Telecoms HelloPeter customer service results

Beri said:
This is a perfect place to complain and get things done. used it a couple of times and it works but only if the company are responding to complaints
Click to expand...

If I was a company, I would not bother paying for the ability to respond to complaints. Extortion.
 
Slootvreter said:
If I was a company, I would not bother paying for the ability to respond to complaints. Extortion.
Click to expand...

I'd view it more as paying for the ability to save face ( seeing as complaints can be turned around ). Unchallenged complaints are more damaging than those that are responded to.

Extortion? Would you prefer the complainant be charged?
 
acidrain said:
I'd view it more as paying for the ability to save face ( seeing as complaints can be turned around ). Unchallenged complaints are more damaging than those that are responded to.

Extortion? Would you prefer the complainant be charged?
Click to expand...

How dumb. No, I'd prefer the company not be charged to respond to a complaint about it.
 
acidrain said:
I'd view it more as paying for the ability to save face ( seeing as complaints can be turned around ). Unchallenged complaints are more damaging than those that are responded to.

Extortion? Would you prefer the complainant be charged?
Click to expand...
Because a company is listed as a 'company who doesnt respond' and no a 'company who refuses to pay to respond' . It is extortion when you are being misrepresented and have to pay to be represented correctly.

Money should be earned from ad revenue
 
Last edited:
Slootvreter said:
How dumb. No, I'd prefer the company not be charged to respond to a complaint about it.
Click to expand...
So how would you suppose they make their money then... from ads possibly but adblockers are easy to install so not the most feasible route.
imranpanji said:
It is extortion when you are being misrepresented and have to pay to be represented correctly.

Money should be earned from as revenue
Click to expand...

How often do you see those companies being misrepresented. A lot, if not the majority of complaints, are all legitimate. If their customer care was up to scratch then they would never be there.

An no, it is extortion when you are coerced into paying. No one is making them pay, it's a choice the company makes. Can call it something else but it is definitely not extortion.
 
acidrain said:
An no, it is extortion when you are coerced into paying. No one is making them pay, it's a choice the company makes. Can call it something else but it is definitely not extortion.
Click to expand...

Allow people to post any old complaint they feel like for free, then charge you to respond to said complaint. How is that not coercing companies to pay?
 
Ykv said:
Allow people to post any old complaint they feel like for free, then charge you to respond to said complaint. How is that not coercing companies to pay?
Click to expand...

That would only hold true if the majority of complaints on there are bull, which I highly doubt. If it was the case then i would agree, but at the moment 1. that is all just assumption and 2. HP wouldn't be around for as long as it has been if that was the case.
 
acidrain said:
So how would you suppose they make their money then... from ads possibly but adblockers are easy to install so not the most feasible route.


How often do you see those companies being misrepresented. A lot, if not the majority of complaints, are all legitimate. If their customer care was up to scratch then they would never be there.

An no, it is extortion when you are coerced into paying. No one is making them pay, it's a choice the company makes. Can call it something else but it is definitely not extortion.
Click to expand...

They are clearly being misrepresented by Hellopeter as 'companies who do not respond' . That is not necessarily true. If they want to respond they are asked to pay for it. It is extortionate in nature. If however they said...."Companies who are not members' that would be a fair comment
 
imranpanji said:
They are clearly being misrepresented by Hellopeter as 'companies who do not respond' . That is not necessarily true. If they want to respond they are asked to pay for it. It is extortionate in nature. If however they said...."Companies who are not members' that would be a fair comment
Click to expand...

This, there should be a distinction. But that would break their business model.

Also @acidrain we cannot dismiss the idea that most claims are bull but accept the alternative that most claims are legit. Proof of one would prove the other, without proof it can be either.
 
acidrain said:
So how would you suppose they make their money then... from ads possibly but adblockers are easy to install so not the most feasible route.
Click to expand...

HelloPeter uses a very devious business model to make money. It is nothing more than extortion when you get your company or product slandered, and you have to pay to respond. I do not at all support it, I will never complain on HelloPeter. Twitter seems to be even more effective. Peter Cheales can go suck my prick.
 
If a company was sussed enough they would allow similar posting on their website and then advertise that they don't need Hellopeter as a customer gets the same rights and exposure on their own site.

What these big customers are actually paying for is the ability to have people complain on a site which makes them feel good, and yet hardly exposes them at all, because of the high volume of complaints per hour.

Another thing: Telcos should learn from insurance companies and start to actively encourage customers to post compliments when they are happy with service
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter