Chorus problem - serious

Forums › Spark New Zealand (including Skinny and BigPipe) › Chorus problem - serious

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

4066 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#434757 3-Feb-2011 12:11

based on the identification of the actual problem, i think that its enough to lay the blame on chorus and it would be fair to attempt to pass on the additional charges to them. at the very least, they (or telecom wholesale, whomever bills the connection charges) should not charge your ISP for any connection fees given that they failed to provide the basic service.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#435039 3-Feb-2011 20:43

My only comment is that the whole saga could have probably been solved a lot earlier had you actually logged into the modem and presented as with the data that was shown.

You mentioned that the ADSL light was on, had their infact been an ADSL service provisioned on the line the modem would have shown an authentication issue in the web interface. If there was no ADSL service provisoned on the line it would have also shown that.

I know hindsight is a great thing, but looking at the router/modem is a fundamental basic first step on any fault checking which is why I continually raised the issue. You mentioned earlier that the "router stats" had been checked. Who checked these and why did they not pick that their was infact no valid PPPoA session?

antoniosk

2358 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#435044 3-Feb-2011 21:04

sbiddle: My only comment is that the whole saga could have probably been solved a lot earlier had you actually logged into the modem and presented as with the data that was shown.

You mentioned that the ADSL light was on, had their infact been an ADSL service provisioned on the line the modem would have shown an authentication issue in the web interface. If there was no ADSL service provisoned on the line it would have also shown that.

I know hindsight is a great thing, but looking at the router/modem is a fundamental basic first step on any fault checking which is why I continually raised the issue. You mentioned earlier that the "router stats" had been checked. Who checked these and why did they not pick that their was infact no valid PPPoA session?

Concur. Even if Chrissie couldn't log into the modem, I would have thought this most fundamental of tests would have been done by any of the army of techs that appears to have gone through this failed install.

I'm always surprised how many times people don't do the basics, as boring as it may be.

At least the outcome is mostly good, now the floating question of the bills is outstanding...

________

Antoniosk

numfarr

329 posts

Ultimate Geek

#435045 3-Feb-2011 21:11

sbiddle: You mentioned that the ADSL light was on, had their infact been an ADSL service provisioned on the line the modem would have shown an authentication issue in the web interface. If there was no ADSL service provisoned on the line it would have also shown that.

I know hindsight is a great thing, but looking at the router/modem is a fundamental basic first step on any fault checking which is why I continually raised the issue. You mentioned earlier that the "router stats" had been checked. Who checked these and why did they not pick that their was infact no valid PPPoA session?

Why are we blaming the victim here? She already said:

15 days ago, the technician from Planet installed a router, together with all the necessary connections and software and checked everything out as being A OK.

Except for one vital thing - authentification for the internet connection. No problem, said Gavin, I'll just log a fault report with Telecom - it just needs someone to flick a switch and all should be good tomorrow.

...

The internet button isn't lighting up. The others (WLan, power and ADSL) are all green.

So the ISP knew from the start that there was DSL service on the line and that authentication was failing, and (presumably) had clearly told Telecom Wholesale that.

steve98

1395 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#435047 3-Feb-2011 21:15

If there is one thing that we can all learn from this saga, it's that Gavin rules.

chrissie

156 posts

Master Geek

#435051 3-Feb-2011 21:31

I'm glad you can learn at least one thing, steve98 - congrats!

Once again, numfarr has hit the right button - thanks again, my friend! :)

sbiddle

30853 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Biddle Corp

Lifetime subscriber

#435056 3-Feb-2011 21:43

numfarr: So the ISP knew from the start that there was DSL service on the line and that authentication was failing, and (presumably) had clearly told Telecom Wholesale that.

And if authentication was failing, a check in the modem showed PPPoA auth fail the most obvious thing would be to check the ASID / SAM ID that the provisioning request was lodged for. Since it was obviously a self install this information would have been provided by the ISP and nobody from Telecom/Chorus visits the property since all provisioning is done at the exchange or cabinet.

It does show one downside - at least with a clothed DSL product you at least have a phone that you can use to make a call and know you're calling from the same ASID that the service is provisoned against!'

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

chrissie

156 posts

Master Geek

#435062 3-Feb-2011 22:05

How often does an address mix-up like this happen?

Regs

4066 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Snowflake

#435080 3-Feb-2011 22:37

chrissie: How often does an address mix-up like this happen?

It is probably quite common.

I'd wager that there isnt a single address database in the country that was 100% accurate. Each council has its own, separate, GIS system, and many companies build up their own databases from scratch. Telecom probably has their own system that they have built up over time.

We (my company) buy a subscription for the NZ Postal Address File (PAF) for use within IT systems and it contains some 1.9 million delivery points (street addresses, rural addresses, P O Boxes and private bag), but it is nowhere near complete. We regularly come accross examples of valid addresses that do not exist in the NZ Post database.

Sales Engineer
Snowflake
www.snowflake.com

about.me/nzregs
Twitter: @nzregs

chrissie

156 posts

Master Geek

#435097 3-Feb-2011 22:56

OK, but how often does Telecom, having been given the correct address, manage to get it wrong, like in my case?

swalker5872

60 posts

Master Geek

#435115 3-Feb-2011 23:54

In relation to how many errors occur I think we can all guess that these things happen. There are lots and lots of monitoring and metrics in place within Telecom as part of the Separation Undertakings such as http://www.telecom.co.nz/binarys/kpi_report_nov_q1_2011.pdf
But ultimately all the monitoring will not stop a technician making a mistake in any company and reporting only shows equivilence of error making! It does however allow us to see if they fix things in the same average timeframes.

In your case (assuming my memory of all the loops is right, someone please correct me if it is materially incorrect) a technician (who may be self employed working under contract to a lines company) associated with one of three lines companies contracted to Chorus made an error in provisioning a service requested by Telecom Wholesale (Chorus's customer) your ISP is Telecom Wholesales customer. For the purposes of Chorus you do not exist, their customer is Telecom Wholesale, For Telecom Wholesale you do not exist as a customer as their customer is your ISP so any problems experienced must be reported by their customer (your ISP) to them they will then contact Chorus requesting an investigation of the issue.
Now while this all sounds unnecessarily complex these are the structures put in place to meet the legally binding agreement between Telecom and the Government.
It sounds like in your case that you chose, through understandable fustration, to cut straight to Chorus asking them to investigate your line. Now they did this at your request, remembering that you are not their customer they are perfectally entitled to ask to be paid for the work they have done. Now if their customer Telecom Wholesale had contacted them to say that they had failed to provide the service requested Chorus would realistically been required to have gone out to investigate and I cannot imagine a scenario where you would have been billed for this. Should you have been a customer of Telecom Retail a fundamentally similar process would have occurred from the time a fault is raised and would likely have been equally fustrating. If as a customer of Telecom Retail you had carried out the same actions in contacting Chorus directly you would in all likelyhood also have got a bill for services rendered.

I did not note anything in the discussion to set out when your ISP actually raised a fault to Telecom Wholesale (only when they intimated they would do this), and if these were timely actions or not. If your ISP failed to raise a fault in a timely manner I would suggest you may ask them to pay any costs incurred.

P.S I am not sure if I have read the thread correctly but was the last visit by Chorus which identified the problem due to your intervention or through your ISP having logged a fault with Wholesale? This may have some bearing on who ultimately should be paying the Chorus bill (if one ever appears from Jack's visit), electricians bill, and if you should be paying your ISP for services billed for but not received in the initial period of your connection.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29763 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#435118 4-Feb-2011 00:04

do not underestimate the power of the dark geekz. if you provide them with data and facts, not hearsay and opinion, they can solve any problem! i think they were itching to help but lacked data ... solved now anyway though so have fun!

chrissie

156 posts

Master Geek

#435124 4-Feb-2011 04:18

swalker5872: <snip>.
It sounds like in your case that you chose, through understandable fustration, to cut straight to Chorus asking them to investigate your line. Now they did this at your request, remembering that you are not their customer they are perfectally entitled to ask to be paid for the work they have done. Now if their customer Telecom Wholesale had contacted them to say that they had failed to provide the service requested Chorus would realistically been required to have gone out to investigate and I cannot imagine a scenario where you would have been billed for this. Should you have been a customer of Telecom Retail a fundamentally similar process would have occurred from the time a fault is raised and would likely have been equally fustrating. If as a customer of Telecom Retail you had carried out the same actions in contacting Chorus directly you would in all likelyhood also have got a bill for services rendered.

I did not note anything in the discussion to set out when your ISP actually raised a fault to Telecom Wholesale (only when they intimated they would do this), and if these were timely actions or not. If your ISP failed to raise a fault in a timely manner I would suggest you may ask them to pay any costs incurred.

P.S I am not sure if I have read the thread correctly but was the last visit by Chorus which identified the problem due to your intervention or through your ISP having logged a fault with Wholesale? This may have some bearing on who ultimately should be paying the Chorus bill (if one ever appears from Jack's visit), electricians bill, and if you should be paying your ISP for services billed for but not received in the initial period of your connection.

At my request? Hardly, since it's not even possible to contact Chorus. Jack rang me to say the problem was fixed. He waited while I checked and on his own volition, came to my house to investigate.

As far as I am aware, my ISP initially raised a service request and then subsequently three fault reports, with Telecom Wholesale.

Everything was done "by the book" as fas as my ISP was concerned and all I did was report back to Gavin that the connection still wasn't working. Telecom, for their part. kept making promises that it would be fixed "tomorrow" or in "two days' time" and twice indicatede that it was already fixed. On one occasion, the ticket even stated that the customer had been contacted and the case closed satisfactorily. That of course, was an outright lie.

The only Telecom employee who actually did his job properly, was Mike.

richms

28187 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#435126 4-Feb-2011 05:26

Address mix ups have happened here twice. Chorus installers seem to think that they cant be installing it to my place since there is already internet, and at the time the house at 34A was vacant so no DSL or PSTN connected to it. Guess where it got connected to...

I have had my pair on the cable down the driveway re-purposed to someone else once because their pair was faulty and mine was "disconnected" since it had no active phone on it and some cowboy chorus contractor thought they would use it. it seems the have no record keeping for cables between the grey pillar on the street and the junction up the pole down a ROW. Luckily both times my connection has been messed with I have been home to go out and ask WTF they were doing. Otherwise I hate to think how long I would be without internet while getting a job thru to the slingshot helpdesk to get passed onto wholesale to get passed on to chorus to get passed onto the guy who came out and thought he was being smart.

Richard rich.ms

swalker5872

60 posts

Master Geek

#435128 4-Feb-2011 05:36

chrissie: Gavin is an ISP tech of many years' experience - I would bet my life he hasn't missed anything as far as the router or my installation is concerned.

Clearly, Telecom/Chorus/whoever have a history of stuffing up and equally clearly, they have done so this time.

Unfortunately, in common with all telco's and certain other "holier than thou" institutions, it's not possible to talk to upper management (or even lower management) to complain about the (non) service. Customer service reps are not properly trained in many cases and it's not uncommon to get a different answer every time you ring up.

For instance, it took over an hour before finally, someone at Telecom informed me that the problem was nothing to do with Telecom itself, but its wholesale department (Chorus was mentioned). When I asked for a contact number, the guy I was talking to said he didn't know.

The phone book yielded no "Chorus" entry, but I DID find it under Telecom. Go figure!

/End rant

And to all those who sneer at my lack of knowledge regarding the finer points of broadband installations, I suggest you come down off your high horses and show a little respect for others not quite at your technical level.

Hi there,

Sorry I got the wrong end of the stick having read your previous post I had understood that the Chorus technician who came out initially was due to your having contacted Chorus directly, that impression was supported by the fact you said they would charge you $90 but ultimately you are not a customer of any part of Telecom only your ISP are a customer of Telecom Wholesale so why would they be billing you.

At the end of the day, painful though it may be, all queries or questions must go through the ISP to Wholesale and then to Chorus.

Glad to hear that your broadband is now all sorted anyway.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7