Audit Department HELL!

[jegrant]

I agree - there might be a good idea in doing some audits - but there needs to be a "Customer's Bill of Rights," just as the IRS was forced to implement. Customers should be treated with respect and given appropriate amounts of time to provide supporting documentation and etc.

 

[Zero327]

1. The customer has the right to shut the **** up!

2. When in doubt see rule #1.

-- DirecTV Policy, 2009

 

[gadgtfreek]

Well, sometimes in larger companies one hand does not know what the other is doing. This dept could be doing more harm than good and if there are not any checks and balances then they might just think its doing good.

I mean how many people are going to say they cancelled because of the audit dept? Then there are the people with a contract who just take it from them. It seems like 75% of the calls are over the top, Dish really needs to rethink this process. Or just fire all of the audit dept and start over with people who arent ***holes.

 

[pabeader]

What really sucks is that it's the gov. that caused the gestapo to be created in the first place. If you look in your agreement, which none of us signed, it says something to the effect that if you have more then 4 receivers you are subject to verification. That wording has been in there for over 5 years. E* had not been doing this and the FCC got on their case about it. Viola! The Audit Nazi's were created.
Their written mandate is to treat everyone as a criminal until proven otherwise. Said proof to be whatever they want it to be. They in no way generate income for E*. They can't. The most they can do is force a stacker to create multiple accounts to cover the different places they have receivers. More then likely, a stacker is going to tell them to F! off! and go to somebody else.
They are not even suposed to be calling anyone who has 4 or less receivers on their account. If I read Claudes' posts correctly. He has 2 receivers??? They should not even be calling him, for any reason!!!! This appears to be a clear case of harassment. E* knows it, but they also know that the bad publicity will stop people like Claude from going public.
Makes me wish D* didn't suck so bad!

 

[mike123abc]

It could be handled in a much more professional manner. For example why turn off the signal over and over? A much better process would be to contact the person, and give them a resonable time to call dish back. Like 1-2 WEEKS. Really what difference does it make if you give them 1-2 days vs 1-2 weeks? If after a reasonable number of attempts in a few weeks then cut off the signal until they call in.

Once they call in give them the benefit of the doubt and turn on all the receivers during the audit process until a resolution is made. If the customer is uncooperative and refuses to help do the audit, refuses to provide documentation then rule against the customer and cut off service until the customer provides what is needed. In Claude's case the audit would probably have gone on for a few weeks as he faxed in the paper work needed. Sure he would not be trying to come up with lease agreements at midnight, but handling it the next day.

Remember these people are PAYING for service. They are not hackers with FTA boxes stealing signal (Dish has no way to find these). The concern is that they may be "sharing" their account, or in Claude's case getting a promotion on two accounts by one person. They are still paying customers, they already have the Dish equipment in their posession. What does it cost Dish to be resonable and keep the service on and work with the customer to see if they are sharing the account with the neighbors.

 

[Zero327]

It could be handled in a much more professional manner. For example why turn off the signal over and over? A much better process would be to contact the person, and give them a resonable time to call dish back. Like 1-2 WEEKS. Really what difference does it make if you give them 1-2 days vs 1-2 weeks? If after a reasonable number of attempts in a few weeks then cut off the signal until they call in.

Each billing day is worth a set amount of money dependant on programming and equipment. Ultimately, if someone is going to be forced to turn off equipment permanantly, E* is financing the time that equipment is on between the first call and the 2 week mark you propose. Current policy is 24 hours to call-in as I recall.

Once they call in give them the benefit of the doubt and turn on all the receivers during the audit process until a resolution is made. If the customer is uncooperative and refuses to help do the audit, refuses to provide documentation then rule against the customer and cut off service until the customer provides what is needed. In Claude's case the audit would probably have gone on for a few weeks as he faxed in the paper work needed. Sure he would not be trying to come up with lease agreements at midnight, but handling it the next day.

This, will never happen. Benefit of the doubts is good for a loan officer, not a multibillion dollar company. If a cop pulls you over after finding your car to be unsafe to drive, you're given a three day deadline to fix it in most cases, or your license is revoked. Same principle.

Remember these people are PAYING for service. They are not hackers with FTA boxes stealing signal (Dish has no way to find these). The concern is that they may be "sharing" their account, or in Claude's case getting a promotion on two accounts by one person. They are still paying customers, they already have the Dish equipment in their posession. What does it cost Dish to be resonable and keep the service on and work with the customer to see if they are sharing the account with the neighbors.

MOST of them aren't hackers... And yes, there are ways to find them. The most amusing are the ones that want service calls, you show up and they have wiring mods on their receivers. Oops? Audits aren't strictly for account stackers or signal pirates. Mind you, the other reasons you'll only come to find out if you're doing one of them. As far as cost, if two hundred customers are audited a day, we'll assume 50% are legitimate albeit the actual number may be higher or lower, with a difference of two receivers and average programming packages, $10.00 in additional receiver fees, $6.00 a day in programming per account...

One hundred customers x 10.00 = 1,000
One hundred accounts programming being illegally obtained x 6.00 = 600.00
Applicable tax DISH has to pay otherwise x 1.50 = 150.00

Total: 1750.00/day

New equation:

Now assuming half a percent of all DISH subscribers are actually pirates, stackers (which I guarantee this number is higher) or other... Multiply by 67,000 (half a percent of 13.4 million subs)

$117,250,000/year (if each of the 67,000 subscribers cheats for only ONE day, based on the above figure.)

Divide by two assuming that half of those audited are legit:

$58,625,000/year (again, if they only cheat for a single day.)

And then it becomes crystal clear why the department exists.

K?

 

[Hall]

Most people won't like that explanation and regardless of the accuracy of the numbers, the point is, when the situation is looked at from "the other side", it can be a little bit more understanding.

 

[KimmiKat]

It could be handled in a much more professional manner. For example why turn off the signal over and over? A much better process would be to contact the person, and give them a resonable time to call dish back. Like 1-2 WEEKS. Really what difference does it make if you give them 1-2 days vs 1-2 weeks? If after a reasonable number of attempts in a few weeks then cut off the signal until they call in.

Once they call in give them the benefit of the doubt and turn on all the receivers during the audit process until a resolution is made. If the customer is uncooperative and refuses to help do the audit, refuses to provide documentation then rule against the customer and cut off service until the customer provides what is needed. In Claude's case the audit would probably have gone on for a few weeks as he faxed in the paper work needed. Sure he would not be trying to come up with lease agreements at midnight, but handling it the next day.

Remember these people are PAYING for service. They are not hackers with FTA boxes stealing signal (Dish has no way to find these). The concern is that they may be "sharing" their account, or in Claude's case getting a promotion on two accounts by one person. They are still paying customers, they already have the Dish equipment in their posession. What does it cost Dish to be resonable and keep the service on and work with the customer to see if they are sharing the account with the neighbors.

And I wonder how many people reading this thead changed their mind about getting E* after reading about the Dish Audit Taliban? Probably a very small number.

 

[Hall]

How many customers have any clue that an "audit" department exists ?? How many potential customers would ?? Further, how many potential customers would read a thread titled the way this one is ??

 

[yellowcanary73]

1. The customer has the right to shut the **** up!

2. When in doubt see rule #1.

-- DirecTV Policy, 2009

Do you work for dish,anybody ever treated me like that first I would tell them to shove the dish up their a**.Then ask them if they would like to meet some where and discuss this face to face:devil:

 

[mike123abc]

MOST of them aren't hackers... And yes, there are ways to find them. The most amusing are the ones that want service calls, you show up and they have wiring mods on their receivers. Oops? Audits aren't strictly for account stackers or signal pirates. Mind you, the other reasons you'll only come to find out if you're doing one of them. As far as cost, if two hundred customers are audited a day, we'll assume 50% are legitimate albeit the actual number may be higher or lower, with a difference of two receivers and average programming packages, $10.00 in additional receiver fees, $6.00 a day in programming per account...

One hundred customers x 10.00 = 1,000
One hundred accounts programming being illegally obtained x 6.00 = 600.00
Applicable tax DISH has to pay otherwise x 1.50 = 150.00

Total: 1750.00/day

You are way out in left field on this one... First of all they are customers being called which means they have paid a month in advance. Second they are paying $$ for the extra receivers.

Extra receiver generated an extra receiver fee. Which they paid up front. In case of stacking the customer would be cut off Dish pockets the money paid upfront and starts collections. A few extra days does not cost Dish anything.

The point of the audits is to keep honest people honest and find the thieves. It is not a profit center for Dish. Stolen signals and stacking in theory cost Dish lost opportunity to make money. Losing honest customers because of bad tactics and rudeness costs real money.

 

[Zero327]

You are way out in left field on this one... First of all they are customers being called which means they have paid a month in advance. Second they are paying $$ for the extra receivers.

Extra receiver generated an extra receiver fee. Which they paid up front. In case of stacking the customer would be cut off Dish pockets the money paid upfront and starts collections. A few extra days does not cost Dish anything.

The point of the audits is to keep honest people honest and find the thieves. It is not a profit center for Dish. Stolen signals and stacking in theory cost Dish lost opportunity to make money. Losing honest customers because of bad tactics and rudeness costs real money.

The math illustrates lost operational costs. In a business there is ALWAYS a cost for delaying an action. Similarly, there are costs if you proactively approach a situation as well. It costs E* cash for every hour a pirated or otherwise illegal unit is operating. Whether you acknowledge it or not doesn't change that part of the system.

Customers usually pay up front, there are of course a few rare exceptions. But this conversation isn't about customer's paying up front. It's about existing customers, that then break the rules or manipulate the system after becoming customers. Again, your above statements only apply to REGULAR customers. The audit process is in place to deal with those who don't play by the rules, so the assumption that they're paying for said receivers, or haven't piggybacked another set of receivers to the ones they are legally paying for isn't taken into account.

I never said this process was a profit center, that's your assumption. It's meant to reduce operating costs by eliminating illegal accounts. Regardless of whether anyone thinks it's a good idea or morally correct, it is here and it doesn't appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

 

[ronjohn]

I never said this process was a profit center, that's your assumption. It's meant to reduce operating costs by eliminating illegal accounts. Regardless of whether anyone thinks it's a good idea or morally correct, it is here and it doesn't appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

I have nothing against trying to find people who are breaking the rules. However, if a retail store stopped people at random and did exhastive pat downs while verbally attacking them, people would not shop at such a store. Dish Network would be better off with a system that treats people fairly and with respect even if some rule-breakers fell through the system. This department has harrassed a major retailer. They have made the owner of this site's wife cry. There are numerous postings where they shout at customers. I don't care how many rule-breakers you catch, the damage to honest customers costs more.

 

[gadgtfreek]

Attn all customers, if you are currently carrying more than 4 shopping bags(thanks for the revenue by the way) please stop, drop your pants and prepare for a cavity search.

Audit dept sucks.

 

[Zero327]

I have nothing against trying to find people who are breaking the rules. However, if a retail store stopped people at random and did exhastive pat downs while verbally attacking them, people would not shop at such a store. Dish Network would be better off with a system that treats people fairly and with respect even if some rule-breakers fell through the system. This department has harrassed a major retailer. They have made the owner of this site's wife cry. There are numerous postings where they shout at customers. I don't care how many rule-breakers you catch, the damage to honest customers costs more.

Valid point, it's not how I'd do it but there's only so many things you can control. Frankly, flipping people on and off was one of the worse points Claude mentioned. Taking the present approach, it would have been more understandable to just keep the account shut off until a final decision was reached. Of course then that would be a topic of discussion instead, so really E* couldn't win this one. But if E* has one failing, it's the left hand not knowing what the right one is doing. Things get even worse if the right hand in such cases does in fact know best...

Don't get me wrong there's things I agree with and things I hate about E*. But all things considered when you tally up the pros and cons (Oh yes.... I've done this a number of times.) E* still comes out a fair bit ahead. I'm still of the firm opinion however that customers in the past decade have come to believe what they want is a god-given (pardon the usage) right. Customer service at the end of the day is a SERVICE. Something you pay for and must maintain. The customer of course will never agree with that perspective because of a feeling of entitlement, that goes hand and hand with spending money on anything.

The catch with service is that you must interactively participate in a mutual good experience. You can't be an a** to someone and expect them to respond politely (regardless of if they should themselves.) That's like signing up for a gym membership, and expecting to lose weight spending every weekend sitting on your couch. You're doing nothing on your end to help the situation. Same principle with people that have a problem, complain about a problem, but make no effort to call customer service for help.

Most audit issues such as these that get blown way out of proportions are a mix between so-so business practices, and a customer who feels whatever they want is a birthright. Sometimes this feeling is justified, and other times its not. But one thing never changes, no matter which customer you ask, they will feel they're entitled (usually to something for free.) Claude got a bit of a short stick here I'll admit, but E* did make it pretty clear they wanted X paperwork in X amount of days. Claude did try to negotiate for more time instead of abiding by their policies. I understand the reasons why, but looking at it from a logical perspective, what would have happen if everything had been faxed in day 1 with no argument?

 

[ronjohn]

Most audit issues such as these that get blown way out of proportions are a mix between so-so business practices, and a customer who feels whatever they want is a birthright. Sometimes this feeling is justified, and other times its not. But one thing never changes, no matter which customer you ask, they will feel they're entitled (usually to something for free.) Claude got a bit of a short stick here I'll admit, but E* did make it pretty clear they wanted X paperwork in X amount of days. Claude did try to negotiate for more time instead of abiding by their policies. I understand the reasons why, but looking at it from a logical perspective, what would have happen if everything had been faxed in day 1 with no argument?

I don't believe I have a right to any programming except for what I pay the current prices for. I do demand respect. I have been a Dish customer for 10 years. I am happy with the equipment and the programming. However, if the audit department speaks to my wife the way they spoke to Scott's, I will cancel and never do business with them again.

 

[Claude Greiner]

Claude got a bit of a short stick here I'll admit, but E* did make it pretty clear they wanted X paperwork in X amount of days. Claude did try to negotiate for more time instead of abiding by their policies. I understand the reasons why, but looking at it from a logical perspective, what would have happen if everything had been faxed in day 1 with no argument?

It was not "You fax in the paperwork, or we shut you off" it was "Your shut off until you fax in the paperwork"

I asked for 3 days to send in the required paperwork and they refused! I had to go to kinkos on mothers day to send it in.

 

[Dish-Direc]

If Dish had want to catch thieves, their service would be unhackable. The audit team, along with a secure encryption, catches thieves. The audit team, with an encryption that is not secure, causes cancellations and encourages more hacking.

 

[gadgtfreek]

If Dish had want to catch thieves, their service would be unhackable. The audit team, along with a secure encryption, catches thieves. The audit team, with an encryption that is not secure, causes cancellations and encourages more hacking.

I agree.

 

[DishDave]

If Dish had want to catch thieves, their service would be unhackable. The audit team, along with a secure encryption, catches thieves. The audit team, with an encryption that is not secure, causes cancellations and encourages more hacking.

Really wish they would put as much effort in the FTA arena that they do on the audit team it would be more secure then Direct..