Started out with customer pays for damaged equipment due to lightning/surges/etc. Quickly found out no one reads the contract they signed and the arguing about it wasn't worth it.
Moved on to an optional $5/month replacement fee. That worked fine for the people that were paying the $5. But still had a handful that claimed they never got the e-mail or read the contract and didn't know about it. Or they asked to be signed up months ago and we never did it.
Now that we are on fiber the lightning issues are not as bad as the wireless was. Now we just replace/fix the equipment as long as it doesn't become a regular issue. If it starts becoming a regular issue we try to figure out what the issue is and fix it.
--
Best regards,
Mark mailto:m...@mailmt.com
Myakka Technologies, Inc.
www.Myakka.com
------
Monday, June 22, 2020, 2:08:19 PM, you wrote:
| Here's an argument I made against charging for repairs: If our default position is to bill for repairs, then we have no incentive to do better work because we can get paid again every time we fix it. We might even have a perverse incentive to do worse work. -- Maybe lightning isn't our fault, but it's certainly not the customer's fault either. And as Dave Milholen points out, you can mitigate the impact. YOU can. If anything the customer has less control over that than you did. It might be the customer's fault if they hit Cat5 with a weed trimmer (and that's one I would bill for), but you could also install a U-channel or short piece of conduit to protect the cable where it's vulnerable to that. It might be the customer's fault if their dog eats the wire, but why is the wire where the dog can get to it? If really it has to be there, add a wiremold. Even when billing for that repair, I'd file away that knowledge and apply it preemptively next time. If we're charging for all of these things, then there's no reason for us to do it better. </beatDeadHorse> On 6/22/2020 1:52 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: |
From: AF <af-boun...@af.afmug.com> On Behalf Of dave
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2020 11:08 AM
To: af@af.afmug.com
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Lightning/Grid Damage to Gear
We bill for acts of God but we also see what it takes to prevent such again. From our side we will add an indoor inline sure suppressor.
9x out of 10 that is the resolve.
If it continues to be an issue we do what we can to relocate subscriber unit to get away from the A lightning zones on a building and get as close to the B Zones.
Where A is a direct for potential discharge and B is more nominal.
This with a little surge suppression goes a long ways in this business.
On 6/22/20 10:41 AM, Lewis Bergman wrote:
| We did it the same way as Jim when we were in that business. We built enough into the price to provide the service. They expect it, it is easier to just charge them for it and give them what they expect. On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 10:38 AM Jim Bouse [Brazos WiFi] <j...@brazoswifi.com> wrote:
-- Lewis Bergman 325-439-0533 Cell |
-- AF mailing list AF@af.afmug.com http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
