Another Open Letter to BT As They Deliver Sheer Incompetence

June 24, 2016

As I have already said very clearly in the email you have included in your reply, it would cause considerable problems to be called on the number BT nuisance called, and I have on multiple occasions made it very clear that BT do not have permission to call me on that number. Equally, my experience of BT is that staff are prepared to be blatantly dishonest, therefore I place no trust in verbal communication. All communication should be by email or in writing, and I prefer email because I do not want the hassle of disposing of junk snail mail from BT.

You already have the phone number which you have been calling despite being told not to.

You already have my name associated with that phone number, including in one of your nuisance calling lists, and you have confirmed this by promising to mark the number as one not to call. Equally you had sufficient information in that junk calling list to mention details of the previous account so it is clearly on your systems somewhere.

You should, under the Data Protection Act, have recorded that you have been refused permission to make nuisance sales calls to my number.

You should have a record on your complaints system from when I became so annoyed with BT’s dishonesty that I spend considerable time making it very clear that your behaviour was unacceptable.

If you check your domestic and business accounts, complaints system, and data protection records, you should find all the information you are requesting. Equally, if you check your own records and confirm the actions you have taken I will have slightly more confidence of BT taking appropriate action than I would if I spoonfed all the details only to receive a bland and unreliable assurance that the problem had been dealt with.

Delivering An Open Letter to BT

June 23, 2016

An open letter because BT continues with its custom of blatant dishonesty and obstruction of customer complaints. This letter was sent to Gavin Paterson, BT’s CEO, following a correspondence string which invariably received responses whose honesty was noticeable by its absence.

It appears that your staff are unable to check customer history correctly. Your complaints system should have comprehensive details of my previous complaints which state very clearly that, having been an extremely dissatisfied customer of BT, I was formally requiring that you did not pester me with junk sales communication via any channel.

It is unsatisfactory that your staff are pretending that the problem lies with another company. This is WRONG. I had enough unpleasant dealings with BT to be very sure of the name of the company causing the problem.

Your staff claim that the problem would not have existed were the number registered with TPS. Your staff should be capable of checking this before making such a stupid recommendation. They should also have the basic understanding that TPS registration is done directly, not through the service supplier. The number has in fact been registered with TPS for years, apart from a brief period when BT abused its position by instructing TPS to remove the number from its Do Not Call list. If your staff think that the TPS list is an effective way of preventing unwanted calls, then your processes should ensure that a check is made against TPS records BEFORE attempting to nuisance call people.

It is also clear from the reply below that your processes are unacceptably inadequate in dealing with the issue of nuisance calls. When BT is told that its nuisance calls are unwanted it has no excuse for failing to record that, whether or not the requirement comes from a BT customer. In this instance, your staff are wrong in claiming that there is no account to mark. There is the historic account, whose management left me disgusted with BT’s dishonesty. And, as I said in earlier correspondence, you are holding sufficient information to have my name associated with the number. Were you making the least attempt to comply with the Data Protection Act, this alone should have prevented your nuisance call.

It is very clear that BT is hiding behind company size and ignorant staff to try and block serious complaints. While this is not surprising given BT’s history, it is completely unacceptable.

Delivering Dietary Confusion

June 15, 2016

The DeliveryDemon has reached the conclusion that the worst thing anyone can do for their health is pay attention to the dietary recommendations from governments, the press, organisations with something to sell, and people with pet theories.

Just for the hell of it (being a Demon), she has decided to keep a list of all the foods reported as wonderful, along with a list of all the foods reported as evil. To keep things simple, there will only be one list, with items being tagged as good, bad or both, and it will grow for as long as the DeliveryDemon bothers to keep it updated. It’s not scientific so it won’t link to information sources. It’s just the DeliveryDemon up to her usual habit aof calling BS when she sees it.

Coffee                     Wonderful / evil

Herbal teas            Wonderful / evil

Fats                          Wonderful / evil

Meat                         Wonderful / evil

Alcohol                    Wonderful / evil

Eggs                          Wonderful / evil

Chocolate                Wonderful / evil

Carbs                         Wondeful / evil

Blueberries              Wonderful

To be continued………