Job hunting is a thankless task. For every hundred jobs you apply for (and, if you are claiming benefits, you have to apply for anything 'they' deem appropriate - even if they don't actually understand what an Instructional Designer is or does or, that their system doesn't, actually, have a category for e-learning.

Personally, I feel that only applying for jobs that you stand a chance of getting is the most sensible approach. If I don't think I can do a job or, that I am not qualified to do it, what is the point of applying? Every job I have ever taken has been pretty easy to land. Let me explain.

I know when I apply, if I am suitable. If, after reading my CV, they want to see me, the chances are that, I will get the job. I'm not being big-headed, that's just the way it has gone. They want to see me because of what is in my CV.

So, looking for a job, the other day, I came across one that I thought: Oh, that sounds right up my street. And, it was. Head of Training for a company in Warrington. Fantastic. Pretty good salary too, about £70K. It would do me. Then, of course, I saw who it was for...

Given my relationship with Talk Talk, an application was never going to succeed. All they had to do was run my name through their computer system and all manner of shit and corruption would be going down. My last communication with them ended with: 'I'll see you in court.'

So, I thought that I would take a different route. Part of being successful with job applications is being noticed, usually, in a good way. You can say good things about me, you can say bad things about me, but, please, just say something about me, is my modus vivendi. So, I decided to go for an unusual approach. The sensible approach hasn't worked in the last couple of years! Below is the text of my covering letter...

Please find attached, my CV, in respect of this vacancy.

Why have I applied? Well, besides the fact that I am qualified, I was, for a short time, a customer of Talk Talk.

You need my experience and knowledge because your company is a nightmare to do business with. Your customer satisfaction rating is the worst of any telecoms company and your employees are poorly trained and do a bad job. Most of your call centre staff are woefully incompetent or, badly trained.

In short, your company is a shambles and your Training Manager should not be taken back after her maternity leave finishes.

You need me because I have suffered at the hands of your corporate incompetence and I know what the problems are. Moreover, with 25 years of experience, I know how to implement a solution.

However, I doubt that you will give me the time of day. Talk Talk thinks it is fantastic and can only be taken down by Kryptonite so, you will view this application with disdain and file it in the round cabinet. Nevertheless, I shall post this on my website, just because I can, and we shall see if you actually have any moral fibre in the company. Someone who genuinely wants Talk Talk to be a good company would, at least, phone me.

I look forward to hearing from you, at your earliest convenience.

Yours sincerely,

Mark L. Potts

I'll let you know if I hear anything. I dare Talk Talk to invite me for an interview!

Here is the latest from BT, followed by my response... Make of it what you will.

csdirectorsteam@bt.com 5 Dec (2 days ago)
to me Dear Mr Potts

Thank you very much for your email and your feedback. I’m disappointed that you’re still unhappy with my suggestion on how to resolve this for you and I find it upsetting that you feel we have tried to bully or intimidate you. That is in no way my intention nor indeed Warren’s.

The broadband cease charge is an industry standard charge passed by the regulators and is a published price within our terms and conditions. You can see more detail at www.bt.com/terms

I fully understand that the implications of the new broadband discount may not have been clearly explained or outlined to Mr Potts and it was on that basis that I agreed to waive any cancellation charge. I recognise and really appreciate Mr Potts’ loyalty to us and we’d never intentionally upset him or do anything to jeopardise that.

If there’s something else you’d like me to do to resolve this for you, please let me know and I’ll be happy to consider it for you.

I’ve placed the order to cancel the broadband as detailed in my email yesterday; with effect from 4 January. After that, any  broadband rental charged in advance will be refunded on the next bill.

You mentioned that you may refer the complaint to the Ombudsman, which of course is your right. Here’s the details you need to do that

Taking your complaint further 

If you’d like to, you have the right to take your complaint outside BT. We’re a member of Ombudsman Services: Communications, who offer free, independent help to sort out disputes. 

You can find out more at: www.os-communications.org or you can call them on either 0330 440 1614 or 01925 430049. You need to do it within six months of the date on this letter. They’ll tell you whether or not they can help, and if not they’ll tell you about any other options you’ve got.

I’m sorry we couldn’t agree on things and I wish you all the best with whatever you decide to do next

Best wishes

Sarah

Sarah McCormick
Executive Level Complaints
Direct line: 01977 596877
Email address: csdirectorsteam@bt.com 
Office hours I’m usually in the office between 8am and 4pm or 10am and 6pm

This email contains BT information, which may be privileged or confidential.
It's meant only for the individual(s) or entity named above. If you're not the intended recipient, note that disclosing, copying, distributing or using this information is prohibited. If you've received this email in error, please let me know immediately on the email address above. Thank you.
We monitor our email system, and may record your emails.

British Telecommunications plc
Registered office: 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ
Registered in England no: 1800000

Think before you print. Please consider the environment before printing this email

Hmmm. Now, I pulled this little snippet out of her email.

I don't think that all these modern terms and conditions are legally enforcible, you see. They are presented as a fait accompli. No choice is offered; I can agree or, not. That is not a reasonable choice.

The significant word here is 'reasonable'. Can you find the part of the BT T&Cs that tells me about the Industry Standard disconnection charge? I had a look and, whilst I don't doubt that it is in there somewhere, I don't think it is reasonable for BT to expect anyone to read them. They are deliberately complex, long-winded, and quite unreadable for even someone used to this legalese. That's a rant for another day.

www.bt.com/terms

One last thing. the link I was given didn't actually take me to the part of the T&Cs that mentioned the charge. I doubt that even BT employees could find it with ease. Oh, in case you were wondering, the T&Cs in JUST the Home section is a little over 5,000 words...

Mark L. Potts <marklpotts@gmail.com> 16:24 (2 minutes ago)
to csdirectorsteam

Dear Ms McCormick,

Firstly, I do appreciate that you have done your best to deal with the situation and I thank you for that. I am not suggesting that you have done anything but your best. However, I am sad and upset that it had to come to that. I never back away from a fight but, in this instance, I did not expect one. I have wasted almost an entire day of my time arguing about something that should have taken ten minutes and no stress.

I still think your CEO is an arrogant individual who could do with some training in how to deal with customers. He does not put a very approachable face on BT. When his email address is so easily available on the internet, he should have been more circumspect; had no idea who I was and he seriously underestimated me. I do not think that is a particularly impressive quality in a 21st century CEO.

What else could you do?

My time, advice, and experience is not free, Ms McCormick.

As a training consultant and developer of e-Learning over the last 25 years (yes, including BT, Ms McCormick) I would advise that you seriously look at your best practice procedures, at all levels of staff. I know that in your industry, particularly at call centre level, your staff turnover is high and your operatives work from scripts so, they are restricted in what they can do. However, given that your people contacted my father AFTER being informed that they should NOT, you need to look at how that could have happened. I could have made a lot more of this than I chose to. If I was Warren, I'd be offering me a job because I have skills that BT is, obviously, currently lacking.

I will still refer my concerns over the Industry Standard charge to Ofcom and, if necessary, The Ombudsman.

Yours,

Mark L. Potts

It would appear that Mr Buckley needs to have the last word.

warren.buckley@bt.com 11:28 (9 minutes ago)

to me Mr Potts

That is of course your choice.

Regards


Warren

We'll see about that...

Mr Buckley,

I know.

Good luck.

Mark L. Potts

Apparently, according to Warren Buckley (or his secretary) it costs £30 to stop supplying Broadband to a customer. We'll see...

warren.buckley@bt.com 10:33 (28 minutes ago)
to me Mr Potts

The £30 has nothing to do with a contract and I have waived any charges related to that as you requested.

The £30 is always charged if broadband is disconnected without is being transferred and reflects the work that has to be done to terminate the equipment.

It remains chargeable

Warren
Warren Buckley
Managing Director, Customer Service and Operations
BT Retail
 
Secretary – Norah Hayes
norah.hayes@bt.com
+44 20 7356 5431

My response:

Mr Buckley,

Unacceptable.

I shall take the matter further.

Yours,

Mark L. Potts

warren.buckley@bt.com 17:04 (16 hours ago)
to elc, me Mr Potts

Thanks for your email.

There will be a standard industry wide £30 disconnection fee but I will ask my team to waive any further charges

Regards

Warren

My response, this morning is:

Mr Buckley,

No, that is not acceptable.

£30 to stop supplying a service?

Your employees contacted my father and got him to agree to something that he didn't understand, after specifically being informed that he didn't understand these matters, 7 days earlier, in writing.

Try again. You might be the CEO of BT but that does not give you the right to rip of senior citizens and you do not intimidate me.

This morning, I contacted BT, to cancel my Dad's broadband...

On May 4th 2009, I set up a broadband and phone account for him, so that he could stay in touch with me (when I was living in Munich) and his family around the UK.

Back then, his laptop was fairly new and his eyesight was much better. As of 2012, his laptop is dead and he doesn't want another one; it is too much for him to deal with. He will be 80 next year.

Long story short: after waiting over 20 minutes on the BT website for online chat with a BT drone, 'Stevie' finally came online. It turns out that they are wanting to charge him £75.77 for REMOVING the broadband from his account, leaving only the telephone.

Sounds simple.

No. This is BT.

Apparently, in June 2012 he agreed to a new contract which runs until June 2013.

News to me.

Thing is, all he remembers is complaining to me that they were trying to increase his direct debit from £30 a month, to £70 a month. He remembers nothing about agreeing to a new contract.

What is more, we contacted BT over that matter. I have included the content of the letter dated 13th June 2012. It is pretty self-explanatory.

Derek Potts
[Address Removed]

Wed 13th June 2012

BT Correspondence Centre
Providence Row
Durham
DH98 1BT

Re : Account - LC XXXX XXXX

Dear sir,

Since I signed up with BT, I have been neither happy nor, especially unhappy with your service. It has been adequate, no more, for a rather expensive monthly amount.

I signed up to pay around a third of that amount per month, by direct debit, how can I possibly be in arrears by the amount you state? If I am then, it is your fault, not mine!

Now, you send me a bill, telling me that you are now going to increase my MONTHLY DIRECT DEBIT TO 70.50 PER MONTH? I don't think so. I am 79 years old and I do not need to spend that much money on a service I barely use. Even you can't argue that this is a ridiculously excessive amount and if you insist that this is correct, you will be losing my custom.

As I don't really understand the bill, my son, Mark L. Potts will deal with you on my behalf. To confirm this you may contact him as below:

[details removed]

You may phone me to obtain confirmation but I DO NOT want to discuss this with you. Contact my son and he will give you the account password and he has full authority to deal with you on my behalf, indeed, if he wishes to cancel the account, he has my agreement to do so.

You have until the close of business on 22/6/2012 to respond to my son, otherwise the account will be cancelled as of 30th June 2012.

Yours,

Derek Potts

He remembers them phoning HIM and agreeing to leave his bill as it was. Did I mention that he is 79 years old?

Even though the letter of 13th June is quite specific, I wasn't contacted by them, at all. However, at the time, I did not take the matter further, as it was settled, in his favour.

They are going to dig out that phone call and listen to it. I have requested a copy of it. I should like to hear how they got a 79 year old, who had written and told them:

'You may phone me to obtain confirmation but I DO NOT want to discuss this with you. Contact my son and he will give you the account password and he has full authority to deal with you on my behalf, indeed, if he wishes to cancel the account, he has my agreement to do so.'

I think I am justified in being angry with BT.

Their move.

Mark  L. Potts
The God of Thunder

3rd December 2012

I must confess that I have always objected to the TV Licence fee. Not because I believed that it was being spent on activities I would not approve of but, purely because it is clearly unfair to favour one broadcaster over others. When there was only one channel, that was fine, even when there was only one commercial competitor, that was one thing but, now, the BBC needs to enter the real world. The population needs to stop paying for what should be provided through fair competition. Most of the BBC's modern, quality output isn't even made by the BBC, it is bought in from overseas and production companies. Don't even get me started on the outrageous cost. £145 per year? You kidding me?

But, that's cheaper than Sky.

So? I choose NOT to pay Rupert the Tumour. I can always read a book. I do not want or need 24/7 game shows, celebrity this and that, soap operas up the wazoo, and crap so bad that even American's don't watch it. In fact, the only thing I EVER watched live on the BBC was F1!

I said I wouldn't get into the BBC selling off the rights to F1... About leaving the license fee payers with a second rate commentary team and coverage so poor that half of the races I haven't bothered to watch because, by the time the BBC showed them, Facebook, Twitter and, even their own news programme had given the result away BEFORE highlights were shown on BBC. 

So, Forbrydelsen, Broen, Borgen, Den Som Draeber, Inspector Montalbano, Lilyhammer, to name a few, I do not need the BBC for. If they had not appeared on BBC, I would still have watched them. Why should I pay the BBC for programmes I can see elsewhere in the world? There are lots of programmes that the BBC has not made. Do I need a TV license to watch Matador? Old silent italian films? German TV broadcasts from live rock concerts in Essen in 1982?

What am I actually paying the BBC for? Let them finance their own business, like everyone else. I'm sure that the BBC's higher echelons are replete with crooked bankers who can do a dodgy Venture Capital deal.

But, it's not just about the morality of the people paying for something, in which they have no say nor, control. It is about how the BBC has been spending our hard earned £££s. When the Savile fiasco blew up, it became clear that the BBC had, knowingly, allowed Savile and his 'friends' to carry out their behaviours on BBC premises. Far from being the guardians of our morality, the BBC was riddled with all manner of evil and, they actually protected him. You, me, your parents, and your children, WE, the Great British public have been paying for it. I never signed up for that and I don't think you did, either.

So, I decide to look at the wording of the TV License. This is what it says:

Your TV Licence allows television receiving equipment to be installed and used at the premises specified in our terms and conditions.

OK. I'm following it, so far.

Your TV Licence allows television receivers to be installed and used at the premises specified on the licence, and at the other places detailed on the licence, subject to the terms and conditions stated below.

Right. Got it. I can watch TV, on a TV (other means of watching televisual entertainment are available) at the place I say I live, provided that...

Definitions
You means the person named on the licence.

TV equipment means television receiving equipment, such as a TV set, computer, mobile phone, games console, digital box or VHS/DVD recorder.

...I am me and that I have a TV (or whatever).

OK. So far so good... That's all pretty tame. However, it is the next part that intrigues me...

'as they are being shown on television.'

So, let me get this straight. According to their own wording, I only need a TV license to watch live programmes...

...or ones that are receivable in the UK and recorded, as they are broadcast. Trying to cover all eventualities, eh?

Seriously? Has anyone ever challenged this point? They are saying that to watch a program that was not even made in the UK, and had nothing to do with the BBC, I have to pay the BBC for the privilege? Surely, this can only apply if the originator is registered in the UK? The BBC cannot possibly claim any jurisdiction over anything that happens to be picked up in the UK, that comes from outside the UK, from a broadcast that is 'alien' in origin. NO, I'd challenge that one, for a start.

So, if I don't watch Live TV, do not record the broadcast, I do not need a license. It says so in their own wording. Proving it is another matter. Who is the burden of proof on? Me to prove I don't watch Live TV or them to prove I do?

What does your licence allow?

I'll save you some effort. This next bit is all about how they have changed the wording of the license, over the years, to try and cover every base and, so that the TV license covers a location, but only by person, not the location. Oh. Bad people trying to steal radio waves!

It's like car insurance. In Germany, for example, your vehicle is insured, not the specific driver. In the UK, the car is covered only for specific drivers. It's a scam, designed to rip us all off. Pure greed. Think about it. The car will cost the same to fix or replace, irrespective of who was driving it... TV License... one house, a number of flats. Each flat needs its own TV License. Greedy Auntie Beeb! Got to pay for the debauched lifestyles of its employees somehow, eh? Should change the name to DBC: Dorian Gray Broadcasting Corporation

Shameful. But, then again, we're British and don't like to make a fuss. Hell, I want to make a fuss. The TV Licence is unfair and ridiculously outdated and Car Insurance is, presumably, only allowed to rip us off because the government makes a shedload of cash out of it. Why is it in the British nature to give in, so easily, to being fleeced by the rest of the world? Rant for another day, methinks?

The licence allows installation and use of TV equipment:

• At the licensed place by anyone.
• In a vehicle, boat or caravan by:
  • You and anyone who normally lives with You at the licensed place (so long as TV equipment is not being used in a non-touring caravan and at the licensed place at the same time).
  • anyone, who normally works at the licensed place (so long as the vehicle, boat or caravan is being used for a business purpose).
  Use of TV equipment powered by internal batteries anywhere:
  
  
  • By You and anyone who normally lives with You at the licensed place.

What does your licence not cover?

• Any parts of your premises with separate legal arrangements e.g. occupied by tenants or lodgers.
• Self contained or physically separate units on the premises.
• Any parts of your premises with separate administrative arrangements e.g. paying guests.

Haha! I particularly enjoy this bit...

Black and white licences:

• If you use TV equipment to record television programmes, you need a colour licence even if you only have a black and white television as TV equipment records TV in colour. A black and white licence is valid only if the digital box is not designed to record television programmes.

If all I've got is a B&W TV, chances are I don't have the means of recording it in colour, or otherwise.

And then, covering off every thing that their evil little minds can invent...

Further conditions of your licence

• The licence fee must be paid when due.
• You may transfer the licence to a different address if the change of address is permanent.
• A licence may be cancelled or revoked or its conditions modified by a notice sent to You or by a general notice which will be published on the BBC's website and, if deemed appropriate by the BBC, in other national communications.
• Our officers may visit the licensed place to verify our records and inspect the TV equipment at any time, but you do not have to let them in.
• You must not cause undue interference to any other radio or television reception with your TV equipment.
• Your licence is issued on behalf of the BBC by TV Licensing.

For further information on whether you require a TV Licence contact www.tvlicensing.co.uk.

Please note that separate terms and conditions apply to the following types of TV Licence: hotel and mobile units TV Licence, ARC concessionary TV Licence and entertainment units TV Licence. If you have one of these, please refer to your licence for specific terms and conditions or contact us for information.

All of the above is mostly crappy bollocks, apart from this bit, which amuses me greatly:

Haha! If they come to check my equipment, they will get so much more than they bargained for.

The last bit is the break down of how the money is spent...

'...as it is broadcast...' See, that's the part that I like, a lot.

Oh, well, that's all right then. We know that the government is filled with corrupt expenses fiddlers, and who knows what else they and the BBC are colluding to fiddle with?

That's my look at the TV Licence fee T&Cs. It is antiquated and extraordinairly expensive. I know of no other country that imposes such a draconian entertainment tax on its population. Yes, other countries do require a fee, Germany, for example, but it is easy to not pay and, it is a fraction of the cost. Even ffrance, yes, the cheese-eating surrender monkeys, are the next most expensive, and that is still only two thirds of the UK cost.

We laugh now at the Beard Tax, Window Tax or, other antiquated forms of screwing money out of those with the least. But, consider that in a few hundred years, future generations will look back to their history - our NOW - and say:

Why did these people pay so much for everything? Why did they permit their elected leaders to treat them like that? Why were they so greedy and stupid? The planet has everything we need, as long as we are not selfish, greedy, and stupid.

Mark L. Potts
The God of Thunder

23rd November 2012

In response to my recent email to TV Licensing about what percentage of the license fee went on programming and how much on supporting undesirables like Savile, I received the following from Customer Relations:

(Formatting as in the original email)

TV LICENSING
BRISTOL
BS98 1TL

Tel:      0300 790 6087
Fax:      0300 790 6012
Email:    enquiries@tvlicensing.co.uk
Our Ref: XXXXXXXXX

21 November 2012

Dear Mr Potts

Thank you for your email of 14 November, which has been recorded under your complaint reference 551564. Please use this number if you wish to contact us again.

I must remind you that whatever your personal view may be, it's still against the law to watch broadcast television programme services without a TV Licence.

We visit all unlicensed addresses in the UK and anyone found to need a licence, could be prosecuted and fined up to £1000.

Last year, each household's colour licence cost about £12.13 per month. On average, this is how the BBC spent the money in 2010/11 (source - TV Licensing annual review 2011 which can be found on the TV licensing website):

TV                       - £8.01
Radio                    - £2.16
Online                   - £0.66
Other                    - £0.61
Collection                       - £0.42
Digital ? Marketing / help scheme - £0.27
Total                    - £12.13

I hope I've been able to explain the situation and thank you for taking the time to contact us.

Yours sincerely

Scott Martin
Customer Relations

Anyone think that Mr Martin's response impresses me?

Naturally, I have replied... More later.

Feeling a bit miffed. BMW are running a competition to win an adventure ride of a lifetime on their new 1200... However, the competition is only open to experienced enduro riders who already own bikes and have had bike-riding adventures before. I am discriminated against before I can apply and I feel very offended. I have never been marginalised before.

Whilst I accept that these prizes require skill, given some training, an inexperienced rider could complete the adventure. I have read enough books written by people with NO EXPERIENCE AT ALL to know this to be FACT. Two words: Ted Simon. Before he went on the trip that started this resurgence of interest in adventure riding, he had no experience, no bike, no licence, and didn't even like motor bikes!

From my POV, it would make a great story for BMW to take someone like me, who has no bike, no license, little recent experience, but who loves motorcycles, take me to Wales, give me some training on the bike and then use it as a PR exercise as I blogged and photographed my way through the adventure. Everybody wins, I get a bike and a new career.

Come on BMW, I've been to BMW Welt. I lived in Munich. I speak German. I know that you could afford it and the cost would be repaid many times in the publicity of the stunt! It would make a good documentary for TV too. Everyone loves an underdog with no chance, having a go at something that is totally out of their league. But, I'm no PR guru. What do I know?

...but not a good year for much else!

Talk Talk failed me with Internet. They lied about their Unlimited broadband (which is subject to 'Traffic Shaping') and tried to rip me off with DDs for more than expected then, the final straw, they tried to charge me an admin charge for a rejected DD that I told them had been cancelled. Well, screw you Talk Talk. Take me to court and we'll argue the meaning of the word 'Unlimited'. I'll bet I'm right!

O2, well, the broadband connection is very good. I will not deny that. However, some of their call centre people are wankers. The guy I spoke to yesterday, an Aussie - sorry mate, can't remember your name - was really good and I didn't shout at him. As for Vincent: incompetent. Michael - wouldn't let me speak so, I hung up on him. John - very broad Glaswegian accent and quite difficult to follow, he REFUSED to let me speak to a supervisor to register a complaint. 'Thinking of You' their advertising proclaims. Yeah, pardon me if I think that is a big pile of shit.

What else?

I hate pretty much everyone and everything. Nothing much changed there then. I am trying to update my website, get all twittered up and do some serious blogging. Facebook is just pissing me off cos it sucks big, fat donkey balls. I tried to add a comment to a post on Sunday and it took 17 attempts before it actually posted it. Every time I write a message, a status update, a comment on a post, I Select All / Copy before I post it. Nine times out of ten it doesn't post the first time. FACEBOOK REALLY IS A BAG OF SHIT!

So, I thought I'd take my ranting elsewhere. Yeah, like I was ever gonna stop. Oh, little pigs, you should know me better than that!

Anyway, this is an interim blogette. Expect an announcement of some significance, one way or another, in the next week or two. 'Tis my birthday in a couple of weeks and as I will be 49, I can't wait for life to come to me any longer. Things haven't worked out as I had planned since I came back from Munich and I am not happy with a lot of stuff. So, things have to change. I have pinned a large map of the world on my living-room wall and well, all in good time...

If you want rants, I am on Twitter now @marklpotts I think is how it goes. Or is it https://twitter.com/marklpotts
One, the other or, both... Rants from here and Twitter should be posted on my Facebook page so, you shouldn't miss out on my opinions.

Catch you on the flipside...