HOW SQUARE ENIX TRULY TREATED ABYSMALLY

[Edax]

that got me heated -snip-
just allow me to vent and do your job -snip-
I am refuse to back down

Having worked complaints for years this feels so familiar.

So your payment was disputed? Your account is your responsibility. If somebody disputes their payment through their bank then it is perfectly reasonable for a business to end your service, because you violated your agreement.
If it's not you but somebody else. Your dispute is with that person.
If it's your bank, then your dispute is with your bank and not SE. SE might have acted in accordance with the ToC's & policies.

Chances are your customer service guy realised this. They probably also realised there's nothing they can do or anybody else within SE can do. And customer service agents are expected to be able to tell customers "no" and may often have to handle complaints themselves and the answer to those complaints can simply be "no". Just because you don't accept "no" for an answer, doesn't mean your complaint wasn't dealt with.
But in some environments agents can get in trouble for needless escalations.


Which would bring me to another point, 95% of customers who threaten legal action or start quoting law or regulations and so on, don't actually know the law, they just think they do. The business they're quoting could have a really good relationship with the law and be found they're clean as a whilstle. But there's a lot of misinformation on people's consumer rights and disatisfying a customer or providing a bad service is not an illegal offence.

And finally your approach, how you've told your story and much of the information also feels familiar, where the customer presents the agent in a bad light, that they were mistreated or hard done by and then I come to listen to the call and find the customer is far from innocent and the agent has found themselves in a bad call and taken more than a customer service agent should, because it's a low paying job and they're not paid to take people's baggage. Of course not saying that 100% that is the case here, but I feel worth mentioning for any onlookers reading this thread, in most cases like this, there's another side to the story and most of the time the customer is not representing the other side well.

I accept it's possible the service was bad, I won't deny that.

Given that the OP wont even admit it was SE at fault over the payment dispute, it does seem like he knows SE isn't at fault here. And yet he decided to play the victim after he verbally abused a SE customer service representative. He admits he got heated, he demanded the right to vent, that he wouldn't back down. Then came here to indirectly insult that person to the public in all caps while playing the victim card. It paints a very depressing picture.

[Saefinn]

Given that the OP wont even admit it was SE at fault over the payment dispute, it does seem like he knows SE isn't at fault here. And yet he decided to play the victim after he verbally abused a SE customer service representative. He admits he got heated, he demanded the right to vent, that he wouldn't back down. Then came here to indirectly insult that person to the public in all caps while playing the victim card. It paints a very depressing picture.

That is the kind of thing I am used to seeing.

I recall one complaint where a woman was really pleasant and polite on the phone but simply unhappy with how the repair centre were rude to her, mistreated her and refused to repair her phone. She admitted it was little heated, but she was never rude.
Once I had the full story she was really verbally abusive, nasty to the staff, tried to get into the workshop and they removed her from the premises and they told me they don't want to deal with her all because of how awful she was.


Or the guy who had a complaint about an agent he spoke to, the guy once again was really nice speaking to me, I empathised with him, said I'd look into his complaint. He sounds like he'd been mistreated once again, bad customer service experience, not having a good time with the agent. I listened to the call, the customer was very abusive and went as far as dealing death threats. This one was passed up to the police with a copy of the call as evidence.


Or the guy who spoke to me before I worked complaints, dished out death threats to me and the engineer. I cancelled his engineer visit and he called up the complaints lot and was as sweet as pie trying to get his engineer visit reinstated. Again, hard done by with the big bad customer service agent. The person handling the complaint listened to the call and was like "is this really the same guy?" And this was also passed up to the police with a copy of the call as evidence.

These are more extreme cases of course, but most of the time I saw it, it's the customer took things further than a contact centre agent should be expected to handle and unfortunately, the narrative here smells very strongly of this. Hence my scepticism and taking the OP with a pinch of salt and why I think there's a fair chance you're not wrong.

[edit]

I'll also add, having been both the standard call centre guy and the guy who handled high level escalations, having too many needless escalations also impacted my ability to do my job, when it's that agent's job to deal with you. And when as a less experienced agent struggling with exacerbated customers my instinct was to escalate only to be told "no" because it's something I should be able to handle. When people are exacerbated or are being confrontational, it can be harder to hold composure or do customer service face/voice, this is something you learn to do with experience. Which is where you can find people lose their professionalism, but then said people shouldn't have to deal with that.

[DominusMaiku]

What makes you think they have to put you trough to a different department? I'd hung up on you if you come up with that. As you work in a callcenter - as you claim - you should know that you are a buffer there. Because literally everyone want to be talking to "the higher ups" instead of the "lower callcenter agents", right? Your job would be obsolete if you have the chief programmer, attorneys, chief community manager, chief game masters etc. directly on the phones.


As "law" is your field - as you claim - you should know that a phone call is useless except you record it - illegally - and try to use it as evidence. There is a thing called, uh... what was it? It is made of wood fibres...which can suck up ink...ah, paper! A letter. And/or use your local court system of whatever kind.


But you are there to cause mad beef to a fellow customer callcenter agent and that does not sound like you are experienced in that field at all.


Sincerely,

I will say one thing just for you own personal knowledge: You may actually record a conversation over the phone if you make all parties aware that you they are on speaker and the conversation taking place is being recorded. Hence, why call centers say It initially "This call may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes".

[DominusMaiku]

That is the kind of thing I am used to seeing.

I recall one complaint where a woman was really pleasant and polite on the phone but simply unhappy with how the repair centre were rude to her, mistreated her and refused to repair her phone. She admitted it was little heated, but she was never rude.
Once I had the full story she was really verbally abusive, nasty to the staff, tried to get into the workshop and they removed her from the premises and they told me they don't want to deal with her all because of how awful she was.


Or the guy who had a complaint about an agent he spoke to, the guy once again was really nice speaking to me, I empathised with him, said I'd look into his complaint. He sounds like he'd been mistreated once again, bad customer service experience, not having a good time with the agent. I listened to the call, the customer was very abusive and went as far as dealing death threats. This one was passed up to the police with a copy of the call as evidence.


Or the guy who spoke to me before I worked complaints, dished out death threats to me and the engineer. I cancelled his engineer visit and he called up the complaints lot and was as sweet as pie trying to get his engineer visit reinstated. Again, hard done by with the big bad customer service agent. The person handling the complaint listened to the call and was like "is this really the same guy?" And this was also passed up to the police with a copy of the call as evidence.

These are more extreme cases of course, but most of the time I saw it, it's the customer took things further than a contact centre agent should be expected to handle and unfortunately, the narrative here smells very strongly of this. Hence my scepticism and taking the OP with a pinch of salt and why I think there's a fair chance you're not wrong.

[edit]

I'll also add, having been both the standard call centre guy and the guy who handled high level escalations, having too many needless escalations also impacted my ability to do my job, when it's that agent's job to deal with you. And when as a less experienced agent struggling with exacerbated customers my instinct was to escalate only to be told "no" because it's something I should be able to handle. When people are exacerbated or are being confrontational, it can be harder to hold composure or do customer service face/voice, this is something you learn to do with experience. Which is where you can find people lose their professionalism, but then said people shouldn't have to deal with that.

I completely understand how you're telling your personal experiences and trying to make conclusions of my own but needless to say: If you don't were not there nor are offering any insight into my post other than "recalling on your experience" and your own concluded "facts", really you're just trying to instigate recognition so If it makes you feel better, I read your post and even replied to it.

(Sorry initially I did not see your edits)

Yes - he maybe lacked experience and I could tell after I asked "Do you record your calls?" and he said he did not know. However, that's why I PROMISE I nicely said "Go ahead, put me on hold, I don't mind waiting but please get someone who could answer my questions - I understand it's impossible for you to have all the answers". I truly tried to stay calm as possible given his continuous rejection to get me to someone with better knowledge to my questions. You have to remember as you worked in a call center and escalation, a member who stutters a lot and said "I don't know" will definitely make things worse and why they are taught placing people on hold it's a better choice. He fail to do all of the steps and instead continued to offer his opinion in rejecting me any other transfer.

[DominusMaiku]

This big issue here may have been you asking for legal information to a front line support rep. In our offices if a customer states' I'm am taking steps to take legal action against you' then our agents will tell them that they can have their lawyer contact ours in writing, but we won't (and honestly can't) transfer to our Legal Department. Depending on the situation we would be bound to not provide any additional support unless it's cleared by the legal team first. If there's ever any situation with any sort of account payment, but best first step would be to get the information from your bank and see about contacting an accounting department who can get holds or freezes removed.

Companies are able to refuse service if they have reason to do so. If there's a miscommunication or an issue between a customer's bank and our company we can get it sorted, but companies can absolutely (and legally) cut someone off from accounts if they have justification. I say this as someone who's seen our legal council do it before.

Yeah, no bro I didn't tell him I was seeking legal action lol - I know you get more bees with honey than vinegar so I just mentioned I had concerns I would like to give their higher ups - once he kept refusing to transfer I asked for their legal departments information so that I could bring to their attention this person who is breaking several regulations that could get them in some serious stuff.

And like you said, they could cut you off "if they have justification" which also needs to be followed with proper protocols to unsure the justification was not a misunderstand or could have been something that could have been helped with a simple warning/notice. Otherwise, company will simply be cutting people off left and right and "justification" is a word with too much gray area which is why there are laws to protect both parties.

[Saefinn]

I will say one thing just for you own personal knowledge: You may actually record a conversation over the phone if you make all parties aware that you they are on speaker and the conversation taking place is being recorded. Hence, why call centers say It initially "This call may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes".

Not only that, but they have to be told at the start of the call so they can give their consent because it gives them an opportunity to disconnect the call if they don't. People tend to mention it when they think it'll win them any favours. If they've not been given an opportunity to give their consent, then it is also illegal.

However, the call centre I worked at recorded the calls, so if there's any legal problems or anything litigious, those calls can be acquired. So really, there was never any need for a customer to record a call.

If a customer turned around and said they are recording the call I'd tell them I've not given them my consent, inform them I'm terminating the call and then terminate the call. And I have done exactly that. They don't just get used by customers to protect themselves from whatever they think they need to protect themselves from.

[DominusMaiku]

Not only that, but they have to be told at the start of the call so they can give their consent because it gives them an opportunity to disconnect the call if they don't. People tend to mention it when they think it'll win them any favours. If they've not been given an opportunity to give their consent, then it is also illegal.

However, the call centre I worked at recorded the calls, so if there's any legal problems or anything litigious, those calls can be acquired. So really, there was never any need for a customer to record a call.

If a customer turned around and said they are recording the call I'd tell them I've not given them my consent, inform them I'm terminating the call and then terminate the call. And I have done exactly that. They don't just get used by customers to protect themselves from whatever they think they need to protect themselves from.

I agree with this 100%! - however I will add: If someone tells you they are recording you and you continue to have a conversation, because you didn't say "No" (like in a sexual harassment case) would lead in most cases that you did indeed approve. MOST cases, not all. Usually it would be up to the Judge/Court to decide based on the circumstances of the conversation/environment/and defenses a the other side can come up with. THERE ARE SO MANY OUTCOMES POSSIBLE LOL

[Saefinn]

I completely understand how you're telling your personal experiences and trying to make conclusions of my own but needless to say: If you don't were not there nor are offering any insight into my post other than "recalling on your experience" and your own concluded "facts", really you're just trying to instigate recognition so If it makes you feel better, I read your post and even replied to it.

I saw enraged customer thread, saw many parallels, thought it very one-sided. Knowing exactly how these things pan out and thought it fair to throw my own scepticism of how the story was told and my reasons why, backed up with experience and with some anecdotes to illustrate. You aired your grievances publically, so I figured I'd contribute my scepticism here upon reading it. If my scepticism is right, then I think serves to show why you had such a poor experience, and maybe something to reflect upon.

If dismissed by yourself then it serves a purpose for anybody reading this thread to take your OP with a pinch of salt to see "maybe there's more to this tale". After your dismissive comment, then I expect it is this purpose it'd end up serving.

If my scepticism is ill-placed (which is why I've not made any straight-up accusations), then it is still worth people seeing these kind of threads and being able to look at them with a critical eye, because rarely do we ever see what really happened and only have the one account, yet certain people will still take it for granted, because people lack experience from the other side and the other side isn't here to defend themselves or give their version of events. Instead, they're made to look bad in front of everybody.

[Gwenorai]

You have the right to customer service, you don't have the right to treat them like emotional punching bags or throw thinly veiled threats at them. We all know what someone is doing when they a) ask for a higher-up b) looking for the department that deals complaints/law/etc - that's why we do it, it's a threat of intervention that can get them into trouble. I bet my bottom £ that's why you're here as well.

some good old r/quityourb*llshit

[AlphaFox]

I will admit it is a shame and I can't really say for what reason your payment would be disputed if you had been doing it for awhile. However I would certainly try contacting again as you are allowed the right to talk to someone. If the conversation went as you said, that rep would be in deep trouble by Quality Assurance, this coming from someone who worked a similar position for 4 years.