News and updates

AppId is over the quota
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 9029.
A California man says his complaints over cable service led to his being fired from consultancy PricewaterhouseCoopers. Now Comcast has issued a public apology, of sorts.

Comcast's customer service is being called into question again -- and the questioning extends to how it is that the customer got fired from his job. Hezakya Mixologist/YouTube screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET

The idea of losing your job after complaining about your home cable service seems a touch absurd.

One Comcast customer, however, says that's exactly what happened after he complained to Comcast about its customer service.

No, he didn't work for Comcast. Instead, the customer, a California resident named Conal O'Rourke, worked for an accounting firm that performed consultancy duties for the cable provider.

Tensions that have been building for months finally escalated to the point where Comcast today issued "A Public Apology to Conal O'Rourke" on its corporate website. O'Rourke's lawyer, meanwhile, says an apology isn't enough.

So how could a customer complaint have led to this dramatic situation?

In initially telling his story to the Consumerist two days ago, O'Rourke says he had the sort of issues with Comcast that seem all too familiar in many service industries. There were allegedly billing issues, with O'Rourke claiming that Comcast misspelled his last name, so he didn't receive bills.

First, O'Rourke told the Consumerist, he wanted to cancel his service. But Comcast persuaded him it would do better. O'Rourke said the service didn't improve. He said he was sent equipment he hadn't ordered. And, being an accountant, he claims to have prepared a spreadsheet of all the alleged errors, which date back to February 2013.

(As an aside, O'Rourke's LinkedIn profile says: "In 2012 I achieved my long desire of living in California, using my Finance, Human Resources and enthusiastic people skills to work for PwC's Learning & Development as the Senior Associate, learning consultant for the San Jose and Rockies (Denver and Salt Lake City) markets.")

He was so frustrated, he said, that he contacted the office of the company's controller, which Comcast has confirmed. He admits that he suggested Comcast's billing practices should be subject to a Public Company Accounting Oversight Board investigation.

After that, he said, two service calls were arranged, but no service engineer actually arrived.

Then things really got out of hand. O'Rourke alleges that someone at Comcast contacted a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. That led, O'Rourke says, to an ethics investigation at PWC on February 7, 2014, after which O'Rourke says he was fired.

Comcast claimed that O'Rourke "did identify himself as affiliated with PWC," according to a letter dated August 18, 2014, to his lawyer, Maureen Ryan of Dhillon Law Group, and signed by Thomas Nathan, senior deputy general counsel for the cable giant. O'Rourke denies it. Instead, he told Ars Technica he believes that someone at Comcast went through his records, put two and two together, and deduced his place of work.

The cable company does acknowledge contacting PWC, saying in its letter to Ryan, which I have seen, that "Comcast communicated to PWC that a person claiming to be a PWC employee had called our chief accounting executive's office with complaints about his cable services and bills, and yelled at our employees who tried to assist him."

Ryan told CNET that O'Rourke never name-dropped his employer in talking to Comcast:

Comcast has not released the tapes of the call, or the email in which they accused Dhillon Law Group's client of trying to use his employment with PWC as leverage with Comcast. Because of this, the only proof we have is our client's word, and I believe him completely. The person he allegedly said this to has not gone on the record with his or her version of events, so he is the only person who has publically made a statement.

It would make no sense for Conal to say that he worked for PWC as leverage in his negotiations with Comcast, because PWC doesn't audit Comcast's books, instead, they provide consulting services. Comcast has all of the leverage in this client relationship with PWC, and they used it to get a good employee with a spotless record fired.

However, what of the role of O'Rourke's employers? He claims, as the Consumerist recounts, that he had only received good reviews before this incident.

"Mr. O'Rourke was employed in one of our internal firm services offices," a spokeswoman for PWC told me today. "The firm terminated his employment after an internal investigation concluded that Mr. O'Rourke violated PwC's ethical standards and practices, applicable to all of our people. The firm has explicit policies regarding employee conduct, we train our people in those policies, and we enforce them. Mr. O'Rourke's violation of these policies was the sole reason for his termination."

It's easy to speculate that the information that has so far emerged from O'Rourke's side is in part a legal push for financial settlement by a plaintiff's attorney. Indeed, according to the letter from Comcast to lawyer Ryan, recounting O'Rourke's demands, he is seeking "a retraction, an apology, $100,312.50 in damages and reinstatement to his former employment."

Which brings us back to that public apology by Comcast. Here it is in full, and attributed to Charlie Herrin, senior vice president for customer experience at Comcast Cable:

What happened to Mr. O'Rourke's service is completely unacceptable. Despite our attempts to address Mr. O'Rourke's issues, we simply dropped the ball and did not make things right. Mr. O'Rourke deserves another apology from us and we're making this one publicly. We also want to clarify that nobody at Comcast asked for him to be fired.

We're also determined to get to the bottom of exactly what happened with his service, figure out what went wrong at every point along the way, and fix any underlying issues. I'm a few weeks into a new role at Comcast which is entirely focused on what we can do to make the customer experience better. We need to make sure that every interaction is excellent ... from the moment a customer orders a new service, to the installation, to the way we communicate with them, to how we respond to any issues.

We're holding ourselves accountable and we are working hard to make real improvements across the board. While it will take us some time, we can and will do better than this.

That's not enough to satisfy O'Rourke's lawyer, who shared this with me today:

An apology isn't good enough at this point. If they contend that Comcast didn't ask for him to be fired, let them prove it. They should release the tapes and their communications with PWC.

Furthermore, the statement that they did not ask for him to be fired sounds to me like the type of careful phrasing that lawyers and public relations personnel use to get around damaging facts. Even if they did not ask for him to be fired in so many words, we contend that they knew, as accounting professionals, that a false accusation of an ethics violation would cause PWC to terminate Mr. O'Rourke. So even if they didn't specifically ask that he be fired, they knew it would happen as a result of their false and defamatory statements about our client.

The tale is bizarre. That a complaint could escalate to a customer losing his job borders on the macabre. The idea that private conversations between a customer and service provider could be elevated, behind a customer's back to his employer, is disturbing.

Comcast seems to feel it is somehow at fault -- otherwise, why would it issue a public mea culpa? But do note that it's apologizing only for problems with O'Rourke's service.

The company's customer service reputation hasn't been garlanded with hosannas lately. Comcast was one the worst-rated companies in customer service, according to a May 2014 survey by the American Customer Satisfaction Index. So the fact that Comcast is the company involved here adds an especially troubling tinge.

Chris Matyszczyk Chris Matyszczyk is an award-winning creative director who advises major corporations on content creation and marketing. He brings an irreverent, sarcastic, and sometimes ironic voice to the tech world. See full bio

View the original article here

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Comcast inches closer to box-free TV in the country's tech hub by adding streaming of live TV to mobile devices in the home and the ability to download anything recorded to its DVR onto a gadget.

X1 is Comcast's cable TV software that moves the brains of cable TV into the cloud rather than leaving them locked in a set-top box in the living room. James Bareham/Comcast

Comcast, the biggest cable provider in the US, is lighting up tech features of its cloud-based X1 TV system in the country's technology home base, San Francisco.

Starting Wednesday, X1 customers in the Bay Area will be able to access their full TV lineup on any connected screen in their home, and they can download any programs recorded on their DVR to a gadget to watch them outside the home too. The features are now available in eight cities, en route to being available to most X1 customers by the end of the year, the company said.

The progress -- which inches Comcast closer to its goal of cable services being beamed to customers from a server with only a tiny (or no) set-top box in the home --brings the company's cloud DVR to half of its footprint. By putting the brains behind cable TV in the cloud, Comcast has outstripped rivals with the sophistication of the X1 system -- smaller rival Cox is even licensing it to be able to offer the same to its customers. With X1, Comcast frequently updates its services without technician visits, integrates search across different types of content, improves channel guide and can offer the streaming and download features introduced Wednesday.

Despite widespread admiration for the system, the prospect of expanding X1's reach through a proposed $45 billion merger with No. 2 cable company Time Warner Cable hasn't placated critics of Comcast's widening power. Consumer advocates, tech companies and -- more recently -- a major TV programmer, Discovery, have protested that the merger would dangerously increase Comcast's market influence by giving it a video presence in 19 of the 20 largest US metropolitan markets and passing the company through half of the country's broadband homes.

The rollout of X1's juiciest features has taken time to reach the bulk of subscribers, too.

"Think of it like an evolution, an evolution that is accelerating," said Matt Strauss, Comcast's senior vice president and general manager of video services. In select cities, it was first available to new triple-play customers (those who subscribe to TV, Internet and phone service through Comcast), then to existing triple-play customers, then double-play customers. "We're pacing about 20,000 to 30,000 new X1 subscribers a day. The goal is to do it as quickly as we can," he said.

The live TV streaming on any connected screen in the home means X1 customers can use their phone, tablet or other device to watch anything they'd watch on a typical television connected to a set-top box -- with the same guide and channels available. Downloading content recorded to the cloud DVR onto a device for out-of-home viewing is now easier to use -- customers can download prerecorded programs over any Internet connection like a library system -- customers can watch a program on one device but then they have to check the program back in to watch it elsewhere.

Strauss said that when his wife could watch her favorite show on a plane ride after downloading it from the cloud DVR to her device, he suddenly became something of a small-scale rock star. "Customers have come to expect that all their content is available time-shifted," he said. "It's the same with devices."

Joan E. Solsman Joan E. Solsman is a senior writer for CNET focused on digital media. She previously wrote for Dow Jones Newswires and the Wall Street Journal. She bikes to get almost everywhere in New York City and has been doored only once. See full bio

View the original article here

Ist die einzige Antwort Aufnahme? Asche-Semvalavich/YouTube-Screenshot von Chris Matyszczyk/CNET

Dieser Aufruf ist aufgezeichnet wird, um den Kundenservice zu verbessern. Es ist durch den Kunden aufgezeichnet wird.

Vielleicht das ist die Botschaft, die jeder Kunde Comcast vorbereiten sollte nach einem anderen unglücklichen Mann beschließt, einen Anruf mit Service-Mitarbeiter des Unternehmens zu erfassen.

In diesem Fall angeboten Tim Davis 14-Minuten epische Ärgernis (komplett mit NSFW Sprache), nachdem er umgezogen und seine Comcast-Ausrüstung selbst installiert hatte.

Er es mit der charmanten Headline auf Reddit gepostet: Comcast lädt mich $182 für Sachen, die nicht geschehen; Comcast Agent, Techniker und Supervisor, die liegen, dann nennen es "verhandelt."

Im Wesentlichen sagte Davis Comcast ihn die Verbindungsprobleme hatte, die er hatte, nachdem die Selbstinstallation seine Schuld waren. So schickte er einen Techniker. Er wurde versichert, es gäbe keine Gebühr.

Er sagt aber, wenn er seine Rechnung bekam er berechnet wurde, als ob es alles seine Schuld gewesen war. Er rief einen Vorgesetzten.

Um seine Seite der Geschichte zu beweisen, spielte er ihr eine Aufnahme des ersten Aufrufs. Oh.

Davis sagt, er war nicht das Gesetz zu brechen, wie Comcast jeden Kunden-Service-Aufruf zeichnet und in ihren Nutzungsbedingungen verdeutlichen.

At zuerst auf seinen Aufruf zu beklagen, die Zuschläge, die Betreuer noch darauf bestanden, dass seine Self-install ein Fail. Davis entgegnete, dass dies nicht der Fall war. Diese Rep war fest, dass sie Kredit würde nicht ihn für die Gebühren, während ihm sagt, dass Comcast "ihn als Kunde geschätzt."

Dann er ihr eine Aufnahme seines ersten Anrufs in spielt die er sagte, gäbe es keine Gebühr für den Techniker kommen, um ein Problem zu beheben, die anscheinend durch Comcast verursacht worden sein.

Der Supervisor sagte ihm, dass er einen Anruf zurückbekäme. Er tat.

Wie durch ein Wunder hatte der $82, den er, als Teil der Tech-Besuches beauftragt war gelöscht worden. Der Supervisor sagte ihm, dass ihre anfängliche Haltung war "Wir versuchen, zu verhandeln." Dies scheint eine seltsame Sache zu tun, wenn Sie eindeutig im Unrecht sind.

Jedoch fügte sie hinzu, dass sie ihr Manager riet, gab es eine Aufnahme von Davis ersten Anruf.

"Sagst du mir, dass wenn ich eine Aufnahme von diesem Aufruf nicht, Sie in der Lage, es zu tun gewesen wäre?" Davis gefragt.

"Das ist richtig," antwortete der Supervisor.

Ich kontaktierte Comcast zu Fragen, ob es tatsächlich die Politik war, dass wenn ein Anruf aufgenommen wurde, dann günstigere Vergütung gesichert werden kann. Mir wurde gesagt, es gab keine solche Politik.

Mehr technisch falsche Paar stirbt, nachdem Sie versucht haben zu Selfie auf Felsen im Gefolge des Fahrers Tod, Nascar Beiträge tone-deaf Tweet Stephen Hawking Film Trailer kämmt romanze, Drama

Das Unternehmen bot diese Aussage: "Dies ist nicht die Art der Erfahrung, die wir wollen unsere Kunden haben, und wir werden erreichen, um Mr. Davis, um ihn zu entschuldigen. Unsere Politik ist nicht die Servicebesuche zugerechnet, die zu Problemen mit unserer Ausrüstung oder Netzwerk verbunden sind. Wir suchen in diesem zu verstehen, was passiert ist und warum es passiert ist."

Comcast ist ganz klar nicht das einzige Unternehmen, das solche Probleme auftreten. Allerdings ist es so etwas wie ein Symbol für selbstgefällig Kundenservice geworden.

Dies wurde angeregt durch einen Dienstaufruf aufgenommen von Tech-Journalist Ryan Block, in dem eine so genannte Retention-Rep unsanft versucht auch alles, aber nicht seine Kündigung-Anfrage nicht erfüllen.

Kann es sein, dass der einzige Weg um echte Kundendienst am Telefon zu sichern ist alles aufzeichnen? Wie sehr moderne wäre.

Tags: Technisch falsche Tech-Kultur-Tech-Industrie-Comcast über den Autor