A Quick Update on Tiscali
For anyone reading out there, it must seem like it has all gone quiet with Tiscali. Far from it,everything is still all go. I simply haven't been posting at this stage as I do not want to jeopardise my CISAS case against them. Tiscali have now submitted their defence to claim, of which I have a copy. It makes interesting reading, I'll tell you that. I remember in I.T. lessons watching a short programme on how an IT upgrade was a complete nightmare because the software turns out not to be suitable (anyone else get shown that horrificly boring programme?). I think this is part of where Tiscali's issues with Customer Service arise from, included in the Defence to Claim is a print out of my case notes. It is quite simply a table of entries showing date and time, the User inputting the event and a short descriptive. Unfortunately the entires are somewhat on the vague side, there appears to be no sign of an attachment of either my letters or their letters, so it maybe that when Tiscali are dealing with an individual case they have no reference to previous letters.
In fact supporting this argument us the fact that in their Defence to Claim, Tiscali have actually misunderstood one of the entries, and claimed that I asked them to write a letter to my bank. Why would I do that? In actual fact what the entry actually says is as follows
"will write to confirm that cheque was sent to custs bank as the was an indemnity claim"
Now obvioulsy Tiscali have read that to say "will write to confirm that cheque was sent, to custs bank, as there was an indemnity..." wherehas it should be "will write to confirm that cheque was sent to custs bank, as there was ..." The entry does not state that Tiscali are going to write to my bank, but simply that they will write to me to confirm that the cheque has been sent.
From that point on everything goes downhill, the entry just prior to that (and the one preceeding that) both state that no further refund is necessary, as customer has requested indemnity payment from bank which will recompense for period offline.
In other words, Tiscali wrote off the charges on 5/12/2006 but have since changed their mind. This change in tactic could be as simple as someone misreading the case notes. Given that the case notes are all written in shorthand this is in fact highly likely.
I have to say, I cannot quite fathom why Tiscali changed their mind and said they would settle as soon as I mentioned CISAS. They seemed to be certain that they were right, up until that point. Perhaps it's possible that High Level Complaints had a look at it as soon as I mentioned CISAS and discovered what I have discovered on the Case Notes, of course as I had already sent the details off to CISAS they could not just turn around and say so.
What gets me though, is assuming they have spotted this entry in the case notes (and I cannot see how they can't have done) they must have known I would find it. This one entry pretty much pulls their entire case apart, this entry supports the notion that they have in fact been unnecessarily been harrassing me. This means that in all likelihood the compensation I have requested with regards to the cost of my writing letters should be awarded.
The other option of course is that Tiscali have not yet noticed this entry, or have misinterpreted it, as I felt it was of such importance I included it in my comments on Tiscali's Defence to Claim, they will receive a copy of this, and I imagine will not be too amused when they verify it.
Tiscali's High Level complaints tried to contact me several times, though because of my working hours they never reached me, they did send an email so I left a message on their answering machine giving them my mobile number. They never called back.
The email was nothing of interest really, just "Please can you call me on ...."
Once I have posted the comments off (still got to proof read and print them yet) it shouldn't be too long until I find out the result
No comments