I fear a coat hanger transmitter would be an improvement with 3s 4GThe best bit is when there clearly is a problem, they deny it anyway, say they've checked everything and all is A-OK... when - after months of perfect service - you're suddenly getting 2mbps download in the middle of a major city, both on your router and on your other three "powered" devices.
Many months now since I dumped them for 5g broadband and speed is still terrible here (full bars though!) on my phone.
One day I reckon it will be discovered that that an engineer has replaced their mast with a wire coat hanger. But not for a long time yet.
I would say that I progressed things as far as was sensible and reasonable, especially as I was in the first 6 months of a 24 month contract.I'm not defending this by the way, but we should understand how the business/technology works and have realistic expectations. If you expect the average support person to fix coverage or speeds for you, then you'll be disappointed
I would say that I progressed things as far as was sensible and reasonable, especially as I was in the first 6 months of a 24 month contract.
I was actually transferred to proper technical support, including one man who was refreshingly candid and detailed with me about the problems they had had with my local mast, and what needed to be done to resolve matters.
Sadly, I never got to speak to him again and those I spoke to from that point forward dismissed what I told them he said and were, frankly, either too lazy to arrange what was evidently possible or under orders to dismiss such problems.
I remarked to the man who "generously" terminated my contract that it is very easy to claim to be the UK's fastest 5g network if they bin off customers who experience otherwise and complain about it.
I understand the way the business world works, but I disagree that we should have "realistic expectations" when this amounts to just accepting rip-off Britain as the natural order of things. I expect staff and companies to be reasonable, and if they've not then then I assert my rights.
Arguably, if more people were pains in the backside like me the financial equation could likely tip in favour of companies just doing what they are supposed to.
On the first point, I believe had the original staff member continued dealing with the case it would have actually been fixed. He told me what had happened prior to fix it, told me what needed to be arranged, and escalated the call expecting it to be so arranged by those being escalated to.You called Three and spoke to someone who understood the issue. They even told you they knew it was a problematic site. Was the problem fixed? Nope. You didn't tell them anything new and they didn't fix your problem. From my point of view this was a waste of time. All you got in return was frustration.
The latter staff lazily tried to hide behind "capacity". I agree capacity isn't great on their network, but my city centre service dropped from around 100 to 300mbps to between 2 and 30, fluctuating between those wildly through day and night. There was (is) clearly a fault!You know this seems all to common with Three.
People seem to think there is a technical 'issue' with Three's service that can be resolved, when the issue is just related to capacity. There's no way that their tech support team can fix that.
You know 5g been slower than usual in a rural area so no capacity, ive been reading others saying similar about 5g on three, im thinking they lowered the power consumption or something like thatThe latter staff lazily tried to hide behind "capacity". I agree capacity isn't great on their network, but my city centre service dropped from around 100 to 300mbps to between 2 and 30, fluctuating between those wildly through day and night. There was (is) clearly a fault!
This doesn't sound like a fault at all, it's a capacity related issue that they're extremely unlikely to fix any time soon.but my city centre service dropped from around 100 to 300mbps to between 2 and 30, fluctuating between those wildly through day and night. There was (is) clearly a fault!
On the first point, I believe had the original staff member continued dealing with the case it would have actually been fixed. He told me what had happened prior to fix it, told me what needed to be arranged, and escalated the call expecting it to be so arranged by those being escalated to.
I believe if subsequent staff were either or both as diligent and unhindered as he, the issue would have been been resolved.
I dispute that merely answering the phone is all one should expect from these people, and if that results in my disappointment so be it. I'll also continue to air that should it occur
Fundamentally, though, until I progressed through their "technical support" hoops I would not have reached the point of contract cancellation.
In fact, had there been any argument over that ending at small claims court, any court would expect me to have taken reasonable steps and afforded reasonable opportunity for the company to put things right before taking matters further.
It's not optional that people engage with technical support. The alternative is to sit there paying out for non-service.
I doubt they're competent, probably just repeating what customers have told himLong story short, while one person was competent, everyone else wasn't, the problem wasn't fixed and you had to leave Three.
I already know the support isn't competent, so I skip the part where I waste my time trying to help them to fix their network and just leave (or try to leave if I had a long term contract, something that I avoid).
Going through their technical support in order to get the service cancelled is fine, but since they rarely fix more serious issues, I'd be focused on leaving the service, not on fixing the issue. But this is me.
With this said, I would try to get them to fix the problem if no better alternative was available (what else could I do?). I didn't see a point doing this with Vodafone though... Three (okay) and EE (good) were good alternatives, so I just left Vodafone.
We should definitely expect more from them, but we already know what the "support" for regular consumers on mobile networks is. Whether we have high expectations or not, the outcome is likely to be the same: they won't (or can't) fix the problem.
While slow speeds on good signal would ordinarily suggest to me capacity, I had had a good number of months prior to that where capacity-related fluctuation would result in the lowest speed at peak of 100-120mbps.This doesn't sound like a fault at all, it's a capacity related issue that they're extremely unlikely to fix any time soon.
If it was a fault there would be no service at all. They have sophisticated monitoring in place so if it was a fault they'd be on it without anyone having to tell them in most cases.