But this year Virgin Media joined that elite after blundering into our street (clearly, as it eventually turned out, without bothering to perform due diligence to determine whether the area met their own criteria for installing fibre optic cable), notifying us, and our neighbours, that we could now be connected to their fibre optic network, messing everyone around for months, then finally recognising that they'd got everything wrong and that our street couldn't be connected for fibre optic after all.
In the meantime, VM created circumstances which resulted in our phone line and internet connection being cut off for more than 6 weeks (until we were forced to seek an alternative service provider), and our contract with previous provider EE cancelled. In response to my formal complaint they denied any responsibility or liability, citing a dubious technicality as the sole excuse, and failed to address any of the many other issues. Although a VM manager visited our house after everything went horribly wrong, acknowledged the full extent to which they had been at fault (in fact the full extent didn't become clear until he spoke about what should and shouldn't have happened), and apologised '...on behalf of Virgin Media for the very shabby treatment you have received', in response to the formal complaint there was no hint of apology. VM apparently believe that incompetence with no consequences for them, and no apology to those affected, is an acceptable way to conduct business. In modern business, profit and share value are everything, and 'customer service' is just a marketing slogan with as much credibility as 'your call is important to us'.
For anyone who stumbles across this while researching whether to change service provider, our story should serve as a warning. If you have a monoblock driveway, or anything even slightly unusual which might complicate cable access to your home, the same thing could happen to you. In our experience, VM don't know what they're doing a lot of the time, and won't even recognise they have caused a problem until it's too late, and in our case not until I told them.
This story includes details of my experiences in dealing with CISAS (the Communications and Internet Services Adjudication Scheme), Ofcom, Citizens Advice, and attempts to gain support from consumer champions in the media. Also problems in dealing with EE (our original service provider) and BT (the provider we signed up with after being let down by Virgin Media), which were ongoing for several months in both cases, none of which would have happened if even one of the many people at VM dealing with installations on our street had been alert enough to recognise the basic problem (the monoblock driveway - not exactly invisible to anyone visiting the area) which ultimately prevented the installations from going ahead.
(My understanding is that it's not impossible to install fibre optic cable under monoblock driveways. It's just slightly more awkward, and supposedly a VM company policy that they generally avoid doing it. Unfortunately most people who work for VM don't seem to know about that basic policy. My dad, who had a long career with Scottish Gas and has wide experience of the problems which have to be overcome when laying gas pipes, was utterly contemptuous of VM's reluctance to tackle minor installation problems.)
We now think of Virgin Media as being like SPECTRE run by the Chuckle Brothers. Evil but incompetent. If they ever try to come back to our street (and everyone I spoke to about it at VM optimistically assures me that will certainly happen in time), as far as we are concerned they should be met by shotguns and savage dogs.
Here is the full story of what happened:-
Our house is one of 8 on a private monoblock crescent (jointly owned by the residents), set back from the main road, behind a landscaped area, in a relatively modern housing estate.
Virgin Media's fibre optic service has been available to most of the rest of the estate for years, but we always understood it wasn't available to us, because of the monoblock driveway. (Though that didn't prevent VM from sending at least 2 letters a week for years trying to sell their service.)
Then, at the beginning of January (2016), VM installed new cable on the main road one house away from us. Immediately after that a salesman knocked on every door to tell us that their fibre optic network could now be connected to our houses. Obviously he walked over the monoblock driveway to knock on every door, and stood on it while selling their unrivalled service, and showed me an iPad with VM's system displaying our houses listed as 'okay to connect', and assuring me there would be no interruption to service while any installation was going ahead.
The problem with installing cable under our monoblock driveways had apparently been resolved. Yaay! There was immediately a lot of interest amongst our neighbours.
The house next door to us, side-on to the main road, were connected soon after. However the man of the house started working for VM during this time, so they may have had preferential treatment.
One of the houses in the centre of the crescent, furthest from the main road, signed up and began the process next (VM's sales team were so keen to proceed that they were going to pay the cost of buying them out of their existing BT contract). We hadn't been considering a change of ISP before VM made the offer, but, following research and consideration, we were next to sign up. Several of the others were waiting on existing contracts to expire before following suit, and in the meantime were watching with interest to see what happened with us.
The woman in the centre house had frequent conversations with VM personnel, and took every opportunity to explain our location, and the circumstances with the monoblock driveway. She even got her main contact to look us up on Google Earth. 2 different installation engineers visited their house to plan the best method for wiring up an additional TiVo box upstairs. Several other VM people visited the street to paint markings on the driveway to indicate where the cables and junction box should go. The last person to visit their house was the engineer working on an installation at her mother's flat, a few yards away on the main road, who called at their house at her request. Together with their neighbour, they walked around the immediate vicinity of their house evaluating the best options for reaching their house with cable leading from the main road, and agreed a plan which the engineer considered to be workable.
However, during this meeting she received a call from VM to notify her that the installation wouldn't go ahead, because it was 'too expensive' for the length of cable required to reach their house from the main road. The monoblock driveway wasn't mentioned as being a problem. The engineer said the decision was out of his hands, and he could do nothing to help, but did comment that it's much easier to be connected if the house next door is already connected, since they can easily take a link from your neighbour's cable. (The VM manager who eventually visited our house much later told me that piece of advice is completely untrue.)
Just after this, our neighbour's main contact at VM told her that 'things were happening' in relation to their plans for our street, and assured her that their installation would be able to go ahead soon.
In the meantime, we had a scheduled installation date, and what happened with our neighbour was actually some cause for optimism in our case: we are much closer to the main road, so less cable required to reach us, and the house next door was already connected. According to advice from someone who actually performed installations, we could be linked via our neighbour's cable. In theory, we imagined, they could daisy-chain the cable from one house to another and connect the houses all the way along? At least the next 3 houses after us all definitely wanted to sign up with VM. Of course, at this time we believed that VM were a professional operation who knew what they were doing.
Amongst the correspondence I had received from VM after signing up as a customer were 2 letters from someone with the title Virgin Media Broadband consultant, which gave his contact numbers and email address, and offered to answer any questions. He was even available for home visits. Since that was the only contact name I had, I emailed him, explained the layout of our crescent with the monoblock driveway, and, though I appreciated it wasn't his direct area of responsibility, asked if he could contact the installation team and enquire whether they could evaluate the practicalities of connecting cable from one house to another during their visit for our installation (which was scheduled for several days later). I was writing to a salesman, offering at least another 3 new customers, and naively imagined that different departments within VM actually spoke to each other. I would have had more chance of success writing a note, putting it in a bottle, and throwing it into a live volcano.
When you have an installation date scheduled with VM you get a letter confirming the date, and a kind of automated phone call from a robot, where you have to press a button to confirm you have agreed. You can also expect to receive a letter from your previous ISP advising that your phone number is transferring to a new provider on that date, and notifying you that your service with them will be cut off, also on that date. Everything appeared to be very slick, and reassuringly well organised.
The day before our first scheduled installation I received a call from VM to notify me that our installation date had been postponed, because the nearest cable was too far away - outside the house on the main road beyond the far end of the crescent (7 houses away from us). He also told me that the budget for our area had been increased and that the service would be available to every house on our crescent. He went on to list every house number, including the house whose installation had been cancelled. This appeared to confirm what our neighbours had been told: that 'things were happening', and the service would be available to them soon.
I pointed out that new cable had been installed on the main road one house away from us, and that our neighbours were already live customers. (VM's system hadn't been updated to show the recently-installed cable. This would prove to be a recurring problem.)
He checked their system, which confirmed our neighbours as live customers, and the next house beyond them, on the main road, too. Satisfied that my information must be correct, he scheduled an alternative installation date for slightly more than a week later.
I raised my remaining concern, that EE, our then-current ISP had written to advise that our service with them would be cut off the following day, in line with the installation date which VM had notified them of. He assured me 'that could never happen', and went on to explain there were protocols in place to prevent something like that from happening.
All the usual confirmations were received for the 2nd installation date, including another letter from EE. My wife took the day off work to wait with me, to ensure her laptop and other devices would still be okay on the new service. But nobody showed, and nobody phoned to notify us of any postponement or delay.
Late afternoon I looked for a number to phone VM. The first person said the installation was still scheduled to go ahead, and put me on hold while he checked it out. The line cut off after half an hour on hold. The next person told me the installation had been postponed, and put me on hold while he checked it out. Again, the line cut off after half an hour on hold.
I could write another 1000 words about the frustrations and wasted hours on the phone, and on-line live chats, over the following days. Basically, VM still didn't know where their own cable was. Installations were planned and cancelled repeatedly. I was assured that people would phone me back, but no one ever did. The onus is on the customer for pretty much everything.
I sent a complaint about the installation which was cancelled without notification via VM's on-line complaints system, but got no response until more than 2 months later.
Soon after the no-show for the installation, our phone and internet were cut off. It took 2 days to get someone at EE to confirm what had happened. (nobody at EE ever phones back either) At first they said they had received no communication from VM about transferring our number to them, and it appeared to be a line fault, but BT's system was down and they couldn't check. Then EE's own system was down and they couldn't check. Eventually someone confirmed our number had been 'ported over' to VM, and our contract with EE cancelled. The only way to be reconnected was to sign up for a new 12 month contract, at a higher price for the same service. The fact they had cut us off based on incorrect advice from a 3rd party made no difference. The fact we'd been customers for many years also made no difference. If we did agree to a new contract it would take at least a week to reconnect.
EE had done exactly what they said they were going to do in the letter they sent.
Since VM were continuing to assure me the installation would go ahead, re-signing with EE for 12 months wasn't an option.
Around 10 days after the 2nd postponed installation I spoke to someone at VM who told me the installation was still going ahead, and that materials had been ordered, but then began to talk about the distance from the main road to our house. I said I could suggest at least half a dozen routes to our house, and that the one they appeared to be planning sounded like the most complicated. So she said she would transfer me to the Construction Team (who I thought I was already speaking to) to talk about it.
Only
minutes later, the next person told me the installation had been cancelled and
wouldn’t go ahead at all, due to the cost of laying cable where monoblock
driveways are involved. I pointed out that our phone line had been cut off, due
to an error made by VM, and that I believed VM had a responsibility to
resolve that problem. If the decision not to install cable to our house had
been made before our phone line was cut off we would have been disappointed,
but accepted the situation. With our phone and internet cut off as a direct
consequence of an error made by VM the situation was no longer
straightforward.
She
apologised, but seemed to take the view that it was okay for VM to cut off
our phone line and simply walk away. I therefore had to move into assertive
mode, and she eventually agreed to send an email to a group
of people, and that someone would phone me the following day.
The manager I mentioned earlier arrived at my house the following day, though clearly with little advance knowledge of the reason for his visit. No one had told him our phone line had been cut off. Although he hadn't known about it in advance, he told me it was company policy that they avoided installing cable under monoblock driveways. This was more than 2 months since VM had originally offered their service, and this was the first VM employee who appeared to be aware of this basic policy.
As we spoke, it quickly became clear how badly VM had got everything wrong, and he offered the apology described above. I showed him the various routes we suggested via which our property could more easily be reached from the main road, including through the back gardens, which would have allowed access to the entire crescent without any monoblock involved. (The closest they came to assessing this option was when he tried to peer through our neighbour's high, thick hedge into their garden.)
Two days later he returned with an offer: they would assess the practicality of wiring up our entire crescent - though, before they could proceed, it was necessary for me to ask everyone to sign a waiver form granting permission for the work to go ahead.
It took 11 days to get all the forms signed, even though most of the neighbours were keen to switch to VM. Separate meetings with most of them, emails, letters. Two of the families are Chinese, and don't speak English, so that was a challenge. But we all believed this was a genuine attempt by VM to make amends, so we made the effort. VM would have got at least 5 guaranteed new customers out of the 7 houses in our street not already connected.
My contact at VM arrived to collect the forms and brought a colleague with him, who agreed that 'things should never have been allowed to get that far'. They explained their ideas for where the cable should be installed. 2 neighbours joined me, and we offered our suggestions. He assured me he would make a strong argument in our favour, but everything was sent to the Network Expansion team in Birmingham to assess. Around 2 weeks later I emailed to enquire if there had been any progress, and got a reply saying the plan had been rejected on grounds of cost, which was '£2000 above the cost matrix for the area'. He suggested I seek an alternative provider, and said our houses would be shown in their system as not suitable for connection. (considering how badly VM had got everything wrong, and considering their sales team had been willing to pay the cost to get one of our neighbours out of their BT contract, £2000 seemed to us like a small price to pay to make amends - and get 5 new customers too)
I asked him if he had any objection to me mentioning his name as someone to speak to when sending my letter of complaint. Considering that all of VM's errors had already been admitted, that at least should be straightforward.
As a final illustration that VM don't know what they're doing, around 2 weeks later I phoned to ask for a refund of the 12 months line rental we had prepaid. (It was by then obvious that no one from VM would ever have offered without being asked.)
It's clear that attempting to initiate legal proceedings would entail plunging into a Kafkaesque hell of indeterminate length. Any financial gain is likely to be minimal, and there would be a significant risk of incurring substantial additional expenses. Time to write the whole episode off as a bad experience, and leave Virgin Media at the top of our list of companies we'll bear a grudge against forever. In 20 years time we'll still be warning people off having any dealings with them.It took 11 days to get all the forms signed, even though most of the neighbours were keen to switch to VM. Separate meetings with most of them, emails, letters. Two of the families are Chinese, and don't speak English, so that was a challenge. But we all believed this was a genuine attempt by VM to make amends, so we made the effort. VM would have got at least 5 guaranteed new customers out of the 7 houses in our street not already connected.
My contact at VM arrived to collect the forms and brought a colleague with him, who agreed that 'things should never have been allowed to get that far'. They explained their ideas for where the cable should be installed. 2 neighbours joined me, and we offered our suggestions. He assured me he would make a strong argument in our favour, but everything was sent to the Network Expansion team in Birmingham to assess. Around 2 weeks later I emailed to enquire if there had been any progress, and got a reply saying the plan had been rejected on grounds of cost, which was '£2000 above the cost matrix for the area'. He suggested I seek an alternative provider, and said our houses would be shown in their system as not suitable for connection. (considering how badly VM had got everything wrong, and considering their sales team had been willing to pay the cost to get one of our neighbours out of their BT contract, £2000 seemed to us like a small price to pay to make amends - and get 5 new customers too)
I asked him if he had any objection to me mentioning his name as someone to speak to when sending my letter of complaint. Considering that all of VM's errors had already been admitted, that at least should be straightforward.
As a final illustration that VM don't know what they're doing, around 2 weeks later I phoned to ask for a refund of the 12 months line rental we had prepaid. (It was by then obvious that no one from VM would ever have offered without being asked.)
After
I explained the reason for my call, he looked at my account, noticed there was
a construction issue with our installation, but assured me it was minor and
would be resolved soon. I explained further, told him I’d been working with a
manager from VM, and had finally been told very clearly that our crescent
would never be connected for Virgin fibre optic. I even had that in writing. No
matter what I said, he remained optimistic to the end that our street could be
connected to VM’s services very soon. After confirming that the refund had
been made, he said he was going to transfer me to the Cancellations Team, so I
could tell them I had decided not to go ahead with the installation. I told him
I had never made that decision, and that it had instead been forced upon us. He
didn’t transfer me to the Cancellations Team, but still assured me Virgin fibre
optic would be available to our street soon.
And there we have the core problem: whoever you speak to at VM, if they are looking at a screen which tells them a property is okay to connect, they will believe it to be true, no matter what contradictory evidence they are presented with.
By the time I was ready to send my letter of complaint it was around 2 months since I had sent my original complaint via VM's on-line complaints system, and there had been no response other than the automated email confirmation, so that didn't seem like a reliable option. However, internet chat suggested that letters of complaint addressed to VM's CEO produced better results, so I addressed my letter to the CEO.
A few days after my letter was sent to the CEO, someone phoned in response to my original complaint, submitted 2 months previously - though he phoned my wife's mobile, which hadn't been given as a contact number (though it had been necessary for me to use that phone at times to contact VM during the time when our phone line had been cut off). He left a number for me to call back, though it took something like 5 days before I was able to speak to him: on hold numerous times until the line cut off. On the few occasions I did get through he wasn't available. Nobody offered to get him to call me back.
When I did speak to him he seemed like a reasonable person. I explained what had happened during the previous 2 months, and he apologised '...on behalf of Virgin Media for the very shoddy treatment you have received'. Although responsibility for the complaint had now transferred to the Executive Complaints team (based in the same office), he assured me that I would be satisfied with the outcome.
In response to my letter, someone from the Executive Complaints team phoned, but denied any responsibility or liability for what happened. She said they 'didn't request a number port' (to transfer our phone number from EE to VM). She failed to address any of the surrounding circumstances. There was no hint of apology at any point.
She offered to send a cheque for £50 as a 'goodwill gesture', and I told her that was an insult. To pursue the matter further, my next option was to refer the complaint to adjudication service CISAS.
CISAS
Since VM's complaints dept had failed to respond to my original complaint within 56 days, they are apparently required to send a letter notifying you that you are entitled to refer the matter to CISAS, so I had received one of those in the meantime. This is equivalent to a 'deadlock letter' (although it wasn't described in that way). The letter should also include a reference number, which mine didn't - although the woman from the Executive Complaints team was able to provide that. It is necessary to have a deadlock letter and reference number before an application can be submitted to CISAS. If you failed to reach an acceptable agreement over a complaint within a timescale less than 56 days, you would have to ask for a deadlock letter before approaching CISAS.
You then have to download an application form from CISAS' website, to send to them with as much documentary evidence as you can provide. (One suggested form of evidence is sound recordings of phone calls. Assuming I had ever recorded any phone calls, these would mostly have been lengthy recordings of on hold music before the line cut off. Dozens of them.) My email had 21 attachments, though no sound recordings.
Near the end of the form is the part about what compensation you are claiming, though it requires both specific values and documentary evidence to support everything. I had documentary evidence for only some of the expenses we had incurred, but listed what I could. As regards compensation for having our phone line cut off for over six weeks, the work I had undertaken to recruit our neighbours as new customers for VM, general inconvenience, distress, wasted time etc, I had no idea of any formula to calculate a reasonable value. So I explained that in a different part of the form (the part about 'Give an apology'), and also clarified the situation in more detail on the accompanying email to CISAS.
As it turns out, CISAS ignore all of that, and simply forward the form to the company you are complaining about, and allow them to contact you directly. CISAS also don't reply to any subsequent emails - though you will get an automatically generated email telling you that they will respond within 5 working days. If you misunderstand any of their processes they consider it to be your fault, which is what they basically told me when I eventually phoned them. (Since I had read something which suggested that they wouldn't discuss individual cases by phone, I had avoided phoning prior to that.)
A different person from VM's Executive Complaints team phoned about the CISAS application form. He phoned at 8am on a Tuesday morning, which I assumed was a deliberate technique to catch people off guard.
He offered to pay the relatively small value I had listed for the expenses I had been able to prove - very obviously as a means of clearing the case from his desk. Again, there was no hint of apology. In reply to my direct question, 'So, do Virgin Media now acknowledge that they have been at fault?' there was a vague, reluctant, 'There have been some issues'.
I pointed out that my request for compensation, for a value to be agreed, was explained elsewhere on the form. He said that they ignore everything on the form except for the part listing values for provable expenses incurred, though did at least comment that CISAS procedures could be confusing for anyone unfamiliar with that organisation. He said he could arrange to have the cheque sent that day. I told him that was completely unacceptable, and not to send the cheque.
A few days later a letter arrived from this person which said things like: 'It was a pleasure to talk to you and understand the details of your complaint'; 'I'm delighted that we've been able to make a plan to resolve your complaint'; and '...(the cheque) will be posted to your postal address in the next 5-10 working days'.
I can only imagine this is another technique to convince you that the conversation you had happened in a completely different way than you remembered.
The cheque arrived with a remittance advice but no covering letter. I posted it back, addressed to the person who had phoned, together with a letter making it clear, once again, that I considered it to be seriously inadequate. A couple of days later he phoned to say he was posting it back. I told him I would tear it up and post it back to him again. It arrived soon afterwards, together with my letter, and a letter stating that the CISAS case was closed (this was long before it actually was closed).
Rather than mailing the torn cheque back, I scanned the pieces and sent them to him by email (they had apparently blocked my email address, so after several failed attempts I sent it from a gmail address instead). I also copied in the manager who had visited my house and the person I had spoken to in the Complaints Dept, and, amongst other things, requested that the waiver forms signed by all our neighbours should be returned to me. (Our neighbours had requested that by this point, since they no longer trusted VM to remain in possession of such sensitive documents. We never got the waiver forms back of course.)
Some time later a letter of apology arrived from the same person, though it was expressed as a personal apology from him rather than on behalf of Virgin Media. The letter was bland, evasive, insincere, and so carelessly written as to be meaningless. A box-ticking exercise to complete the CISAS case, since that was one of the requirements. It had taken my original epic letter of complaint, the full CISAS process, and another letter and email (both of which highlighted that an apology was a requirement on the CISAS form) before VM offered this pitiful token apology.
I sent CISAS a scanned copy of the apology letter, and explained why I felt it didn't fulfil the 'Give an apology' part of their application form.
Some time later I received an email from CISAS which quoted their adjudicator, and appeared to agree with me. It said he wasn't satisfied that VM had apologised, and that if they failed to do so the case would proceed to adjudication. But a few days later it turned out that they just hadn't read my email. Another email basically said that it doesn't matter who at VM sends an apology, or what it says, as far as they are concerned it still counts.
At the end of the standard timescale they allow, CISAS notified me that they had closed the case, which never got as far as actually going to adjudication.
Presumably the CISAS process works for some people, but for me it was a frustrating waste of time. Their processes are rigid. They're not remotely proactive in offering advice. And although their aim is to be impartial, VM are familiar with how they operate, and take full advantage, so the process is weighted in their favour, rather than the customer, looking for help, advice, and justice, while trying to obtain fair treatment from an indifferent company.
The only remaining positive is that you're not obliged to consider CISAS closing the case as final, and can pursue your complaint via other avenues.
Ofcom
Months after our phone line had been cut off, and our contract with EE cancelled, I was still having problems with EE (more on this later) and, during my last phone call to them someone told me that our number had been 'slammed'. She didn't make much of an issue of this, and just explained that was the technical term they used to describe what had happened to us.
On checking, I read on Wikipedia that 'telephone slamming is an illegal telecommunications practice in which a subscriber's telephone service is changed without their consent'. Ofcom take telephone slamming very seriously indeed, and 'can fine these companies up to ten percent of their turnover'.
That sounded like what happened to us, so I checked Ofcom's website.
Ofcom don't generally deal with individual complaints, but they make an exception for this, and have a specific form to report cases of telephone slamming.
I submitted our story to Ofcom, and got a reply the next day. They were sympathetic, and thanked me for sending the information, which they had recorded for potential use when putting future regulations in place. However they also explained that, strictly speaking, it wasn't the type of telephone slamming they could deal with. Nevertheless, they ended by recommending that I seek legal advice. At least they considered our story to be worth recording, so I was reasonably satisfied with that.
Other avenues pursued
Media
After being urged to do so by neighbours, I submitted our story to the consumer champion on one of the main Scottish newspapers. I was reluctant to have our story tabloidised, but we remained angry enough that we were willing to try it.
After a couple of weeks I got a letter saying the explanation was 'too long and complicated', and asked me to send a more concise version. Unfortunately it is a long and complicated story, and I had already made what I thought was a good attempt to precis it. However, I took the letter as a positive sign that they were interested, and tried again to make the explanation as clear and brief as possible.
Eventually I got another letter which expressed a great deal of sympathy for our case, but explained they were unable to help, again because the situation was too complicated. From what I understand, if the issue had related to a specific sum of money they would have tried to help, but anything which may have entailed negotiation over compensation was more than they could take on. Again it was suggested that I engage a solicitor. It took more than 3 months before I received the final letter.
Consumer champions working for newspapers are doing a great job standing up for people trying to do battle against unscrupulous companies, but they are clearly overwhelmed by the volume of complaints. The letter I received said they receive 700 letters and emails a week. In the shrinking industry of print media, it's impressive they're achieving as much as they do.
Twitter
My wife's Twitter account is predominantly for business use, and she has a large number of followers, but had been reluctant to post anything about our troubles with VM. However, eventually she responded to someone else's complaint about VM by saying something to the effect of 'without question the worst customer service experience ever'.
Although VM hadn't been specifically copied in, they responded quickly with the suggestion that we should contact them, and they were 'here to help'. Spend further hours in queues on the phone hurting my ears listening to bass-heavy pop music and repeated recorded messages, before being passed from one department to another? No thanks. We replied to say that VM had already proved what kind of company they were, and that further direct communication was pointless - to which there was another blandly polite and superficially helpful response. It was like communicating with an AI rather than a human.
Citizens' Advice Bureau
At the local Citizens' Advice Bureau we explored every option they could think of:-
By the time I was ready to send my letter of complaint it was around 2 months since I had sent my original complaint via VM's on-line complaints system, and there had been no response other than the automated email confirmation, so that didn't seem like a reliable option. However, internet chat suggested that letters of complaint addressed to VM's CEO produced better results, so I addressed my letter to the CEO.
A few days after my letter was sent to the CEO, someone phoned in response to my original complaint, submitted 2 months previously - though he phoned my wife's mobile, which hadn't been given as a contact number (though it had been necessary for me to use that phone at times to contact VM during the time when our phone line had been cut off). He left a number for me to call back, though it took something like 5 days before I was able to speak to him: on hold numerous times until the line cut off. On the few occasions I did get through he wasn't available. Nobody offered to get him to call me back.
When I did speak to him he seemed like a reasonable person. I explained what had happened during the previous 2 months, and he apologised '...on behalf of Virgin Media for the very shoddy treatment you have received'. Although responsibility for the complaint had now transferred to the Executive Complaints team (based in the same office), he assured me that I would be satisfied with the outcome.
In response to my letter, someone from the Executive Complaints team phoned, but denied any responsibility or liability for what happened. She said they 'didn't request a number port' (to transfer our phone number from EE to VM). She failed to address any of the surrounding circumstances. There was no hint of apology at any point.
She offered to send a cheque for £50 as a 'goodwill gesture', and I told her that was an insult. To pursue the matter further, my next option was to refer the complaint to adjudication service CISAS.
CISAS
Since VM's complaints dept had failed to respond to my original complaint within 56 days, they are apparently required to send a letter notifying you that you are entitled to refer the matter to CISAS, so I had received one of those in the meantime. This is equivalent to a 'deadlock letter' (although it wasn't described in that way). The letter should also include a reference number, which mine didn't - although the woman from the Executive Complaints team was able to provide that. It is necessary to have a deadlock letter and reference number before an application can be submitted to CISAS. If you failed to reach an acceptable agreement over a complaint within a timescale less than 56 days, you would have to ask for a deadlock letter before approaching CISAS.
You then have to download an application form from CISAS' website, to send to them with as much documentary evidence as you can provide. (One suggested form of evidence is sound recordings of phone calls. Assuming I had ever recorded any phone calls, these would mostly have been lengthy recordings of on hold music before the line cut off. Dozens of them.) My email had 21 attachments, though no sound recordings.
Near the end of the form is the part about what compensation you are claiming, though it requires both specific values and documentary evidence to support everything. I had documentary evidence for only some of the expenses we had incurred, but listed what I could. As regards compensation for having our phone line cut off for over six weeks, the work I had undertaken to recruit our neighbours as new customers for VM, general inconvenience, distress, wasted time etc, I had no idea of any formula to calculate a reasonable value. So I explained that in a different part of the form (the part about 'Give an apology'), and also clarified the situation in more detail on the accompanying email to CISAS.
As it turns out, CISAS ignore all of that, and simply forward the form to the company you are complaining about, and allow them to contact you directly. CISAS also don't reply to any subsequent emails - though you will get an automatically generated email telling you that they will respond within 5 working days. If you misunderstand any of their processes they consider it to be your fault, which is what they basically told me when I eventually phoned them. (Since I had read something which suggested that they wouldn't discuss individual cases by phone, I had avoided phoning prior to that.)
A different person from VM's Executive Complaints team phoned about the CISAS application form. He phoned at 8am on a Tuesday morning, which I assumed was a deliberate technique to catch people off guard.
He offered to pay the relatively small value I had listed for the expenses I had been able to prove - very obviously as a means of clearing the case from his desk. Again, there was no hint of apology. In reply to my direct question, 'So, do Virgin Media now acknowledge that they have been at fault?' there was a vague, reluctant, 'There have been some issues'.
I pointed out that my request for compensation, for a value to be agreed, was explained elsewhere on the form. He said that they ignore everything on the form except for the part listing values for provable expenses incurred, though did at least comment that CISAS procedures could be confusing for anyone unfamiliar with that organisation. He said he could arrange to have the cheque sent that day. I told him that was completely unacceptable, and not to send the cheque.
A few days later a letter arrived from this person which said things like: 'It was a pleasure to talk to you and understand the details of your complaint'; 'I'm delighted that we've been able to make a plan to resolve your complaint'; and '...(the cheque) will be posted to your postal address in the next 5-10 working days'.
I can only imagine this is another technique to convince you that the conversation you had happened in a completely different way than you remembered.
The cheque arrived with a remittance advice but no covering letter. I posted it back, addressed to the person who had phoned, together with a letter making it clear, once again, that I considered it to be seriously inadequate. A couple of days later he phoned to say he was posting it back. I told him I would tear it up and post it back to him again. It arrived soon afterwards, together with my letter, and a letter stating that the CISAS case was closed (this was long before it actually was closed).
Rather than mailing the torn cheque back, I scanned the pieces and sent them to him by email (they had apparently blocked my email address, so after several failed attempts I sent it from a gmail address instead). I also copied in the manager who had visited my house and the person I had spoken to in the Complaints Dept, and, amongst other things, requested that the waiver forms signed by all our neighbours should be returned to me. (Our neighbours had requested that by this point, since they no longer trusted VM to remain in possession of such sensitive documents. We never got the waiver forms back of course.)
Some time later a letter of apology arrived from the same person, though it was expressed as a personal apology from him rather than on behalf of Virgin Media. The letter was bland, evasive, insincere, and so carelessly written as to be meaningless. A box-ticking exercise to complete the CISAS case, since that was one of the requirements. It had taken my original epic letter of complaint, the full CISAS process, and another letter and email (both of which highlighted that an apology was a requirement on the CISAS form) before VM offered this pitiful token apology.
I sent CISAS a scanned copy of the apology letter, and explained why I felt it didn't fulfil the 'Give an apology' part of their application form.
Some time later I received an email from CISAS which quoted their adjudicator, and appeared to agree with me. It said he wasn't satisfied that VM had apologised, and that if they failed to do so the case would proceed to adjudication. But a few days later it turned out that they just hadn't read my email. Another email basically said that it doesn't matter who at VM sends an apology, or what it says, as far as they are concerned it still counts.
At the end of the standard timescale they allow, CISAS notified me that they had closed the case, which never got as far as actually going to adjudication.
Presumably the CISAS process works for some people, but for me it was a frustrating waste of time. Their processes are rigid. They're not remotely proactive in offering advice. And although their aim is to be impartial, VM are familiar with how they operate, and take full advantage, so the process is weighted in their favour, rather than the customer, looking for help, advice, and justice, while trying to obtain fair treatment from an indifferent company.
The only remaining positive is that you're not obliged to consider CISAS closing the case as final, and can pursue your complaint via other avenues.
Ofcom
Months after our phone line had been cut off, and our contract with EE cancelled, I was still having problems with EE (more on this later) and, during my last phone call to them someone told me that our number had been 'slammed'. She didn't make much of an issue of this, and just explained that was the technical term they used to describe what had happened to us.
On checking, I read on Wikipedia that 'telephone slamming is an illegal telecommunications practice in which a subscriber's telephone service is changed without their consent'. Ofcom take telephone slamming very seriously indeed, and 'can fine these companies up to ten percent of their turnover'.
That sounded like what happened to us, so I checked Ofcom's website.
Ofcom don't generally deal with individual complaints, but they make an exception for this, and have a specific form to report cases of telephone slamming.
I submitted our story to Ofcom, and got a reply the next day. They were sympathetic, and thanked me for sending the information, which they had recorded for potential use when putting future regulations in place. However they also explained that, strictly speaking, it wasn't the type of telephone slamming they could deal with. Nevertheless, they ended by recommending that I seek legal advice. At least they considered our story to be worth recording, so I was reasonably satisfied with that.
Other avenues pursued
Media
After being urged to do so by neighbours, I submitted our story to the consumer champion on one of the main Scottish newspapers. I was reluctant to have our story tabloidised, but we remained angry enough that we were willing to try it.
After a couple of weeks I got a letter saying the explanation was 'too long and complicated', and asked me to send a more concise version. Unfortunately it is a long and complicated story, and I had already made what I thought was a good attempt to precis it. However, I took the letter as a positive sign that they were interested, and tried again to make the explanation as clear and brief as possible.
Eventually I got another letter which expressed a great deal of sympathy for our case, but explained they were unable to help, again because the situation was too complicated. From what I understand, if the issue had related to a specific sum of money they would have tried to help, but anything which may have entailed negotiation over compensation was more than they could take on. Again it was suggested that I engage a solicitor. It took more than 3 months before I received the final letter.
Consumer champions working for newspapers are doing a great job standing up for people trying to do battle against unscrupulous companies, but they are clearly overwhelmed by the volume of complaints. The letter I received said they receive 700 letters and emails a week. In the shrinking industry of print media, it's impressive they're achieving as much as they do.
My wife's Twitter account is predominantly for business use, and she has a large number of followers, but had been reluctant to post anything about our troubles with VM. However, eventually she responded to someone else's complaint about VM by saying something to the effect of 'without question the worst customer service experience ever'.
Although VM hadn't been specifically copied in, they responded quickly with the suggestion that we should contact them, and they were 'here to help'. Spend further hours in queues on the phone hurting my ears listening to bass-heavy pop music and repeated recorded messages, before being passed from one department to another? No thanks. We replied to say that VM had already proved what kind of company they were, and that further direct communication was pointless - to which there was another blandly polite and superficially helpful response. It was like communicating with an AI rather than a human.
Citizens' Advice Bureau
At the local Citizens' Advice Bureau we explored every option they could think of:-
- Refer to an ombudsman - I'd already done that with CISAS.
- Trading Standards - similar to Ofcom, they don't deal with individual complaints.
- Small Claims Court - unsuited to negotiating a compensation claim for a non-specific value. If your claim is unsuccessful you may be ordered to pay the other side's legal expenses.
- Lawyer - the final option suggested, but they weren't confident of success, which matched my own thoughts on the subject: an uncertain outcome with anticipated high cost.
The most interesting thing to happen during my visit was when one of their volunteers came into the room soon after my interview began. She was a former employee of Virgin Media, who had worked with them for 18 years, and even spent time dealing with customer complaints. Could she help? The main points she confirmed were:-
- VM don't pay compensation. At most they might pay expenses incurred as a consequence of problems caused by them.
- There is no communication between different departments within VM, so little surprise they had got everything so wrong.
So, something close to official confirmation that VM believe it's acceptable for them to cause havoc for customers, or potential customers, through their own ineptitude, with no consequences for them. Also that they're never going to learn anything from their own mistakes. What happened to us could easily happen elsewhere.
The Legal Situation
The consumer champion at the newspaper I contacted provided contact details for a Law Clinic run by student volunteers and trainee solicitors at a local university. You can submit questions via a form on their website to obtain advice, though by this time (nearly 10 months since VM originally offered their services) I'd had enough and just wanted to leave the whole episode in the past. The main reason I sent details to the Law Clinic was so I could report on the response for this blog, in case it helps anyone else who finds themself in a similar situation.
The first part of the response from the Law Clinic related to the contract with VM, and whether VM failed to fulfil any part of that. The onus of course is on the customer to prove that VM failed in any aspect of the contract before you could consider raising a claim against them for any losses suffered as a direct result.
The small print in VM's Terms and Conditions are of course comprehensive in absolving them of any liability in almost any circumstances. In our case there are a couple of points I would challenge:-
The Legal Situation
The consumer champion at the newspaper I contacted provided contact details for a Law Clinic run by student volunteers and trainee solicitors at a local university. You can submit questions via a form on their website to obtain advice, though by this time (nearly 10 months since VM originally offered their services) I'd had enough and just wanted to leave the whole episode in the past. The main reason I sent details to the Law Clinic was so I could report on the response for this blog, in case it helps anyone else who finds themself in a similar situation.
The first part of the response from the Law Clinic related to the contract with VM, and whether VM failed to fulfil any part of that. The onus of course is on the customer to prove that VM failed in any aspect of the contract before you could consider raising a claim against them for any losses suffered as a direct result.
The small print in VM's Terms and Conditions are of course comprehensive in absolving them of any liability in almost any circumstances. In our case there are a couple of points I would challenge:-
- In the section about the date set for installation, if there are any changes it says 'We will try to notify you of any changes as soon as possible'. We were at home waiting all day (my wife took time off work), and there was no attempt to notify us of the postponement. They also didn't notify EE, our previous service provider, who 'ported' our phone number over to VM on that day, and cancelled our contract with them.
- Concerning the section which says that providing the services 'is also subject to survey'. We think it's reasonable to expect that they should have conducted a survey before notifying everyone in our street that their service was available. Beyond that, it took nearly 3 months from the initial approach until the final notification that they weren't going to connect our street, during which many representatives from VM visited the area without recognising any problem with the monoblock driveway, and many more were told about it by phone, also without realising that might be an issue. If any survey was performed during that time, it failed.
Amongst other things, The Law Clinic response made this point: "Before embarking on any court procedure it is important
that you weigh up the costs, time and stress involved in court proceedings
against the prospects of success."
And the only positive outcome? At least they no longer bombard us with letters trying to sell their services.
Other telecoms companies are available.
We had problems with EE (our original service provider) and BT (our new one) too, which lasted for months in both cases. None of it would have happened if Virgin Media had never entered our lives, so I do consider that VM are responsible for all of it, but it is a reminder of the frustrations in dealing with any telecoms company.
EE
After EE cut off our phone line and cancelled our account with them, they started sending emails chasing payment for unpaid bills (covering the period after our service was cut off), and warning that we were at risk of having our broadband services cut off (which they obviously already had been). Each time I phoned them they assured me that our account was definitely cancelled, and that no payments were due. Someone even made an adjustment to the numbers in our account, to ensure that all would be well. Someone else told me that that the information in their system was way behind anything which had happened in real time. Emails were automatically generated, and could safely be ignored.
Eventually a letter arrived, which started by saying "We have tried to contact you several times about your unpaid bill, but have had no response to our letters and calls (there hadn't been any). If your bill is not paid within 21 days, you will be disconnected from the network." (we had been disconnected months before). It went on to warn that our credit rating would be affected, and our 'ability to find a new broadband service provider' (we were already signed up with another one).
I phoned again, and explained to someone what had happened, and about my phone calls in response to various emails. She said she didn't understand why any of the people I had previously spoken to would tell me that our account had been cancelled. After asking some questions she said that, although it wasn't standard procedure, she would try to transfer me to a department which would take final actions to close everything.
The next person closed the account, and said that we would receive a letter confirming the closure. There might even be a cheque to refund any over-payment. No letter or cheque was ever received.
This was also the person who told me that our phone number had been 'slammed', which later gave me cause to contact Ofcom, as described above.
It took months, but at least we no longer hear from EE. I suspect this is quite a normal experience when leaving any internet, or mobile phone, service provider.
BT
Virgin Media had given final notification that our street wouldn't be connected by them on a day before we were about to go on holiday, so I was forced to drop all holiday preparations and try to find a new service provider so we could be reconnected soon after returning from holiday.
We went with BT. The broadband speed was better, the phone package was worse. Monthly costs were higher than before, and would increase significantly after the first 12 months of their introductory promotional offer had passed. Though, less than a month after we were connected there was an email telling us the price was about to be increased. Soon after that emaiI arrived I read something on a money-saving website which said BT had assured them that promotional offers weren't affected by the price increase, but BT told me everyone was affected. So much for believing that we had a reliable fixed-price deal with them.
On the day when BT confirmed that our service was now live, nothing worked. An impatient person at a call centre had me crawling on the floor unscrewing the BT socket, and attempting various connections, before saying that a BT engineer would visit. If the problem proved to be within our home, there would be a charge of £129.99.
The BT engineer, an unfriendly, unhelpful and impatient individual, arrived a few days later. He was self-employed, so knew very little about BT or how they operated, and couldn't answer any questions about anything - such as 'Will we be charged £129.99 for this?'. The only question he did answer was about how we should go about getting our original phone number back, but his advice on that turned out to be completely wrong. (BT never confirmed whether they were going to charge the £129.99, until months later when it suddenly appeared on our bill.)
He said there was a short-circuited wire in the main BT socket. Our previous router had been directly connected to my desktop PC in another room, but that couldn't happen any more. If I wanted a cable from the main socket to reconnect the socket next to the desktop PC, I would have to arrange that myself. After he went away I found he'd left 3 loose wires hanging 2 inches out of the socket.
I had to buy a USB wi-fi adaptor to connect my desktop PC wirelessly to the router, but found that it had to be reconnected every morning, and spontaneously disconnected frequently throughout the day. Whenever the power cut off after a circuit blew (which seemed to happen frequently during that time), the internet remained disconnected for hours afterwards.
Eventually I contacted a local independent telephone engineer, who arrived quickly and fixed everything with minimal fuss. He said there was no evidence that there had ever been a short circuit, and "I think the BT engineer probably conned you". His charge was £30, less than a quarter of the BT price, and he provided an ethernet cable at no charge. Good service actually is possible.
The only good thing I have to say about BT? (as with all telecoms companies, phoning them is generally a nightmare) But at least they got our original phone number back. Eventually.
