevant areas for discussion are in bold and underlined)

Offer available until 11 July 2004 for new Xtra JetStream residential and Home Business customers only. A 12 month term applies. Set-up costs and an early disconnection fee of $50 apply. First two months free access applies to the standard monthly charge for the Xtra JetStream Plan selected during the registration process. Offer excludes any usage above Plan MB allowance. Xtra JetStream is not available in all areas.

As I am a, “new Xtra JetStream residential and Home Business customer” I can see no reason why I am unable to participate in your promotion.

If what you meant by the above statement was that any association with JetStream did not allow the customer to take part in this promotion then indeed that should have been indicated in the advertisement.

It was not.

Or have I just missed it?

It is also interesting to note that a twelve month term applies and an early disconnection fee. So, as a minimum you are offering $80.00 and taking back $50.00 should your customer change his mind. To put it very simply, it looks to me like the kind of promotion you are having when you are not really having a promotion at all!

That being as it may, I again draw your attention to the misleading wording in your advertisement

The plan which I am currently on up until August 3 2004 is outlined below:

The paradise.net JetStart plan gives you 10GB of International (or Equivalent) traffic to use every 28 days. Please see our traffic charges page for a complete description of traffic types and charges.

Cost $30 for 10GB of traffic plus Telecom charges.

Additional Traffic $0.20 per international MB
$0.02 per national MB

You will note that it is called JetStart and paradise.net JetStart. Nowhere is there a reference to

Your own promotional material on this product lists it as JetStream Starter. (see below)

JetStream Starter
A good option for
people who: Download † Speed: Monthly data allowance: Excess
per MB: JetStream monthly charge for Telecom HomeLine and calling customers* JetStream monthly
charge for other customers: ISP monthly charge
Heavy downloaders where connection speed is not a priority 128kbs (up to 3x faster than dial-up) Varies by ISP Varies by ISP $29.95

Four names for one product?

Is it any wonder that the customer is confused?

Indeed even on the bill received from Telecom there is no reference to JetStream.

The bill specifies I am being charged in the rental and activity section for, and I quote, “Telecom IP services (05/06/04 to 04 07/04)” – as an example.

Pray tell if, on the said bill, there is no reference to my being a Jetstream customer then why:

1. Am I regarded as being a JetStream customer when there is no reference to that on the invoice?
2. Have I been charged for something I did not receive (i.e. services provided to JetStream customers)?
3. Why I am being charged for IP services if indeed I am already a JetStream customer?

One would suggest that I am indeed paying for something I am not receiving (service provided to JetStream customers) understanding ofcourse that you regard me as a JetStream customer.

After speaking at some length with your supervisor, “Jan” at your Hamilton Call Centre, I was advised that as I was an existing JetStream customer that there was nothing she could do.

I found this most peculiar understanding that my first point of contact advised that there was nothing she could do and, “Did I want to talk to her supervisor?”.

Who makes the decisions at your Call Centres on issues that require resolution if indeed your supervisors do not?

This lady (the supervisor) called “Jan” indicated to me that she would look into the matter and, “get back to me”.

Having had this assurance in the past from other companies and then not ever been contacted again I asked her, “Will you really?”. You see I already knew that she would not contact me again.

Out of sight out of mind.

She then assured me again that she would call me back.

Lo and behold, as predicted, no call.

Quite frankly it is not good enough. I want to great pains to ask her twice, “Would she get back to me?” and twice I was assured that she would.

Then ofcourse there was no further contact just as I predicted there would not be.

As an organisation that prides itself on customer focus, you surely do not believe that this level of negligence is acceptable, or do you?

I am still waiting for the promised resolution that, “Jan” in Hamilton assured me would be forthcoming via a return phone call that I am still waiting to receive.

Did I really expect to receive the promised return call?

Probably not, but that does not excuse the negligence exhibited on her part.

After all I am the customer, and is the customer not always regarded as being right?

Yes or no?

Given the run around that I have received from Telecom New Zealand over these matters the very least that I now expect is the following:

1. The return phone call promised from, “Jan” in the Hamilton Call Centre.
2. The two free months on the Jetstream plan (3 gig) that I have ordered via Telecom New Zealand as a new Xtra JetStream residential and Home Business customer, as advertised.
3. A credit, as a gesture of good will, on the charge sustained for the shifting of my ADSL connection from XXXXXXXXX to XXXXXXXXXXXX.
4. A waiver of the conditions of twelve month minimum duration and $50.00 exit fee should I decide to sever my association with Xtra.
5. An apology for the shocking manner that I as a customer of Telecom New Zealand have been subjected to.
6. An indication as to what Telecom New Zealand intend doing about the misleading/false advertising currently being used to attract new customers.

As an aside, I pointed out to, “Jan” in Hamilton that the difference between being good in business and being great was about the, “2% factor”. The, “2% factor” revolves around a very simple concept – “Do what you said you were going to do”.

Sadly, “Jan” of Hamilton as a representative of Telecom New Zealand failed to understand this. This is evidenced by my still waiting for the return call promised.

As a loyal Telecom New Zealand customer of 21 years I can advise that your efforts over this matter are unacceptable.

They cause customers, such as myself, who are now in a sole supply situation, to question the value that Telecom New Zealand put on their business and consider alternative sole supply telecommunication providers.

Resolution on all matters is required as a matter now of some urgency.

One hopes that this letter and its content will receive a full investigation and that you will advise of a way forward from the current impasse.

In the unlikely event that the above listed action is not forthcoming you may rest assured that the matter will pursued through the Chief Executive of Telecom New Zealand, Ms Gattung, the television programme, “Fair Go” and the Commerce Commission.

Address for service is as listed above.

Relevant email address, until August 3rd 2004, should you wish to use that method of communication, is as follows:


I look forward to hearing from you on all matters in due course.

__________________________________________________ ______________

I would be interested to know if anyone else out there has had difficulites in getting in on the recent promotion.

Look forward to hearing from others.

16-07-2004, 12:39 AM
um..........That is the exact treatment i would expect from Telescam,they write and redefine the rules to suit themselves.


16-07-2004, 12:47 AM
It should be interesting to see what response is forthcoming from Telecom.


16-07-2004, 12:51 AM
I would guess a repeat of the first response, you’re an existing company by whatever definition they choose to use that best fits their agenda hence you don't qualify.

16-07-2004, 01:23 AM
They make it up as they go along. there are no rules for Telecom.

16-07-2004, 02:48 AM
It is the same as their Texting deal. When they bought it out they new there would be a cap in the end. It was just a marketing ploy to get people on a Telecom phone that one of their biggest partners would employ.
Years ago in Greytown there was this woman who was rung up by a Telecom cell phone rep. She told him she wasn't interested at the time. Anyway on her next Telcom bill she got an extra $120 or so for a cell phone. She rang up Telecom to say she never requested a cell phone and never recieved one so was not going to pay the $120. They told her their database said she had one so cut her home phone off. Telecom had obviously never heard of GIGO ( garbage in garbage out )

16-07-2004, 02:56 AM

16-07-2004, 12:01 PM
My thoughts:

I think you bring up some valid points - particulary regarding what "Jetstream" and "Jestream Starter / Jetstart" mean.

Your woes could be best served in a few concise paragraphs

Poor Jan - she's in the firing line, but she is not the cause of your real problem - merely someone to point the finger at. Even if she did ring back with the "company line", your issue would not be resolved.

Good old "Fair Go". If I had a dollar for every time I have heard that someone is going to "Fair Go" .....

Good luck


16-07-2004, 12:18 PM
> I would be interested to know if anyone else out
> there has had difficulites in getting in on the
> recent promotion.

You are not the only one ;)


& there are other threads, I think on this as well....

Hope this helps

16-07-2004, 02:11 PM
The response, if one is received will be posted on this site.