Actual Client Issues/Resolutions
Client A - Saw Vietnam calls on their bills & thought their PBX was hacked (i.e. fraud calls).
Findings – The client's PBX was secure. Although these were not calls placed by the client, they were not fraudulent calls. We were able to correct the issue in a few minutes.
Client B – Was getting complaints that incoming callers were getting busy signals. The client was planning to add 24 new DID circuits.
Findings – We found that the client had 200% more DID circuits than they needed! Additional DID circuits were a waste of money. After some further investigation, we addressed the issue. The client then reduced the # of DID ’s and saved over $5,000/year. The key clue to identifying the problem was understanding the exact time of day of the complaints.
Client C – Saw their 800 expenses go up, not down after the phone bill audit.
Findings – This client was upset because our recommendations were to save $30,000/year in 800 expenses. Instead, their 800 expenses increased by $50,000/year. Our investigation found that the client indeed saved $30,000+/year from our recommendations. However, a new, unbudgeted application introduced by another organization increased the 800 cost by $80,000/year. We identified and provided the client a PowerPoint graph showing what was occurring.
Client D – The Corporate IT group had minimal exposure to their branch offices' telecom expenses. They were concerned with the both expenses and control.
Findings – We found numerous issues, including the offices not following HQ contracted vendors for long distance, calling cards, conference calling, etc. Substantial savings were achieved by working with the branch offices to use company standards. In addition, the HQ group received graphic diagrams showing the circuits (# of circuits, types of circuits, ANI's, account numbers, etc).
Client E – was paying for a special “Leaky PBX” charge on their bill.
Findings – a data entry error by the carrier caused this client to be incorrectly charged $600 a month for a FCC requirement that did not apply to their situation. However, since it was a federal charge, it appears to be legitimate.
Client F – thought a branch office bill was high for the size of the office and # of people.
Findings – Our audit found that this client was billed at the carrier's "Casual rates" (which can be 10x more expensive).
Client H - was using CLEC (Competitive Local Exchange Carriers) and local telco.
Findings - We found that the conversion process from the local telephone company to the CLEC was poorly handled. The client was paying for services that should have been disconnected.
Yonemoto & Associates
Specialists in helping you control your telecommunications expenses
Copyright © 2012, Yonemoto & Associates, Inc.