21^st March 2000

Dear [Chairman],

This is now my third letter to [the mobile phone network]. The previous two (copies are enclosed) failed to elicit any response from your colleagues. So fed up am I with [the mobile phone network's] inability to deal with this issue that I have now signed up with [another company]. All that remains with [the mobile phone network] is the cellphone to which the attached correspondence refers – and which I fully intend to keep at the rental level that was agreed.

I was unhappy with your service before the correspondence began, but that unhappiness has now been turned to anger by the way that your colleagues have ignored my letters. They clearly hope that by keeping silent, I’ll go away. Wrong. I’m now more determined than ever to make you honour your obligations.

The long letter I sent to [mobile phone network employee] on 14^th February was written at her request. She wasn’t prepared to consider my points over the phone and insisted that I put them in writing. I was naïve because I thought that meant she intended to resolve the issue once she’d examined the evidence. What she really meant was: get off the line and get lost. Not only did she fail to do what she promised; she couldn’t even be bothered to acknowledge receipt of my letter.

A couple of weeks ago I thought that help might be at hand. Your colleague, [mobile phone network employee], sent me a mail shot which promised "exceptional customer care". Perhaps this was a [mobile phone network employee] who meant what he said. Of course not. He never replied either.

[the mobile phone network's] customer care is exceptional only in its awfulness. Customers are passed from voice to voice via automated machines, are left dangling on the line at their own expense, never get to talk to the same person twice and, as a result, never get the same story twice.

In the correspondence, for instance, I refer to various promises and reassurances that were made to me before I signed the transfer, but which were later denied. One of those offers has since been made to me again – and this time in writing. You can bet your bottom dollar, however, that if I try to take up that offer, I’ll be told that it doesn’t apply to me.

I’m afraid that [the mobile phone network's] customer care problems are beyond solving, even by the MD. But my cellphone rental is an issue that you can fix at a stroke. I’m relying on you to clean up the mess that your colleagues created.

Dear Mr Walton,

Thank you for your letter dated 21 March 2000 addressed to [Chairman and CEO]. I have been asked to reply directly to you.

I understand your concerns that you were due to have free line rental on your mobile number. Unfortunately this is incorrect. Your line rental each month is £17.50 with VAT. I am able to offer you a 12-month Line Advance package for £79.99. I am sorry that you were misadvised about your current tariff charges.

I understand this may have not have been the answer you may have wished for however, this the standard price for care digital tariffs for [the mobile phone network]. Thank you for writing to [the mobile phone network] your comments are taken very seriously. If you require any more assistance please contact me on [the mobile phone network direct number].

Dear [Chairman],

I am pleased to report that, following my letter to you of 21^st March, I have at last had a response from your colleagues. Writing to the CEO is clearly the simplest (perhaps the only) way of kindling any interest in a customer complaint within [the mobile phone network].

[the mobile phone network employee's] letter, however, is not the one I expected. True, I was prepared for the semi-literate and blandly patronising style, but the attitude she has taken is so extraordinary that I cannot believe it is actually [the mobile phone network] policy.

[the mobile phone network employee] acknowledges that I was "misadvised about [my] current tariff charges", yet she does not accept any obligation to honour her colleagues' mistake. Can this be true? Fundamental issues of integrity and principle should be decided at the top, not by a junior in the customer services department. Please can you confirm that it really is [the mobile phone network] policy not to honour the representations (erroneous or otherwise) that it makes to its customers, and upon which customers rely in good faith?

For the record, I dispute that a mistake was made in my case. More than one of your colleagues confirmed that the rent-free line which was transferred to my name would continue to be rent-free after the transfer.

I have spoken with [the mobile phone network employee] about her letter and it was clear that she had only a superficial understanding of the case. Despite my sending all the relevant correspondence to yourself, she had barely read it, let alone done any serious research. She was only vaguely aware that the line had been rent-free before the transfer (but had made no effort to check the details) and incorrectly assumed that, if it had been rent-free, the rent-free period would have expired by now.

I am heartily sick of writing about this issue. I have wasted several hours at my keyboard and on the phone, trying to get the matter sorted. And for all that effort I expect nothing less than the unconditional transfer of the mobile phone to my name on the same open-ended rent-free terms that existed before the transfer, and which I was assured would continue afterwards.

I do not take kindly to being first ignored by your colleagues and then patronised ("thank you for writing...your comments are taken very seriously") by someone who hasn't even read the correspondence.

It would also help if someone was prepared to apologise for the failure of [the mobile phone network employee] and [the mobile phone network employee] to reply to my earlier letters. An explanation of their conduct is long overdue, yet no reference to their shoddy behaviour appears in [the mobile phone network employee's] letter.