THE EDITOR, Sir:
MAY I through the medium of your column congratulate Cable & Wireless for their consistency in the service provided to their customers.
In the year 2001 they wrote me as follows:
"We took note of your letter to The Gleaner, dated, Saturday, July 14, 2001, in which you made reference to your telephone being out of order for a number of days, although the fault was promptly reported on July 2, 2001.
"Our investigations revealed that you are correct, the line was out of service for more than two days, as it was returned to service on July 12, 2001, or eight working days after the first report was made.
"We admit that this is unsatisfactory and in breach of our customer charter, which stipulates that business lines should be returned to service within 2 working days after a fault has been reported. Consequently, a rebate for the period of outage will be credited to your account.
"Cable & Wireless Jamaica regrets any inconvenience this undue outage may have caused".
On 24th September, 2004, I reported that two business lines had been out of service since 22nd September.
Ten working days after that report they are still out of service. Congratulations Cable & Wireless you have maintained your position of total indifference to your obligations to your customers.
Indeed the significant progress you have made in the last three years in providing wrong information in recorded messages that numbers (which are in fact in service) are not in service and that numbers which are not long distance numbers are long distance numbers.
No doubt the customer pays for this. Keep up the good work! Please do not lay any blame at the feet of Hurricane Ivan. The present problem arose as a result of a truck damaging the telephone cable in the area of Duke and Tower streets on September 22, 2004.
I am, etc.,
D. A. SCHARSCHMIDT,
Q.C.
Kingston
