Feedback: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it. |
Since 19 July 2007, I've had 1024/512kbps two way satellite broadband through Bluemaxx Communications. The plan includes 1GB of downloads monthly, after which the speed is throttled to 64kbps. The contract does not restrict uploads. From the beginning of 2008 to 28 September 2008, the service was of less than merchantable quality (while that term might not be technically appropriate, I do believe that Bluemaxx was in prima facie violation of the Trade Practices Act). Bluemaxx gave an undertaking to compensate me, but subsequently dishonoured that undertaking. Strangely, they'd earlier honoured a similar undertaking.
In June 2009, Bluemaxx finally agreed to honour their undertaking. That was after I'd lodged a formal complaint with the TIO. Bluemaxx is evidently unable to grasp the concept that, in order to atone for their appalling behaviour, they need to do more than just what they should have done from the beginning. As at 8 January 2010, I can't say that Bluemaxx is meeting its contractual obligations.
Here is my best-effort reconstruction of my experiences with Bluemaxx. It's long and a little tedious.
After a few complications,
the service was installed
on 19 July 2007. Bluemaxx was prime contractor
on
the installation and retained ownership of the hardware.
The
turn of the year brought problems.
On 24 February 2008, I
had no service for 11 hours.
Service failed completely on 26
February
2008, so I was given temporary (shared) dialup access.
On 20 March 2008, Bluemaxx gave an undertaking
to reimburse me for the poor service.
On 9
May 2008, faulty hardware was replaced. I had difficulty connecting
(due to configuration errors at Bluemaxx) and ongoing problems with
dropouts.
Despite ongoing problems, on 8 June 2008 I foolishly reported my service
as restored
from
9 May and requested the promised reimbursement.
On the same day, I detailed
the
ongoing problems.
Two days later, Bluemaxx honoured
their undertaking
to reimburse me for the poor service.
On the same day, Bluemaxx support suggested that ongoing problems must
be
caused by my equipment.
I responded
that the modem shows a constant connection. I also pointed out that
Bluemaxx's own usage page showed about 30 dropouts in little more than 2
hours.
Bluemaxx then said
they'd send in the tech's.
When nothing happened, I gave
details
of a peculiar pattern of regular dropouts.
On 20
June 2008, a technician turned up. While he was on site, everything
seemed fine. Of course, it couldn't last.
From the beginning, I had problems
with slow Web access and corrupted downloads.
On 13 July 2008, I complained about the poor service and sought
compensation for the period from (at least) 24 February. On 15 July
2008, Bluemaxx agreed.
Also on the 15th, Skybridge made
a
booking for the 19th, which they didn't
keep. Soon after I complained, Skybridge phoned me to make a new
booking.
They kept
that
appointment and confirmed the problem, but couldn't do anything
about it.
Toward the end of July, I hooked
up
a new Vista system which, trying repeatedly to update itself on a
link that corrupts downloads, consumed most of my download allowance
before I realised what was happening.
Bluemaxx subsequently revealed
serious
deficiencies in their Client Relationship Management system
(assuming they had a system, it evidently didn't record details of my
installation).
I directed
them
to the most likely source of information, then asked what's been
changed that degraded service quality.
Shortly afterward, Bluemaxx began to show
signs
of desperation: implying that I'd done works for which I'm not
qualified and that any fault must be my responsibility.
I interpreted their behaviour as an attempt to bully me into accepting the
unacceptable. My reaction may have been a
little testy. I pointed out (among other things) that I'd done
nothing for which I'm not qualified, then asked for the evidence on which
Bluemaxx's assertions were based.
Bluemaxx's response
revealed that their assertions were based on a lack of information and
agreed that, on the available information, some were improbable. It also
asserted that no change had been made that could account for the degraded
service.
On 6 September 2008, I responded,
giving evidence that something had certainly been changed, pointing out an
apparent error in their response, suggesting testing that should have been
carried out and seeking further information.
Two days later, Bluemaxx
responded, providing signal strength data and asking whether I'd had
problems recently.
I answered,
giving my geographic coordinates and replying that problems are pretty
constant.
Bluemaxx's reply
exposed a surprising geographical ineptitude and revealed deficiencies in
their interpretation of signal data. They were probably guessing well
beyond their competence. They also attributed problems to weather events
which occurred after the problems and admitted
an
error to which I'd previously alluded.
I pointed
out some more of their errors and reiterated my suggestion that they
follow up on whatever has changed.
Bluemaxx then enquired
further about the installation,
then suggested isolating
the
modem, which I did. Nothing
changed.
On 17
September 2008, I reported details and effects of service problems,
reminded Bluemaxx that I have their undertaking “to compensate me for the
period during which my service is not of merchantable quality” and gave
them until the end of the month to fix the problem.
Bluemaxx responded, in
a
manner that I consider attempted to establish excuses for denying
liability, offering to send a technician. I did
my
best to give a civil response.
Bluemaxx replied in
characteristic
tone, with familiar distortions of fact. Though interpreting their
behaviour as an attempt to bully me into silence (&/or to fabricate an
excuse for evading liability), I did not respond.
On 25
September 2008, Skybridge technicians replaced some electronics and
(yet again) adjusted the dish.
Between 10
November
2008 and 28
January
2009, I emailed Bluemaxx three times, reporting small problems,
confirming that the service quality issue has been resolved and seeking
the promised compensation.
On 29 January 2009 Bluemaxx replied, with
reasoning
significantly vague, that they have decided to dishonour their earlier
undertaking. They followed by further demonstrating shortcomings of
their Client Relationship Management system (assuming they had a system,
it evidently didn't record details of my plan speed).
I responded immediately, suggesting that they reconsider and giving
due
notice of potential consequences. Had the record genuinely supported
their decision, I believe they would have provided evidence.
Almost three months after my
last
message reporting issues, I was contacted
by
Bluemaxx support. That was the day after I'd invited
Bluemaxx
to comment on this reconstruction.
As at 22 May 2009, Bluemaxx hadn't responded to my suggestion that they reconsider
their decision to dishonour
their undertaking,
so I lodged
a
complaint with the Telecommunications
Industry
Ombudsman. The TIO
suggested on 29 May 2009 that I contact a Mr Russell Smith at
Bluemaxx.
After three
attempts, I managed to speak to Mr Smith, who referred
me
to Chris Rodriguez of Bluemaxx Sales. After failing
to
contact Mr Rodriguez by phone, I sent him an
email on 2 June 2009.
Shortly after, Mr
Rodriguez
phoned. I subsequently received an
email, confirming their intention to honour the original
undertaking. Though the formal complaint may be resolved, Bluemaxx has a
long way to go before their reputation is restored in my eyes. The apology
letter mentions a change of management at Bluemaxx. If they perform well,
I might stay on after my contract expires. Miracles do happen.
That miracle looks less and less likely:
On 18
August 2009, major changes were evidently made in Bluemaxx's setup.
No warning was given.
The changes affected
the
satellite usage meter in a way that gives no cause for confidence in
Bluemaxx.
On the 10th of October, I received a request
from
a former employee, asking that I remove their name from this site.
They had evidently not enjoyed their experience with the company and did
not want to be associated with it.
In October
and November,
I ran some basic tests on my shaped bandwidth. The results were not
promising.
As at 1 January 2010, the usage meter still gave no
cause
for confidence.
On 18
January 2010, following further unpromising test results on shaped
bandwidth, I transferred to one of Bluemaxx's new plans. As usual, all did
not go smoothly.
Feedback: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it. |