A Civil World. Off-topic discussions on a variety of topics. > Time For a Coffee Break!

Professional Darwinism: Update to OP on p.74

<< < (695/1262) > >>

LazyDaisy:

--- Quote from: Cami on April 04, 2013, 12:28:13 PM ---I am watching a vendor commit Professional Darwinism in front of me nearly as I type.

Background: We provide services A & B to clients. We have a contract with Vendor to provide A with our clients. This relationship has been in effect since mid-January. We've been in regular communication since then. No problems. All went well until last week, when clients called and told us that Vendor insisted they pay Vendor for B.  I thought, "No big deal. I'll call them up and straighten it out."

Beginning of big deal:  I called them up and told our rep, "Susie" of the problem. Susie's response, "Well, we checked your website and the way we read it, we should have been charging them for B all along."
Me: "No. In fact, it's quite clear that we are charging them for B." I read the verbiage to her.
Susie: "Oh, guess I read it wrong." [note the lack of apology here]
Me: "Okay. So let's just confirm the names of the people you've charged and I'll just refund them from here to make it easy."
Susie: "Oh, I can't give you the names."
Me: "Why?"

Big deal #1:
Them: "It's too much trouble."
Me: "Excuse me?"
Them: "We won't give you the names. It's too much trouble. Are you hard of hearing or what?"

Big deal #2:
Client calls me today to warn me that she called there to make sure her credit card had been refunded and the tells me that Susie was not only snippy and abrasive with her, but also badmouthed us and told her that, "The only reason we've had this problem is that Cami is incompetent." Shortly thereafter, second client calls and tells me the same thing.

Darwinism moment: Guess whose contract is going to be terminated at the end of the month?

--- End quote ---
End of the month!?! Why not immediately?

wheeitsme:

--- Quote from: Cami on April 04, 2013, 12:28:13 PM ---I am watching a vendor commit Professional Darwinism in front of me nearly as I type.

Background: We provide services A & B to clients. We have a contract with Vendor to provide A with our clients. This relationship has been in effect since mid-January. We've been in regular communication since then. No problems. All went well until last week, when clients called and told us that Vendor insisted they pay Vendor for B.  I thought, "No big deal. I'll call them up and straighten it out."

Beginning of big deal:  I called them up and told our rep, "Susie" of the problem. Susie's response, "Well, we checked your website and the way we read it, we should have been charging them for B all along."
Me: "No. In fact, it's quite clear that we are charging them for B." I read the verbiage to her.
Susie: "Oh, guess I read it wrong." [note the lack of apology here]
Me: "Okay. So let's just confirm the names of the people you've charged and I'll just refund them from here to make it easy."
Susie: "Oh, I can't give you the names."
Me: "Why?"

Big deal #1:
Them: "It's too much trouble."
Me: "Excuse me?"
Them: "We won't give you the names. It's too much trouble. Are you hard of hearing or what?"

Big deal #2:
Client calls me today to warn me that she called there to make sure her credit card had been refunded and the tells me that Susie was not only snippy and abrasive with her, but also badmouthed us and told her that, "The only reason we've had this problem is that Cami is incompetent." Shortly thereafter, second client calls and tells me the same thing.

Darwinism moment: Guess whose contract is going to be terminated at the end of the month?

--- End quote ---

And guess who probably won't have a job at the end of the month?

Cami:

--- Quote from: LazyDaisy on April 04, 2013, 12:47:33 PM ---
--- Quote from: Cami on April 04, 2013, 12:28:13 PM ---I am watching a vendor commit Professional Darwinism in front of me nearly as I type.

Background: We provide services A & B to clients. We have a contract with Vendor to provide A with our clients. This relationship has been in effect since mid-January. We've been in regular communication since then. No problems. All went well until last week, when clients called and told us that Vendor insisted they pay Vendor for B.  I thought, "No big deal. I'll call them up and straighten it out."

Beginning of big deal:  I called them up and told our rep, "Susie" of the problem. Susie's response, "Well, we checked your website and the way we read it, we should have been charging them for B all along."
Me: "No. In fact, it's quite clear that we are charging them for B." I read the verbiage to her.
Susie: "Oh, guess I read it wrong." [note the lack of apology here]
Me: "Okay. So let's just confirm the names of the people you've charged and I'll just refund them from here to make it easy."
Susie: "Oh, I can't give you the names."
Me: "Why?"

Big deal #1:
Them: "It's too much trouble."
Me: "Excuse me?"
Them: "We won't give you the names. It's too much trouble. Are you hard of hearing or what?"

Big deal #2:
Client calls me today to warn me that she called there to make sure her credit card had been refunded and the tells me that Susie was not only snippy and abrasive with her, but also badmouthed us and told her that, "The only reason we've had this problem is that Cami is incompetent." Shortly thereafter, second client calls and tells me the same thing.

Darwinism moment: Guess whose contract is going to be terminated at the end of the month?

--- End quote ---
End of the month!?! Why not immediately?

--- End quote ---
Because we have to give 21 days notice of intent to vacate the contract. So while Vendor was told today that the contract would be vacated, the actual termination won't happen until the end of the month.

LazyDaisy:
I would think that they are the ones in violation of the contract thereby nullifying it.

Only thing I can think is to put a big notice on your company website alerting customers not to fall for the scam and report directly to your company of any payments they've made.

Midnight Kitty:

--- Quote from: Cami on April 04, 2013, 12:28:13 PM ---Background: We provide services A & B to clients. We have a contract with Vendor to provide A with our clients. <snip> All went well until last week, when clients called and told us that Vendor insisted they pay Vendor for B.  I thought, "No big deal. I'll call them up and straighten it out."

Beginning of big deal:  I called them up and told our rep, "Susie" of the problem. Susie's response, "Well, we checked your website and the way we read it, we should have been charging them for B all along."
--- End quote ---
Why would Vendor have the right to charge for service B?  They only provide service A as a sub to Your Company.  I assume that Your Company provides service B either directly or through another vendor.

If Your Company is contracted to provide A & B, why don't they bill for both, then pay Vendor for providing service A?  I don't know the specifics of this situation, but usually the prime contractor gets paid by the client and then, in turn, pay their subcontractors after collecting a service or management fee.  When I was a consulting civil engineer, we often contracted with surveyors.  We billed the client for the surveyors' work and added a 10% "management fee" for our effort in coordinating the work.


--- Quote from: Cami on April 04, 2013, 12:28:13 PM ---Big deal #1:
Them: "It's too much trouble."
Me: "Excuse me?"
Them: "We won't give you the names. It's too much trouble. Are you hard of hearing or what?"
--- End quote ---
This comment would have set me off like fireworks.  I would have been in my manager's/supervisor's office in 1 minute, telling her what happened and escalating it to Susie's boss within an hour.  It might take 21 days to terminate the contract, but it shouldn't take more than a couple hours to have Susie pulled off your account.  This statement is completely, totally over the line.  Susie's not even in the same galaxy as the line.

Be sure to post the fall out.  Inquiring minds want need to know.  (passing around virtual popcorn with plenty of virtual butter) >:D

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version