I absolutely understand your reasoning. And it's also more business for you if
the customer goes over $0. It's like asking Bell Canada to not provide long
distance service by default. It would be depriving them of their good chunk of
revenue source and it's un-fair. But maybe an option to TRUE pre-paid vs
pre-paid/post-paid should be given to all customers at sign-up or portal level.
I also understand that from a billing point of view this is a lot of work but
it may clear the air for your customers who expect to receive some leniency if
a bill is not paid within few hours on a pre-paid/post-paid account model.
Regards,
Bruce
> From: monet...@unlimitel.ca
> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2010 11:48:59 -0400
> CC: henry.cole...@voip-pbx.ca; aster...@uc.org
> To: het...@hotmail.com
> Subject: Re: [on-asterisk] RE: [biz] Unlimitel
>
> Bruce,
>
> Can you imagine how much hate mail we would receive if the system would
> suspend the service as soon as it hits $0.00 or less?
>
> Stephan.
>
> On 2010-08-04, at 11:40 AM, Bruce N wrote:
>
> >
> > I agree with Reza on this listing being the absolute right venue for
> > recommendations and *concerns*. This post is not being made to the Asterisk
> > User list but rather to the Biz list. I don't see why something like this
> > should be censored.
> >
> >
> > I understand Unlimitel's reasoning for payment on-time but I would not
> > agree with them that accounts are *pre-paid*. A true pre-paid account would
> > stop at $0 and customer is requested for more money. If a hacker is allowed
> > to rack up $200 bill or so at the expense of the customer then a customer
> > with a good payment record should be given a $50 chance as well. Or maybe
> > not :-)
> >
> > Though, I commend Unlimitel for having a system in place to catch abnormal
> > activity on the *post-paid* accounts.
> >
> >
> > -Bruce
> >
