Home » The PARIS Forums » PARIS: Main » chuck duffy cancels his efax account
chuck duffy cancels his efax account [message #92860] |
Mon, 19 November 2007 10:26 |
chuck duffy
Messages: 453 Registered: July 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
The only way to cancel an efax account is via interactive chat. Odd, but here
goes the transcript:
{Megan F.} Hello, Chuck. Welcome to j2 Global online support. I am Megan,
your online Live Support Representative. How may I assist you?
{chuck duffy} Hi, I would like to cancel my service, number ####. Not because
of a problem, but because I don't need the service anymore:-)
{Megan F.} I'm sorry to hear that you wish to cancel. Could you please provide
me your PIN for verification?
{chuck duffy} sure
{chuck duffy} ###
{Megan F.} Thank you for providing your information. Please give me a moment
while I go through your records. In the meantime, please type the number
corresponding to your reason for cancellation:
1) Moving to another provider
2) Bought a Fax machine
3) Business or role changed
4) Short term project completed
5) Financial reasons
6) Problems with Faxing or Billing
7) Dissatisfied with Quality of service
8) Too Costly
{chuck duffy} none of the above - haven't received a fax in over a year :-)
{Megan F.} In the current situation as a special consideration, we will waive
off the monthly fee for two months. You can use the fax service with no monthly
fee for the next two billing cycles. Please feel free to contact us at any
time. This way you will be able to keep your local fax number, which will
enable you to send and receive any pending faxes with your number.
{Megan F.} Your eFax account will be credited with $33.90 so that you may
utilize our services without being billed our monthly fee for the next two
billing cycles.
{Megan F.} Since you will not be charged any monthly fee for the next two
months you may keep the account till then. If at all you find that you need
our services during this period, then you will still have the account. If
however, you still feel that you do not have any use for our services by
the end of the two months credit period, then you can always contact us back
anytime. Would you like that?
{chuck duffy} not, really :-) I haven't recevied a fax in over a year
{chuck duffy} all my customers send via pdf in email now
{Megan F.} If you wish we change you fax format to EFX from PDF. I do understand
that you are not using the service much. I suggest you to use the service
for another 2 months as you will not be charged any monthly fee for this
period.
{Megan F.} As a goodwill gesture for our further association, I would also
provide you with an additional gift usage balance of $10.00 with which you
can send up to 100 pages of faxes for free (per page per minute within US
& Canada).
{chuck duffy} Honestly, it's not the format, and you run a great service,
but I just don't have a need for it.
Thanks but I would like to cancel now...
{Megan F.} Okay. I will cancel your account immediately.
{Megan F.} I'm sorry that you are leaving eFax. At eFax, we are continuously
improving our products and services. Please do consider us if your faxing
needs should change in the future.
{chuck duffy} Thanks
{Megan F.} Is there anything else, I can assist you with?
{Megan F.} It was my pleasure assisting you.
{Megan F.} Thank you for contacting j2 Global Online Support, I hope you
found our session helpful.
Good-bye and take care!
{chuck duffy} I definitely will, and thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
Re: chuck duffy cancels his efax account [message #92895 is a reply to message #92876] |
Mon, 19 November 2007 23:53 |
Kim
Messages: 1246 Registered: October 2005
|
Senior Member |
|
|
You guys should see my correspondence with the Australian Bureau Of Meteorology
on the fact that they predict rain in Melbourne roughly twice as often as
it actually occurs.
I did withhold from getting abusive about it for the first two weeks, because
the person who I first dealt with, while I was getting nowhere, was, at least,
sending me a lot of data and responding within 24 hours or so to each email,
even if he wasn't addressing the points themselves, or giving any indication
of admission that this might be an issue.
Once he went on holidays however, and the new person basically asked that
I repeat everything so that he could presumably muck me around for the same
period of time as the first guy, I did get a little annoyed.
It was at this point that I pointed out that, given that they predict twice
as much rain as what actually occurs, that were I to set up a weather website
which never ever predicts rain, it would, in fact, be equally accurate to
them. I felt that they might then see my point at least, that improving from
this dismal level of accuracy cannot be hard given that predicting nothing
at all is equally accurate. That was Friday. On Monday night, having seen
no response, I emailed again asking for a response. About 11am today I still
had seen nothing, and emailed back explaining that I am determined to get
something done about this, and would appreciate it if they save me the trouble
of talking to the media and politicians in order for that to happen.
Strangely, responses quickly followed.
The first simply said that the person I was speaking to had passed the information
on to his supervisor.
The second was presumably from the supervisor, and contained no text whatsoever,
but just a picture of a graph which simply showed how much rain occurred,
on average, with each of their prediction types. In other words, it said
that for the prediction "A Few Showers / Drizzle" the average rainfall was
0.7mm. It made no statement as to whether, for example, two out of three
times when they predict "A Few Showers / Drizzle" no rain occurs, but 2.1mm
occurs on the third occasion hence creating this average. It simply stated
that the average is 0.7mm. In other words, it was information that was close
to irrelevant to the question.
I am getting rather tired of this, and might spend my energy contacting the
media if I don't feel like I'm getting somewhere as of tomorrow.
Anyhow, I responded thusly:
===============================
I see you have supplied me with a graph.
From what I can tell this graph shows, over time, how much rain occurs on
average given a set probability of rain.
It does not appear to show what percentage of those predictions occurred.
For example, it provides no information whatsoever as to whether the rain
on the graph underneath for the prediction "Drizzle/Shower or two" occurred
in one hit.
To give you an example, this graph could mean that of all 352 cases shown
where you predicted "Drizzle/Shower or two" that it only rained once, but
on that one occasion it rained around 200mm hence bringing the average rainfall
for all 352 cases to the total shown of around
0.7mm or so.
I assume that didn't happen. It is however quite likely that in your 352
cases of "Drizzle/Shower or two" it rained about 2mm in one third of the
cases, but did not rain at all in the other two thirds of the cases. This
would also give an average of
0.7mm of rain on those days.
That said, I can't see this graph's relevance to the point I am making. Do
you properly understand the point I am trying to make and the reason for
my concern? Because you appear to have sent me a graph which, while interesting,
really doesn't in any way answer my query.
Cheers,
Kim.
"Rob Arsenault" <mani1147athotmaildotcom> wrote:
>!!!!........HOLY FAX.......!!!!
>
>
>"John" <no@no.com> wrote in message news:4741fafb$1@linux...
>>
>> please don't go. we love you man !
>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Dec 02 23:43:42 PST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01621 seconds
|