Disability Rights Law

[#1]

I can see why PlusNet get away with having dishonest staff. Too many of their customers are equally dishonest.

[#2]

mod:note
Can I thank the regular forum members for being their usual helpful selves but politely ask they step away from this thread for the moment.
The OP is obviously upset and hopefully in the cold light of day will see their mistake.
thanks.

[#3]

Quote from: dvorak

Moderators Note. Can I thank the regular forum members for being their usual helpful selves but politely ask they step away from this thread for the moment. The OP is obviously upset and hopefully in the cold light of day will see their mistake. thanks.

My mistake?
Fine. You are obviously ttring to make P!usnet look bad by condoning dishonesty. There is no need. I already know P!usnet are shit weasels.

[#4]

Moderators is attempting to cover up for Plusnut staff who lied and who broke the law.
Staff were  [removed], [removed] and  [removed].  [removed] just lied.  [removed] tried to put my Mum at risk, refused to let me speak to a manager and refused to provide his full name. He knew what he was doing, and did not want to be held accountable. The modererator is assisting him in that,and thus now shares his guilt
[Moderator's note by Adie (dvorak) removed csa names as per Forum Rules

And there he goes again, covering up for a collrage. Dvorak has admitted checks helping Plusnet cover up their breaking the law. He is as built as his colleagues.
Thanks Dvorak for confirming you think discrimination is OK. I note though you are too cowardly tonuse your real name. That shows you know you are doing wrong,.
The names removed to protect the built are [color=red][Removed], [Removed] and [Removed]. Not one of them knew their last name.
Dvorak, Stop covering up for your colleagues. Show some moral backbiomr?. Leave them, and  give your real name. Or you as cowardly as they are?
[Moderator's note by Mike (Mav): CSA name removed as per the forum rules.]
dick:green A bit of tidying of tags done.

[#5]

Moderators Note.
Please desist from posting the names of the agents which is a clear breach of the forum rules as linked to above.
These names have been removed from a public forum to a private area for PN staff.

[#6]

Quote from: susanpenfold

Can anyone from PlusNet explain why "<CSA name removed>",  "<CSA name removed>" and  "<CSA name removed>" (none of whom would provide the full name thus confirming they have so ething to hide) have no concept of the requirements of various disability rights legislation? These law are supposed to prevent companies discriminating against disabled people. All three think it acceptable to demand my mother, who finds it extremely difficult to walk, leave her home in the pouring rain and put herself at risk of falling to report a fault. Not one of them could see the problem with this. Why does Plusnetvemploy people like this? Is it your intention to make your company look bad? If sdo, I will agree you are. No need to be so horrible to my Mum.

Hi Susan,
Just a quick post to say that this'll be picked up first thing tomorrow. We'll stick a comment on this thread once investigated.
Matty

[#7]

Sorry to hear what's happened.
I've contacted our suppliers and a engineer is working on this job as I type.
We'll get this fixed for you as soon as we can.

[#8]

@Susan
If you took the time to look you'd find that many of the users who you have criticised have themselves been very critical of Plusnet's policies and inflexibility when these sorts of issues have come up in the past. Their contributions were in no way condoning Plusnet, but honest attempts to help you get matters resolved. Your attitude to them has meant you are now getting less advice and support from some prominent members of these forums than you would have had.
Moderation of these forums can be at times a little variable on implementation of the rules, but one rule is rigidly enforced: the ban on posting staff names (except members of the Customer Relations Team). I challenge you to find one instance of a post on these forums where a name has not been removed (if you do find one report it and it WILL be removed). In case you haven't followed the links in the moderator's notes and read the rules here is the relevant section:
[quote=http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,132333.0.html#post_posting]

• Personal details are not to be posted on these forums, this includes the content of private message unless permission is obtained from all parties.


• This includes the names of staff members who you may have had contact with via a call or ticket. This does not include members of the Customer Relations Team.

Quote

Dvorak, Stop covering up for your colleagues. Show some moral backbiomr?. Leave them, and  give your real name. Or you as cowardly as they are?

Dvorak is a customer who has volunteered to moderate these forums - NOT a member of Plusnet staff. The moderators are independent of Plusnet and get no personal gain for the time and effort they put in. I think you owe him an apology.

[#9]

...and for the record, if it becomes necessary to arrange an engineer visit to the user's premises, then PlusNET will need to communicate with the account holder to confirm the acceptance of the potential for 'customer out' or 'fault found in user equipment' charges from BTOR.
How they will achieve that if the phone line is down and there is no mobile phone available is though a bit of a challenge.

[#10]

Just to confirm I can see a engineers gone out and fixed the issue by disconnecting your mums emergency help machine that was faulty.
Let us know if there's anything further we can help with.

[#11]

Matthew,
Has supplier ownership of the line been clarified, such that in the future PlusNET do pick up the problem or the OP knows the right organisation to contact?
Who is going to pick up the fault found in end user equipment charge here?  If this equipment is not hard wired to the phone line, the standard 'disconnect all other connected equipment' test would have immediately identified the source of the issue.

[#12]

I suspect the OP was in no state of mind to go through the 'elimination of customer equipment' procedure

[#13]

Dick,
If by 'state of mind' you meant 'attitude' then (to be blunt) an attitude adjustment could have very quickly resolved this issue for the OP's mother without all of the consequential heat exhibited in this thread.  There is no excuse for the abuse shown to Old Jim!
Such matters do though 'turn' upon how said equipment is connected to the line - if it is hard wired then the EU cannot disconnect it.  In such circumstances one wonders where the EU boundary lays.
Kevin

[#14]

Quote from: spoon

If you took the time to look you'd find that many of the users who you have criticised have themselves been very critical of Plusnet's policies and inflexibility when these sorts of issues have come up in the past. Their contributions were in no way condoning Plusnet, but honest attempts to help you get matters resolved. Your attitude to them has meant you are now getting less advice and support from some prominent members of these forums than you would have had.

The consequences of the point I was making have been proved:

Quote from: Matthew

Just to confirm I can see a engineers gone out and fixed the issue by disconnecting your mums emergency help machine that was faulty.

If you had been less belligerent, there's every chance one of us would have helped you to sort this out last night (and avoid the £50 charge that I suspect could be coming your Mother's way because it was a fault caused by customers own equipment). I started a post last night to ask what was wrong and what had been tried but scrapped it because of your attitude. One of the standard pieces of advice we would give would be to unplug everything except for a single phone in the test socket inside the master socket.

[#15]

+1 per the above.