. As long as payments are made in $100 increments, the balance is good for one year.
Not sure I would be real pleased about that. You have already paid $180 for an annual fee ... why won't any moneys you ad to your account not last to the expiry of THAT plan . Otherwise if the first $20 happens to last you for 6 months and then you ad a hundred you may have a big balance left over when the $180 plan expires .... just something I wouldn't want because it sort of locks you to Rogers at plan renewal time .
I think based upon what has been described in all these posts, and the most recent post on the response from CRTC, plus the person who got a fair offer from management, that it is now time for anyone who is unhappy with what is happening with their personal account with the changes to start at the CSR level - as said, they will probably say no, then to a supervisor, their experience was no, then go to a concern to manager, then to office of the president, and CRTC says that if not settled to your desire, go to CCTC.
This whole change over has been a complete mismanaged mess from my perspective, messed up with the 120.00 plan of last year, and now the 180.00 plan and the many grandfathered older plans and the poor communication of options to customers and reliance on text which is unreliable.
I think it is time that Rogers management took a rethink on this whole thing and come up with a fair solution for customers to consider that reflects their individual contracts. This would be an honest admission that this did not roll out as hoped in a fair solution for customers, and does not fit into the stated goal of the CEO to aggresssively approach each customer service experience that is of concern and to find innovative creative solutions.
In absence of a timely response to clarify this to all customers (find a way to communicate to them - be creative and innovative) then it is for the customers to do the long timely process of moving their request for a fair solution up through the escalation process, or just walk with all your other services.
The more people who push this up to office of president and CCTC if necessary or ombudsman, the quicker Rogers will come out with a fair solution for all and be creative in the various permutations of how these plans have been implemented over the years.
I understand the corporate desire as stated in their financial statements to simply and reduce the number of different plans, but they need to consider the current relationship with the customer and as the CRTC suggested that it appears that there may be a breech of contract (not literally what what was said) in the other post, and to take it to CCTC if you can't resolve it, but it also means that the CRTC is aware of what is going on and directing us, plus seeing what is going on too.
So come on Rogers, step up and fix this problem - the large balances were your creation, customers chose to use it, some became aware of ability to pay with the balance to top up, some did not, each person needs to be looked at individually in this situation. customers just took advantage to meet their needs best, trusted Rogers in the offers, and now are feeling like Rogers has not lived up to their side of the deal.
So Rogers do the right thing, or customers will push this to the CCTC level which is public available to all in terms of rulings and many will just walk and that violates your stated goals around end to end customer experience - this customer experience so far is largely a huge failure - fix it.
I understand the corporate desire as stated in their financial statements to simply and reduce the number of different plans
There was originally was one plan. There are now eleven
I understand the mess that Rogers created for itself over the years running the multiple offerings. As a customer I found it impossible to talk to CSR's anymore about my plans as almost everything was grandfathered. Now everything is no longer grandfathered, and we can talk on common grounds, and behind the scenes, there remains flexibility with each customer if you end up at retentions, but we can also just go with in market offerings if the interest us and are offered to existing customers.
So the goal of reducing the plans, grandfathered and offerings as it becomes managable for staff and customers to understand. It becomes much more of, this is what I want, do you offer it or not, if not in the plan, is there a creative solution that retentions can make, and in my case, I typically now opt for less services. This is somewhat of a contradiction of the Rogers model which is to get us to take on more, not less, but I am one of those fixed pension people, so having the few options and small flexibility is ok with me - I set my budget now knowing that I will likely have to give up some services by reduction, or even eliminating and I shop around and compare.
The problem that Rogers has at this time with all of this is how they get us the customer to this new model of reduced number of plans and moving us off the grandfathered plans.
Sounds like Rogers has decided to gradually keep the grandfathered plans in place and let people bring their balance down slowly, 100.00 per year based upon the past post.
So shows the power of the customer's voice and using the system of escalation and the willingness of the company with being pushed to back off. Another example though, of how about running different models across the customers in advance - this mess could have been reduced with some individual discussion with customers and focus groups - they may do that, don't know.
But then again, this particular group, they would have to be able to contact them and that is one of the issues - how do you advise this group who many don't have their phones on, deliberately.
So 11 yes, too many, and the end is admirable, it is the way we get there that matters to the customer and their other admirable goal of end to end customer experience.
But I am still waiting to see the official announcement, not dribs and drabs from the forum and other social media streams as people learn what options are available to them. I have no doubt that there are still users out there that have no idea of what is coming at them.
Here is what I think. Customers are annoyed enough with the once or twice yearly increases to stay with inflation. Nobody will tolerate increases in the prices of plans as well. But that's what what happens anyway. I almost jumped to a newly introduced $100/year PayGo plan with free texting a couple of years ago, but went back to my original, now grandfathered, one. I saw that one go to $120 and now $180, although the details may not be exactly identical. But that's what they do, make new plans that cannot be compared to old plans, A against B. I saw the same thing with Cable. I have a grandfathered VIP Cable plan that offers more channels for less money than Rogers current Cable packages. But Rogers stopped publishing lists for packages by channel number years ago, so it's hard to compare.
post number 11 here where the involvement of media came into play, and post 91 in the pay as you go thread where it is described the escalation steps and persistence by the poster to get an agreement that satisfied them.
So it appears that you may have to push and play your own game of hardball to get what you want to see or something close, but the CRTC has weighed in on their perception of the contract, advising to work with escalation and CCTC if necessary, and the report that a CSR was very flexible agreeing that options were available - tread 11.
Sure there is interpretation on these pieces of information, but it says something for playing hardball back, and escalating, bringing in media, and comments and direction from CRTC.
Rogers is not outside the wireless code and customer pressure, at least seems to me.
But I do think their ultimate goal in the long run will be to reduce plans and complexity and mix of plans and pricing in order to simplify the offerings, which was a stated goal of the new CEO - we have seen this in the TV and Internet mixes, the wireless and home phones and we now see it coming in the pay as you go side of things. But the challenge for us as customers is to keep pushing back hard, or walking if that is not your thing to push, and put the pressure on Rogers to find a fair way to move forward while respecting their past committments.
That is all I am saying.
But that's what they do, make new plans that cannot be compared to old plans, A against B.
Is it not all about phasing out the old and getting people switched to the new because the old don't generate enough cash flow on a regular basis . They bring out new plans in the guise of suiting the customers needs better when it is actually a just a different plan with wording in the fine print that allows Rogers to update pricing more efficiently when needed . Just like the 100/ 120/ 180 plan . Why is the "anytime plan" being grandfathered and not the $120 plan ?