Dated: 17th February
To,
Head – Customer Care
Airtel, New Delhi
Subject: Continued Harassment by AIRTEL, It’s Employees & DSA’s for the settled account vide no 13152279 and having the phone number 01140513969
Dear Sir / Madam,
1. Today Indian telecom & broad band industry is considered amongst the best in the world and companies are making their billions by providing the services to millions of users with various regular and value added services. Having had the impression of AIRTEL being the most efficient & honest player in the sector I applied for the broadband connection to avail of the highly promised services by Airtel-New Delhi as per the details mentioned at the end of this letter.
2. The above mentioned connection (01140513969) was installed at my residence in the first week of Sep and the plan chosen was based on the recommendation of the Sales Executive representing AIRTEL. At this stage the plan taken was with 2MBPS speed with 2GB download limit.
3. The first bill was fine, but the very next month, I discovered the horror of being tricked into an unviable plan with the receipt of Invoice No – 454159009, dated 06/11 amounting to Rs.4526/-, and immediately called the customer care who told me that this might be an aberration and I should watch my usage for another month.
4. As an unsuspecting consumer, I went by what the customer care executive advised and soon discovered the perils of my belief in AIRTEL. This time again the bill was for Rs.2702/- vide Invoice number 456199848 dated 06/12. On receiving this bill I called the customer care and informed them about the repeated problem. They suggested that I should go for some 999 plan with 6GB download limit. The plan change reference number provided on 15th Dec at 7.25pm by Mr. Sunil Sachdev was 11699515.
5. Post this, for almost two months I started using internet on very specific days when I needed it most for the fear of a huge bill again. Things were ok for a couple of months, but then I was sent a BOMB of a bill vide invoice no.-462285625 dated 06/03 amounting to a staggering Rs.15849/-
6. At this juncture, I made several calls to the customer care to look into the matter. To my surprise, the services were taken off and the unending horror of calls from AIRTEL started. After a lot of explanation to a number of people who called up, the matter was finally settled on 29th Sep and I made the payment of Rs.5300/- (More than the charges for an unlimited plan for a month) vide receipt no- 569776 (Annexure-A) & Settlement Letter (Annexure-B) from AIRTEL was issued for the same.
7. Having made the payment as per AIRTEL’s desire, I was quite sure that the matter had been put to an end. But, the biggest surprise was yet to come – namely….A fresh Bill of Rs.12, 395/- mailed by AIRTEL customer care on 6th Jan vide Invoice number 480235017 dated 06/12 on account of the same connection.
8. This is after a span of almost 3 months from the settlement and despite the fact that the ICICI Bank Cheque No.643837 amounting to Rs.5300/- was cleared on 3rd Oct and AIRTEL had issued the settlement letter for the same.
9. I have also learnt that my PAN number had been given by AIRTEL to CIBIL as a defaulter.
After having expressed my side of the story, I would want to know the following
1. Why fresh bills were sent despite the settlement?
2. Why was I harassed by AIRTEL employees / DSA’s for the settled account?
3. Why was the name given to CIBIL, despite having settled the account?
4. You have a policy of charging fine for late payment, do you also have a policy of paying fines to customers for harassment by your team?
Point number 3 amounts to “Willful intention to Malign”.
I would request you to provide a clarification for the above and explain why I should not approach consumer court for “harassment” & “willful intention to malign”
Looking forward to an immediate action on the above.
Faheem Khan
[email protected]
Airtel Phone Number - 011-40513969
Installed on - 05/09
Installed at - C-16/2, SFS Flats, Saket, New Delhi-110 017
Total Charges Paid - Rs.17434/- (For less than 7 months of usage)
0 comments