We send out card expiration notices a month or so in advance requesting an update.
We also send out the invoice before the first set of attempts and then there are 2 more attempts each day after the first attempt if declined.
If an account goes past due, we do suspend it in our system (all calls go to busy signal) but we don't immediately disconnect the number with our carriers. Typically we keep numbers with our vendors 3-4 weeks beyond the suspension so they can be reactivated (this is not guaranteed though).
I understand the point of view of people who think we should wait longer, but there's also the business case for limiting our exposure to bad debt. If we're not paid, we unfortunately can't provide the service. It's the same situation with our vendors.
When we suspend the service, people notice and take action to correct the situation or contact us to make arrangements to extend the due date. If we leave it on and send them notices, they typically ignore it until it's cut off.
Since we're holding onto numbers for a little while after suspension, it's important to do that quickly. Otherwise if we're waiting a week then suspending (which is the only time 99% of people notice) then we're holding it a few weeks, we're well beyond a month of paying to maintain that phone number, E911, etc and in 2 or more billing cycles with all our vendors (cannot get prorated refunds). At least by suspending as soon as it goes past due, waiting a few weeks will typically keep us in one billing cycle with vendors and not two.
While I agree an immediate full disconnection would not be best, I think it's reasonable to suspend service and then hold the number for a few weeks before we permanently disconnect it. I don't think it would be reasonable for us to be expected to continue service as usual if we're not being paid for it though.
Our process allows us to limit our exposure, get people's attention quickly and give people ample time to resolve billing issues before their number is lost.
Bookmarks