Here are the emails that have been exchanged between [Pipex][] and myself so far (automated responses excluded). Names have been replaced by initials.<\/p>\n
[pipex]: http:\/\/www.pipex.co.uk\/<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 14 September 2006 11:53
\n> **To:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Customer Services,
\n>
\n> I have a payment from my credit card to PIPEX INTERNET to the value of \u00c2\u00a335.19, dated 11 September 2006. This payment for such a high value is completely unexpected. I am concerned that it might not be legitimate, in which case I will have to phone my bank and cancel my cards. Please get back to me as soon as possible regarding this payment.<\/p>\n
The reply came six days later.<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 22 September 2006 11:10
\n> **From:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Dear Sir,
\n>
\n> Thank you for your email
\n>
\n> This includes the zone alarm fee which has been charged in error, I have sent a request to my finance team who will have this refunded back to you, please allow 28 days
\n>
\n> I thank you in advance for your patience
\n>
\n> Kind regards
\n>
\n> SS
\n> Customer Services<\/p>\n
All good. Three days later, I noticed another erroneous transaction on my account. The snowball starts to roll down the hill…
\n
\n> **Sent:** 25 September 2006 20:34
\n> **To:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> SS,
\n>
\n> Thanks. I’ve also noticed that my account seems to have been debited twice – once at \u00c2\u00a323.44 (the old monthly fee) and once at \u00c2\u00a325.99 (the new monthly fee). I think that the first transaction has been applied in error – that account should have been cancelled on the 15th September.<\/p>\n
A week and a day later:<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 3 October 2006 10:53
\n> **From:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Dear sir\/madam
\n>
\n> Thank you for your email
\n>
\n> I can confirm that I have forwarded your email onto my Finance Department who will endeavour to respond to you as soon as possible.
\n>
\n> At the moment they do have a response time of 7-10 working days so I thank you in advance for your patience
\n>
\n> If you have any further enquiries please do not hesitate to contact us on 0845 077 2455
\n>
\n> Kind regards
\n> JB<\/p>\n
It took them a week and a day just to forward my email on to the correct department. Haven’t they considered the possibility of hiring more staff to deal with these emails? Preferably someone who can tell that “Pete” is a “sir” and definitely not a “madam”.<\/p>\n
Ten days elapsed:<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 13 October 2006 16:33
\n> **From:** billing@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Dear Mr P [redacted]
\n>
\n> Thank you for your recent enquiry and on behalf of Pipex, I would like to apologise for the delay in responding to you.
\n>
\n> I have looked into the account [redacted] and can only see an invoice for the amount of \u00c2\u00a325.99. Is it possible that the charge for \u00c2\u00a323.44 is from your old account? Can you please provide us with the user id or contract service number for this account? We can then look into issuing you with a refund if necessary.
\n>
\n> We look forward to hearing from you soon.
\n>
\n> Kind Regards
\n>
\n> LJ
\n> Finance Adminstrator<\/p>\n
I responded immediately (well, within the hour)<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 13 October 2006 17:14
\n> **To:** billing@pipex.net
\n>
\n> LJ,
\n>
\n> Yes, \u00c2\u00a323.44 is the amount that I used to pay for my old Pipex account, which should already have been cancelled at that time. The user id was [redacted].<\/p>\n
The response to this email arrived eleven days later. Despite addressing it to billing@pipex.net, it had clearly been re-routed back to the dummies in customer services.<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 24 October 2006 10:01
\n> **From:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Dear Sir,
\n>
\n> Thank you for your email
\n>
\n> I can confirm that I have forwarded your email onto my Finance Department who will endeavour to respond to you as soon as possible.
\n>
\n> At the moment they do have a response time of 7-10 working days so I thank you in advance for your patience
\n>
\n> If you have any further enquiries please do not hesitate to contact us on 0845 077 2455
\n>
\n> Kind Regards
\n> GD<\/p>\n
Firstly, it angers me that it is taking them so long just to pass an email on to the correct department. Secondly, it angers me that every single email comes from a different person. I’d much rather deal with one representative until my questions are answered.<\/p>\n
My frustration begins to emerge. I address the email to GD, even though I know that there is not a chance in hell that she’ll be the one to receive it.<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 24 October 2006 17:55
\n> **To:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> GD,
\n>
\n> Thanks very much. I must confess to being a little concerned that it has taken 11 days for this email to even be forwarded on to the right department. Is this normal?<\/p>\n
The following day, at 11:25am, I then receive an email from yet another person using the address customerservices@pipex.net. The content of this email is just GD’s previous email, forwarded back to me. Helpful.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, remember SS and the erroneous zone alarm fee?<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 26 October 2006 13:07
\n> **To:** customerservices@pipex.net
\n>
\n> SS,
\n>
\n> It has been more than 28 days since your email, but this fee has not yet been refunded.
\n>
\n> When is this fee going to be refunded?<\/p>\n
Back to the matter of the overlapping month. I receive this email:<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 27 October 2006 09:38
\n> **From:** billing@pipex.net
\n>
\n> Dear Mr P [redacted]
\n>
\n> Thank you very much for your e-mail. I apologise for the delayed response to this. I can confirm that I have checked your account and I have raised a refund for the amount of \u00c2\u00a37.98 excluding VAT this is for when your account was cancelled on 03\/10\/06 and you were billed on 16\/09\/06 – 15\/10\/06 so we did a pro rata refund. Please note that we are currently dealing with a backlog of refunds and this will receive you within 28 days. If you have any other queries please don\u00e2\u20ac\u2122t hesitate to contact us.
\n>
\n> Kindest Regards
\n> GC
\n> Finance Administrator<\/p>\n
What? Where did this 03\/10\/06 come from, all of a sudden?<\/p>\n
> **Sent:** 27 October 2006 17:40
\n> **To:** billing@pipex.net
\n>
\n> GC,
\n>
\n> I’m sorry, I think that someone at Pipex must have made a mistake. I requested that my original account be cancelled on the 15th September 2006 (not the 3rd October, as you said below). There should have been no
\noverlap between the two accounts. A refund of \u00c2\u00a37.98 will not be sufficient – I demand my \u00c2\u00a323.44 back.
\n>
\n> Pete<\/p>\n
What are they playing at? What on earth makes them think that they can charge me twice for the same month? I am absolutely incensed that they have abused my credit card in this way. I didn’t give them my credit card number so that they could start apply transactions willy-nilly!<\/p>\n
I’m also rather angry that they are taking so long about this. My money is loitering in their account, accruing interest. Sure, it’s not a significant amount of money as far as I am concerned, but something tells me that I am not the only person that they are doing this to.<\/p>\n
And I still haven’t had an email from the same person twice.<\/p>\n
More as it happens.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Here are the emails that have been exchanged between [Pipex][] and myself so far (automated responses excluded). Names have been replaced by initials. [pipex]: http:\/\/www.pipex.co.uk\/ > **Sent:** 14 September 2006 11:53 > **To:** customerservices@pipex.net > > Customer Services, > > I have a payment from my credit card to PIPEX INTERNET to the value of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,29],"tags":[50],"class_list":["post-291","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computing","category-displeasure","tag-pipex"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=291"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/291\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=291"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=291"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pete.nu\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=291"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}