There's no such thing as a stupid question, but they're the easiest to answer.
JoinTour
Login
 
Tag Cloud
access audio avg avg 8 bios blue screen boot bsod computer connection cpu crash css dell desktop dma driver drivers dvd email error excel explorer firefox firefox 3 freeze gimp graphics hard drive hardware hijackthis hjt install internet internet explorer itunes keyboard laptop macro malware monitor motherboard network networking outlook outlook 2003 outlook 2007 outlook express pio problem problems router seo server slow sound sp3 spyware trojan usb video virtumonde virus vista vundo windows windows vista windows xp winxp wireless
Civilized Debate
Search
Search in:
 
Advanced Search
Tech Support Guy Forums > Community > Civilized Debate >
Whose Responsibility


HELLO AND WELCOME! Before you can post your question, you'll have to register -- it's completely free! Click here to join today! We highly recommend that you print a copy of our Guide for New Members. Enjoy!

 
Thread Tools
Omniscient's Avatar
Junior Member with 21 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
14-May-2007, 10:41 AM #1
Whose Responsibility
A client of ours is moving premises. They used a local telecoms company to deal with all telecoms requirements, including installing the phone system in the new building and dealing with BT for all line requirements. Included in the line requirements was a PSTN line to be used for ADSL, the telecoms company placed an order with BT to install the line, but never placed an order for ADSL to be activated on the line.

I handle all IT matters for the client. I realised that the DSL order had not been placed when i phoned the telecoms company to get the details of the DSL connection. Since then I've personally dealt with BT Local Business to get it sorted asap.

The problem is that the DSL line can't be activated until after the client was scheduled to move premises. The client is obviously upset by this.

My question is whose responsibility was it to order the DSL?

Was it the telecoms because they dealt with all the other telecom requirements, knew DSL was required, ordered the phone line, but not the DSL?
or
Was it mine because I deal with all the IT requirements and the DSL line is of course used for IT Matters, which are my responsibilty.

I'd be interested in your views. So far the client holds the telecoms company responsible, so did I initially.
But now I'm not so sure... I should have been aware that the DSL line might be considered IT related instead of Telecoms related, I should have realised that the DSL directly affects my job and therefore falls under my responsibilty.

What do others think?
Paquadez's Avatar
Distinguished Member with 5,183 posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: London UK
14-May-2007, 12:30 PM #2
Should be covered in your company's SLA (Service Level Agreement).

If not, it ought to be!

Additionally, the client should have made absolutely sure who was ordering and provisioning and specifying what and who was paying for it!

With the level of poor performance, broken promises and kiddies driving call centre response lines, any telcom or datacom service in the UK at present is liable to go wrong; as an ordering and delivery process and as a service, per se.

Whwn I am ordering anything, hard goods or services, I make absolutely sure I know who is liable: and it aint me!

Paq
__________________
Retreated To Relative Sanity!


Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

You Are Using:
Server ID
Advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:05 PM.
Copyright © 1996 - 2008 TechGuy, Inc. All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin, Copyright © 2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.1.0
Powered by Cermak Technologies, Inc.