K
klarionthewitchboy
Guest Shopper
Ah now this is where things differ from realtime. I'm not defending QVC here just speaking from experience from the back end .
Given that the problems lie in easypay not one-off's the chances are that the payments are processed in a batch. That may or may not be in QVC's control and depending on the time of the batch run, that may not show up for several hours. For example if the payment is done at 10pm then the problem will probably be noticed the next day when either the customer complains or when the staff get the reports the next morning. You know the ones where your card isn't valid etc.
Now, given that a fault has been recorded let's say a group of people are fixing the underlying issue and ready for the next batch run the following evening. The fix fails and another fix is attempted till, which it seems is 3 times before its called to a halt. Then because of SLA's the refund process isn't immediate and may be caused by the credit card company or other factors in returning what seems to them legitimate requests. I'll add at this point that because there is a working process in place to refund, someone may have made the decision to continue the run as the risk unfortunately isn't theirs at this point in time. Conversely, the problem may be with the processor and QVC is taking the flack.
As for stopping the system, I'd disagree. It may be the case that the actual fault is a dodgy character somewhere that the parsing system doesn't know how to cope with. And yes, I do fault finding with data issues like this and believe me, a space or a full stop can break the system because somewhere along the line it hasn't been dealt with properly and sometimes, its just a one-off. Not eliminating human, computer issues/IT infrastructure either. On occasion, it can take days to find the source which can be caused by a small change on the system. I digress slightly but we wouldn't make a UK wide announcement saying we've got a failure and stop everything till we fix it as the affected user base is known. If we did that we'd destroy our reputation let alone the client who has to deal with impact!
I understand what you're saying, but I really do think that QVC could have contacted the poor customers who have forcibly overpaid.
I understand what you're saying about QVC not wanting to scare people away, but regardless of whose the fault is for the "glitch" happening, it's QVC's responsibility to deal with the fallout and to minimise any problems for its customer base.
Yet it has failed to do just that. If anything, it has continued to push easy pays as a way of spreading cost as a "hassle free" alternative to purchasing a product in full.
How is taking payments multiple times "hassle free"? And how is not proactively contacting customers that have been affected good customer service?