I wrote earlier today about a positive customer service experience with HP. I contrast that with a series of missteps that characterize my interactions with Direct Energy.

For more than 3 weeks, one of our major appliances has been out of service. The first delay in repairs was because the technician’s truck wouldn’t start one morning. Then the part had to be ordered and apparently, their supply depot needed to hand craft the part from blocks of plastic that had not been harvested from the rain forests or where ever. The part was delivered to the technician which took another week – it isn’t clear to me what took a week, unless it got returned by the post office for insufficient postage. Then, the technician who was supposed to finally show up today called in sick.

The caller from Direct Energy said that they can’t send a different technician – the sick guy has the part. Will he show up for work tomorrow? Will the part fix? Will I renew the service contract?

I’m gonna call my dentist to get my fillings replaced – it will be much more pleasant than dealing with the Direct Energy call centre.

---

Update [January 26, 12:15 pm]
The Direct Energy technician returned today and successfully repaired the machine, including some heroics on sealing another source of a leak that had not been detected on the first service call. We’re back in service. Special thanks to JT at headquarters for letting me know there is follow-up to look at the process breakdowns on this file.

I generally approach dealing with customer support centres with all of the same enthusiasm as going to the dentist. It isn’t going to get any better by putting it off, so take a deep breath and get on with it.

I had an especially pleasant experience with HP over the weekend.

The battery in one of our computers was indicating that it was “plugged in, not charging”. Not a good thing for a portable device.

The battery check software tool showed a failure and added “This may be covered by your warranty.”

It took just 15 seconds on HP’s on-line chat service to be connected with an agent and in less than 10 minutes, we were setting up arrangements for a replacement part to be delivered later this week.

I know that this is the way warranty service is supposed to work – it’s just nice to see when it actually does.

We have a session at The 2010 Canadian Telecom Summit looking at Billing and Customer Information Systems: Increasing loyalty and revenues. Have you registered yet?

In releasing a free map and directions application yesterday, Nokia took aim at Google and a variety of handheld GPS suppliers got caught in the cross fire.

Nokia’s new version of Ovi Maps includes high-end walk and drive navigation including turn-by-turn voice guidance at no extra cost. The application has detailed maps for more than 180 countries, voice guidance for 74 countries, in 46 languages, and traffic information for more than 10 countries.

Why have multiple devices that work that work in only one country or region? Put it all together, make it free, make it global and you almost double the potential size of the mobile navigation market. Nokia is the only company with a mobile navigation service for both drivers and pedestrians that works across the world. Unlike the legacy car navigation manufacturers, we don’t make you buy maps for different countries or regions even if you’re only visiting for a few days. We offer both navigation and maps free of charge, with all the high-end functionality and features that people now expect.

Unlike other mobile mapping applications, Ovi Maps has a lot of functionality without using mobile data – making the application particularly attractive for travellers who can get concerned with roaming data charges around the world.

By removing costs associated with global navigation for drivers and pedestrians, Nokia is activating a massive user base for location-based features, content and services, part of a strategy for Nokia in mobile, navigation and location-based services.

The announcement leverages Nokia’s 2007 acquisition of NAVTEQ. Nokia is said to be the biggest camera manufacturer in the world. With Ovi Maps, it may quickly become the world’s largest handheld GPS manufacturer.

Google and Verizon filed a joint letter to the FCC last week, finding some common ground “on a number of important matters that are crucial to the formulation of an enlightened, sustainable Internet policy for the United States.”

Among highlights are:

1. Preserving Openness. It is essential that the Internet remains an unrestricted and open platform, where people can access the lawful content, services, and applications of their choice. … where anyone, including network providers, are able to innovate without permission and provide any applications or services of their choosing, either on their own or in collaboration with others.
2. Encouraging Investment and Innovation in Broadband Networks. …continued private investment is essential to increase the reach and capabilities of advanced intelligent networks, which will in turn support the development of ever more sophisticated applications.
3. Providing Users with Control. No entity from either the government or the private sector should wrest control from consumers over how they choose to use the Internet, and the government should not implement policies that would limit consumers’ ability to choose for themselves.
4. Providing Users with Information. Transparency will ensure an environment of informed user choice.
5. Maintaining Balanced Intellectual Property Policy. We both recognize the importance of protecting intellectual property in the digital environment and each of us engages in efforts to assist content owners in enforcing their rights and deterring online copyright infringements.
6. Keeping Internet Applications, Content, and Services Free from Communications Regulation. There is … no sound reason to impose communications laws or regulations on the robust marketplace of Internet content, applications, and services.
7. Providing a Leadership Role for Expert Technical Bodies. [A] model of self-governance and collaboration, with minimal government involvement, will continue to serve the Internet well into the future.

The companies go on to promote self-governance as the hallmark of the success of the Internet; that any government intervention needed to address harm to users or to competition, should be surgical, swift and based on a finding of specific facts that establish harm.

The companies appear to agree in rejecting the reduction of broadband carriers to commodity dumb pipes:

Google and Verizon acknowledge that broadband network providers, in addition to offering traditional Internet access services, should have the ability to offer consumers additional service options over their broadband facilities. Clearly, broadband infrastructure has multiple uses, and network operators should continue to have the ability to offer users the choice of service options in addition to traditional Internet access services.

Google and Verizon seem to endorse a Canadian style nondiscrimination rule, stating that the focus should be to prevent harm to users or to competition. They agree that differential treatment of Internet traffic by network operators can be beneficial or harmful to users and therefore need to be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

The companies have a number of areas of divergence on such issues as the FCC’s authority to regulate and wireless network applicability, so they also filed separate submissions on those matters.

The joint letter is notable in demonstrating an evolution of the debate on net neutrality in the US, contrasted with a more static perspective often expressed on our side of the border.

Bell and Bell Aliant have sought approval to use Deferral Account funds to help pay for its HSPA rollout in some rural markets [zip, 215KB].

Specifically, they plan to offer wireless broadband services with up to 2 Mbps download, 800 Kbps upload, with a 2 GB usage cap, for $31.95 per month for retail and $22.00 wholesale. These rates are said to be comparable to existing DSL rates.

TELUS and MTS Allstream also filed plans with the CRTC, but neither of those companies have proposed new technology solutions. Details pertaining to Bell’s roll-out plan, including cost and deferral account drawdown estimates will be provided on February 26.

The Bell proposal to subsidize its HSPA rollout is certain to keep the controversy on deferral account alive.