Esat & Eircom = Dumb & Dumber

crashedmind

In my rented house (Dublin) I had the following setup:

• line rental: eircom
• broadband: esat residential
• calls: teletwo

I bought a house nearby and figured in the short term it would be easier just to transfer all services to my new address.
Because both houses were close I could keep my old phone number.

Longer term, I planned on moving line rental to esat and using VOIP for calls.

The problem began when I went to transfer my Esat broadband...

First I had to get the Universal Account Number from Eircom to give to Esat. So I rang Eircom and they said they could only post it to my new address for security reasons. After 4 days I receive a Direct Debit Mandate form I did not request and no mention of a UAN!!!!

So I rang them back and told them I wanted my UAN now and wasn't going to wait another 4 days for them to post me out more crap.

I completed my Esat Relocation Request Form with UAN from Eircom and waited... and waited....

The original Esat Relocation Request Form was submitted on 07/03/06.

After LOTS of phone calls over a period of weeks Esat said that Eircom should have first cancelled the broadband on my old line but didn't.

As of today, 15/05/06 I was told that it would take another 3-4 weeks. This involves Eircom issuing a "dummy seat" which would take 10 days. And then Esat will be able to provide the broadband.

So what I naively thought would be a simple routine procedure looks like it is going to take at least 3.5 months!!!!

watty

It would have been easier to cut the wire going the the house and run a cable ...

cgarvey

Hiddeous mess, as is trasnfering (BitStream Transfer) at the same location! ComReg think this is functioning satisfactorily! I'd complain to them anyway, if for no other reason than it goes on file (and maybe when the complaints mount up, they might do something.. keep the mail brief, but factual with dates, etc.).

Keep nagging ESat for updates (they won't ring you, when they say they will, and they'll conveniently lose stuff).

.cg

Urban Weigl

In fairness, the whole time you and BT Ireland (formerly Esat) were waiting on Eircom. So in other words, it was all Eircom's fault. And ComReg, for not regulating Eircom as they should.

jdc78

I agree about the East being the 'Dumber'

Get this, March 27 I check my BOI account and noticed a direct debit from East... the kicker is, I don't own a phone nor have internet... as a matter of fact, I haven't had a phone for about 3-4 years and the new building I live in won't be wired for phones or broadband until July (that's another issue).

So, I call Esat about the issue and they want my phone number or account number. I tell them I have neither. They tell me that if I don't have a phone number or account number they can't help me. Hmmmm. I am not exaggerating when I say that I have called at least 15 times since last Monday about this and have spoken to someone who says they can help me but for security purposes they can't discuss anything over the phone. You'd think they were the CIA or something. Anyway, I tell him I don't have an account with them so they aren't breaking any security issues. He asks me to send my bank account details so they can trace direct debit from my account for €118.34, another one was scheduled for April and so on but managed to catch it before they went ahead and took another €118. Anyway, I get all the details and send the mail to him, only for it to be bounced back... I think Eircom and ESAT are a cover for 'spooks'. Don't know what to do now... I am past frustration and upset that I now laugh at the whole thing in disbelief!

Urban Weigl

jdc78, I think we all know that BT Ireland have problems with their billing software. And while I don't mean to discount the issue you are having, it's off topic and not relating to the issue of transferring ADSL.

dub45

Urban Weigl wrote:

jdc78, I think we all know that BT Ireland have problems with their billing software. And while I don't mean to discount the issue you are having, it's off topic and not relating to the issue of transferring ADSL.

Thats a fairly blase post I think as it is relevant to us all to know that Esat are now direct debiting accounts of people who apparently dont have any business with them. That goes way beyond Esat having billing problems!:eek:

I am astonished that jdc78 could be so relaxed about this - and Esats response seems extraordinary altogether - there are so many issues here.

If the case is true then it should be reported to the police straight away - the bank should be asked to produce the direct debit (and of course cancel it straight away)

I wonder what account Esat credited the direct debit to???????

crashedmind

thanks for the replies...

I am not usually one to rant but I just felt I had to air my frustration and forewarn others who were considering relocating their esat broadband/eircom landline.

Agreed Watty it would have been easier to run a cable had I only known it would have been so difficult.

I'd attribute some of the fault to Esat (BT Ireland) because as cgarvey says the only way you find anything out from them is to keep chasing them. On several occasions when I found out that the problem was on Eircom's side I chased Eircom to resolve their side and then told Esat (BT Ireland) that it was resolved and then kept chasing Esat (BT Ireland) to get status updates. Every time you ring (after the long wait on hold or on Queuebuster callback) you end up speaking to someone who then puts you on hold while they talk to the relocations office and then tells you that there seems to be a problem which you already knew.

I never had much regard for Eircom to begin with and was going to drop them for line rental anyway.

I have been a long time Esat customer and never had problems with them before. However, as a result of this experience I am now strongly considering alternative providers.

Urban Weigl

dub45, I'm afraid you misread my post. I'm not discounting he has a problem with BT Ireland's billing department, and that the problem is serious. In fact, I wouldn't have a problem if he had posted it in its own thread. However, this particular thread seems to be about transferring ADSL, which is not related to billing problems.

Edit: Heck, it deserves a separate thread. I just don't like issues being mixed up, as obviously it makes it hard to discuss the issue the thread was originally about, risks the new post which is about a DIFFERENT ISSUE being lost, and generally confuses matters. It should be in its own thread.

cgarvey

crashedmind wrote:

However, as a result of this experience I am now strongly considering alternative providers.

I don't blame you .. just be aware that many companies will give you the same "it's eircom" story. I know a lot of the time it is, but I've heard a fair few stories, at this stage, where it wasn't eircom's fault at all, just that was the excuse offered out of convenience. So just be aware that it's not just BT who do that. Now, of course, not many (any?) companies are as bad as BT when it comes to billing. BT have been saying for years that they're fixing it, but that doesn't correlate at all with the complaints we read here.

.cg

crashedmind

Status Update
I ditched Eircom and BT Ireland (ESAT) and went with Digiweb Metro and Blueface.
My telecom bills have approximately halved.


My new setup is:

• line rental: none (Digiweb Metro is a wireless service so I got rid of line rental)
• broadband: Digiweb Metro
• calls: Blueface / Call13434

Details of the setup are as follows:

Broadband: Digiweb Metro (static IP, 3mb down, 0.5mb up)
Approx EUR35/month but get discount for signing up for a year. There is also a referral discount.
I got the Digiweb Metro broadband installed (pay in advance for a year and you get a discount: equipment and installation is free) because after 4 months Eircom/BT still had not managed to get the broadband transferred from the old house. So I got rid of them both – no more line rental!
You can plug an analog phone into digiweb cable modem but their call rates are expensive.

Phone: analog + ATA
I got a Linksys PAP2 ATA from Ebay for €42 incl. delivery (Blueface were selling them second hand).
I decided to go with DECT phones because I wanted the convenience of wireless and multiple phones upstairs/downstairs with intercom and they are now fairly cheap. Wireless VOIP phones are still not good enough and too expensive.

Voip: pstn - Blueface.
EUR 10/month package includes 300mins of calls per month to Irish landlines and 20 other international destinations.
See call rates here: http://www.blueface.ie/rates/rates.aspx (Best viewed with Internet Explorer)
The PayAsYouGo option does not suport caller ID so you need to sign up for one of the packages e.g. EUR10/month package.

Discount call service: Call13434
Call13434 seem to have the best PSTN call rates - cheaper than SkypeOut or Blueface.
You need to sign up with credit card – it is billed to credit card not to your existing phone bill.
However, this service requires that the calling phone supports caller id (so they can identify your a/c). That’s why I wanted caller id with blueface.
I use Call13434 where rates are cheaper than Blueface e.g. to call Croatia it's 1c/min with call13434 instead of 6.4c/min with blueface. The call to 13434 from blueface is free since it is local.

See http://www.call13434.ie/rates_printer.php for all rates.

• Ireland land lines ......................................... 0.0 Ct/Min
• Irish mobiles (sat/sun) .................................... 5 Ct/Min
• Irish mobiles (weekdays) ................................... 10 Ct/Min
• united kingdom (fixed) ..................................... 0.5 Ct/Min
• united kingdom (mobile) .................................... 5 Ct/Min
• united kingdom 0845 rate? (fixed) ......................... 5 Ct/Min
• united kingdom national rate? (fixed) ..................... 10 Ct/Min
• united states (fixed & mobile) ............................. 0.5 Ct/Min

voip-voip: skype
I’ve also setup skype for free voip-voip calls.
This is setup on laptop – goes over wireless network to router to modem.

Conclusions
Overall, the voice quality is very good. It looks like there is more deterioration in quality as a result of the DECT part rather than the VOIP part.

BT cancellation of broadband
Another point worth noting is that my bank claimed that they could not cancel the direct debit payment to BTIreland. The bank person suggested that I send a registered cancellation request letter to BTIreland. They would cancel the DD if I produced the registered letter 30 days or more after the letter was sent. In theory, without this registered letter, BT could delay cancellation of their service and charge you for it. In practice, they didn't - they cancelled pretty much immediately.

Eircom cancellation of line
Not surprisingly, Eircom played silly buggers when I asked to cancel the line rental. They said they could not cancel it because BT still had the broadband enabled on the line. So I rang BT and they told me they could see it was cancelled on the Eircom gateway and even gave me the cancellation number.
So I rang Eircom again and the operator insisted that the broadband was still active. I didn't want to go through the same 4 months debacle to get the line cancelled as I did in trying to get it transferred, so I insisted on talking to a manager. The manager was able to submit the cancellation request that day and the line was cancelled next day.

A useful website for finding the cheapest call rates to a specific destination
http://www.cheapertelco.com/default.asp

probe

jdc78 wrote:

I agree about the East being the 'Dumber'

Get this, March 27 I check my BOI account and noticed a direct debit from East... the kicker is, I don't own a phone nor have internet... as a matter of fact, I haven't had a phone for about 3-4 years and the new building I live in won't be wired for phones or broadband until July (that's another issue).

You can always instruct your bank to return DDs to the originator where they have no authority to take the money.

Direct debit is a far more secure method of payment (from your perspective) in these circumstances than giving a credit or debit card number.


probe

Solair

There's actually a pretty comprehensive Direct Debit Guarentee, which, in the event of an error, offers a full refund.

If BT are debiting your account in error, I would strongly suggest that your first port of call is your bank.

Even if nothing else, your bank will have a LOT more sway over a company who is not complying with the terms and conditions of the DD scheme than you will.

They can stop, reverse etc DDs.

For details of guarentee go to www.ipso.ie

dub45

Solair wrote:

There's actually a pretty comprehensive Direct Debit Guarentee, which, in the event of an error, offers a full refund.

If BT are debiting your account in error, I would strongly suggest that your first port of call is your bank.

Even if nothing else, your bank will have a LOT more sway over a company who is not complying with the terms and conditions of the DD scheme than you will.

They can stop, reverse etc DDs.

For details of guarentee go to www.ipso.ie

There has recently been a long thread on direct debits elsewhere but anyways here I go again:) There are many flaws in the direct debit system and in the guarantee. The main one is that there is no sanction against a company who contravenes it. There is no central authority to monitor who does not comply with the code. It is a gross overstatement to state that your bank will have a lot more sway over a company - in fact they have no sway whatsoever if you think in terms of sanctioning that company - sure they can give you a refund but there is absolutely nothing at all to prevent companies recreating a direct debit and starting the whole thing over again.
Of course they should not do this and I would certainly argue that it is forgery but it has been reported on boards many times that it has happened.

To get a complaint made against an offending company your bank will have to complain to their sponsoring bank which of course that company's own bank.

Now can you imagine BT's bank sanctioning them given the amount of business that they would do with them. Thats of course given that you can get your bank interested enough to acutally make complaint:rolleyes:

Anyways if what jdc78 originally posted is correct then we are talking forgery and robbery not the weaknesses of the direct debit system.:eek:

Foxwood

crashedmind wrote:

voip-voip: skype
I’ve also setup skype for free voip-voip calls.
This is setup on laptop – goes over wireless network to router to modem.

Does Blueface not support free voip-voip calls?

I think the only thing you get free with skype is calls to other skype users.

crashedmind

Does Blueface not support free voip-voip calls?

Blueface supports free voip-voip calls to other Blueface users.
Since Blueface uses SIP it should be technically possible to call other SIP voip providers but I haven't investigated this yet.
Skype does not use SIP so it is not possible to go Blueface-skype.

I think the only thing you get free with skype is calls to other skype users.

Correct.

To clarify, the setup as described above is my setup and how I use it:

• None of my contacts use Blueface so I can't avail of Blueface voip to voip.
• Some of my contacts use Skype so that's what I use.

probe

dub45 wrote:

There has recently been a long thread on direct debits elsewhere but anyways here I go again:) There are many flaws in the direct debit system and in the guarantee. The main one is that there is no sanction against a company who contravenes it. There is no central authority to monitor who does not comply with the code. It is a gross overstatement to state that your bank will have a lot more sway over a company - in fact they have no sway whatsoever if you think in terms of sanctioning that company - sure they can give you a refund but there is absolutely nothing at all to prevent companies recreating a direct debit and starting the whole thing over again.
Of course they should not do this and I would certainly argue that it is forgery but it has been reported on boards many times that it has happened.

To get a complaint made against an offending company your bank will have to complain to their sponsoring bank which of course that company's own bank.

Now can you imagine BT's bank sanctioning them given the amount of business that they would do with them. Thats of course given that you can get your bank interested enough to acutally make complaint:rolleyes:

You surprise me!

Surely it is a black and white issue. You write to your bank and tell them to return the DD and credit your account with the specified offending transactions. You didn’t order or get the goods or services being charged to you and you don’t owe the money.

The bank complies and refunds you or they write back to you with documentary proof that you ordered and received proper and full delivery the goods/services.

Otherwise you go to the police and file a complaint. DDing your account without your authority is no different to pick-pocketing the same amount of banknotes from your wallet.

In France if this happens to your bank account or credit/debit card you are obliged by law to go to the police and make a formal complaint about the theft of money from your bank or card account by a service establishment or bank. Unless the party in question gives you an immediate refund and justifies/apologies for the offending transaction.

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. How often do you come across retailers in Ireland who ask you “Do you have your PIN?” If not presumably, they let you get away with signing for the transaction without showing ID. Anywhere else in Europe if you have been issued with a chip card you must use the PIN or use an alternative mode of payment. There is no point in having this huge investment in EMV cards and infrastructure if the system allows people to get away with signing. Worse still, people can steal an EMV credit or debit card on the Continent and bring it to Ireland to milk it by scribbling a “signature” every time. Potentially undermining the entire European EMV payment infrastructure.


probe

cgarvey

It's far from black and white. You enter a DD contract with the vendor, and the bank are merely 3rd party facilitators. You can write to your bank to cancel your DD, but you must have cancelled it with the vendor first. More banks/branches are asking for proof of this now. For any DD refund I've heard of, the banks required proof of the error,etc. Going to guards would be a complete waste of time IMO. I bet you'll be told it's a civil issue (unless maybe it was a case of serious/mass fraud). Not all vendors require written proof for DD mandates to be set up (which is why NTL, for example, can set it up over the phone). Small claims court is probably the 1st port of call, if you run into trouble, and can't resolve it via registered letter.

Retailers are perfectly entitled to accept Chip & PIN transactions without the PIN. Those who have had their systems flagged as PIN-capable (the vast majority by now) will have to accept full responsibility for any non-PIN transaction that turns out to be fraudulent. It's a risk a retail might take to facilitate your custom. Not many do allow non-PIN transactions anymore, but some do, as a calculated risk.

dub45

probe wrote:

You surprise me!

Surely it is a black and white issue. You write to your bank and tell them to return the DD and credit your account with the specified offending transactions. You didn’t order or get the goods or services being charged to you and you don’t owe the money.

The bank complies and refunds you or they write back to you with documentary proof that you ordered and received proper and full delivery the goods/services.

Otherwise you go to the police and file a complaint. DDing your account without your authority is no different to pick-pocketing the same amount of banknotes from your wallet.

In France if this happens to your bank account or credit/debit card you are obliged by law to go to the police and make a formal complaint about the theft of money from your bank or card account by a service establishment or bank. Unless the party in question gives you an immediate refund and justifies/apologies for the offending transaction.

I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised. How often do you come across retailers in Ireland who ask you “Do you have your PIN?” If not presumably, they let you get away with signing for the transaction without showing ID. Anywhere else in Europe if you have been issued with a chip card you must use the PIN or use an alternative mode of payment. There is no point in having this huge investment in EMV cards and infrastructure if the system allows people to get away with signing. Worse still, people can steal an EMV credit or debit card on the Continent and bring it to Ireland to milk it by scribbling a “signature” every time. Potentially undermining the entire European EMV payment infrastructure.


probe

I dont know why you are surprised anyone who follows boards regularly will be only too well aware of the flaws in the dd system. It appears that you are in denail about them.

dub45

cgarvey wrote:

It's far from black and white. You enter a DD contract with the vendor, and the bank are merely 3rd party facilitators.
You can write to your bank to cancel your DD, but you must have cancelled it with the vendor first.

The direct debit guide for consumers makes no mention of this requirement.

Not all vendors require written proof for DD mandates to be set up (which is why NTL, for example, can set it up over the phone).

I think its crazy to allow a direct debit to be set up without a signature but anyways this mad scheme is called 'direct debit plus' and the really insane thing about it is that there is only a requirement for the company concerned to give 7 days notice to the bill payer. Now 7 days to get a bill checked and make any complaints to a company is simply ludicrous and totally uworkable. I cannot believe that whoever devised this thing got away with it.

Another big flaw in the dd scheme is that there is no definition of what makes up the 7 days or 14 days notice. Is it from the date of the bill - the printing of the bill - despatch of the bills - the receipt of the bill? You could argue that in the case of the 14 days notice this might not make too much difference but in the case of the 7 days its very relevant.

oscarBravo

crashedmind wrote:

Since Blueface uses SIP it should be technically possible to call other SIP voip providers but I haven't investigated this yet.

Of course it's possible to call other SIP providers, and to the best of my knowledge it's free to do so.

cgarvey

dub45 wrote:

The direct debit guide for consumers makes no mention of this requirement.

Correct, and it's insane. IPSO, IFSRA and a solicitor have all told me the same though. It usen't be any problem, in my experience, to cancel a DD with your bank. Lately, however, they've been seeking evidence that you've cancelled with the vendor / DD originator first. The solicitor went off to research it for me, and found that because the banks were definitely a 3rd party, that they weren't obliged to cancel it (which contradicts the DD consumer guide from IPSO). I think there's a lot of ambiguity that's indicative of the lack of any interest in consumer welfare in DD/DD Plus (and payment services in general). You're 2nd point is also testimant to that. How hard would it be to come up with a clear charter, and defined forms for cancelling that you send to your bank (or ISPO, if the banks think it's not there place to do that).[/QUOTE]

There's no question that the vendor is the winner in the DD contract, and would continue to be were it to be made a lot more consumer friendly.

Now, I'm short of banning myself for being seriously off topic. My main point is that there is nothing B&W about DD, and banks aren't always that interested!

.cg

JohnC.

I was once charged a DD after it was supposed to have ended. I phoned the company in question, who to their credit did sort it out quickly and cleanly. But they did ask me to go to the bank to cancel the DD. The bank didn't make any fuss about me cancelling the DD either.