INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT INDORE

Exercise (1): Letter Writting MARKETING OF SERVICES

Submitted to- Prof. Jayasimha K.R.

Submitted by-Group 15
Rahul Kumar Prasad (2012 PGP 286) Sudhanshu Ranjan (2012 PGP 377) Ashish Kumar Mallik (2012 PGP 070) Yogesh Shivdas (2012 PGP 354) Hitesh Kumar Chand (2012 PGP 137)

Page 2 of 29

INDEX
Sr. No.
1 2 3 4 5 Introduction to Sample Description of techniques used Hypothesis Tested Conclusion Letter and Replies

Topic

Page No.
3 5 6 16 20

Page 3 of 29

Introduction to sample:

Page 4 of 29

Other Industries

Page 5 of 29

Description of Technique Used:

We have used the Crosstab technique. A crosstabulation (crosstab for short) is a combination of two or more frequency tables arranged such that each cell in the resulting table represents a unique combination of specific values of the included variables. Crosstabs are a great way to familiarize yourself with the data you are working with and to get a rough idea of how the variables in your data set are related, if at all. Crosstabs are useful for exploring the data, exploring relationships in your data, and determining future analyzes. The strength of association between two variables was calculated using STATISTIC CRAMERS V. This measure of association is based on CHI-SQUARE TEST.

Cramer's V is a way of calculating correlation in tables which have more than 2x2 rows and columns. It is used as post-test to determine strengths of association after chi-square has determined significance. V is calculated by first calculating chi-square, then using the following calculation: V = SQRT (c2 / (n (k - 1)))

Page 6 of 29

where c2 is chi-square and k is the number of rows or columns in the table.

The strength of relationship between two variables in a crosstab can be expressed by the measure Cramers V.

To perform the chi-square statistic in SPSS we formulated the hypotheses and did the test. The test gives the p-value and it was checked against the significance level. We used a significance level of 5% for all the tests. The decision rule for testing statistical hypotheses: If the p-value (Asymp.Sig.)is less than the significance level, we reject the null hypotheses. p-value< Reject Null Hypotheses p-value> Fail to reject Null Hypotheses

HYPOTHESIS TESTED H1:In the population, there exists no relationship between size of the organization and receiving of
response from the organization. What is the relative size of the organization? * Did you receive the response before the deadline? Crosstabulation Results:

Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 5.972a 6.229 4.049 160 df 4 4 1 Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .201 .183 .044

Page 7 of 29

Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association

expected count is .35.

df 4 4 1

Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .201 .183 .044

5.972a 6.229 4.049

a. 4 cells (40.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum

Symmetric Measures Value Nominal by Nominal Phi Cramer's V N of Valid Cases .193 .193 160 Approx. Sig. .201 .201

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between size of the organization and receiving of response from the organization.

H2:In

the population, there exists no relationship between time taken to response from the

organization and length of association of the customer with the organization.

How long have you been a customer of the organization? * How long did the organization take to respond? Crosstabulation Results: Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases 17.539a 18.855 .021 160 df 12 12 1 Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .130 .092 .884

Page 8 of 29

Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association

1.05.

df 12 12 1

Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .130 .092 .884

17.539a 18.855 .021

a. 6 cells (30.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is

Symmetric Measures Value Nominal by Nominal Phi Cramer's V N of Valid Cases Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value> Conclusion: There exists no relationship between length of time for which a customerand time taken to receiving of response from the organization. .331 .191 160 Approx. Sig. .130 .130

H3:In the population, there exists no relationship between time taken to get a response from the
organization and howprofitable customer is to the organization. To the best of your knowledge, the organization thinks you represent which level of profitability? * How long did the organization take to respond? Crosstabulation Results: Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
.25.

df 12 12 1

Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .762 .672 .092

8.291a 9.358 2.835 160

a. 11 cells (55.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is

Symmetric Measures Value Approx. Sig.

Page 9 of 29

Nominal by Nominal

Phi Cramer's V

.228 .131 160

.762 .762

N of Valid Cases

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between time taken to receive a response from the organizationand profitability of customer

H4:In

the population, there exists no relationship between time taken to response from the

organization and significance of incidence.

Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * How long did the organization take to respond? Crosstabulation Results:

Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
.15.

df 12 12 1

Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .499 .344 .092

11.350a 13.353 2.845 160

a. 12 cells (60.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is

Symmetric Measures Value Nominal by Nominal Phi Cramer's V N of Valid Cases .266 .154 160 Approx. Sig. .499 .499

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between time taken to receive a responseand significance of incidence.

Page 10 of 29

H5:In

the population, there exists no relationship between time taken to response from the

organization and IIM Indore affiliation in the complaint/praise mail. To what extent your letter reveals your IIM Indore affiliation? * How long did the organization take to respond? Crosstabulation Results: Chi-Square Tests Value Pearson Chi-Square Likelihood Ratio Linear-by-Linear Association N of Valid Cases
.25.

df 9 9 1

Asymp. Sig. (2sided) .067 .083 .557

15.971a 15.286 .345 160

a. 8 cells (50.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is

Symmetric Measures Value Nominal by Nominal Phi Cramer's V N of Valid Cases .316 .182 160 Approx. Sig. .067 .067

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between time taken to get a response from organizationand IIM Indore affiliation in the complaint/praise mail. Similar tests were done for the following hypotheses. The findings for the same are written below the respective hypotheses.

H6: In the population, there exists no relationship between special employee indicated as author
in response mail and length of association of the customer with the organization. How long have you been a customer of the organization? * Was a specific employee indicated as the author of the response letter? Crosstabulation Results:

Page 11 of 29

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship special employee indicated as author in response mailand length of association of the customer.

H7:In the population, there exists no relationship between special employee indicated as author in
response mail and howprofitable customer is to the organization. To the best of your knowledge, the organization thinks you represent which level of profitability? * Was a specific employee indicated as the author of the response letter?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between special employee indicated as author in response mailand howprofitable customer.

H8:In the population, there exists no relationship between special employee indicated as author in
response mail and significance of incidence. Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * Was a specific employee indicated as the author of the response letter?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between special employee indicated as author in response mailand significance of incidence.

H9:In the population, there exists no relationship between addressing of problem and length of
association of the customer with the organization. How long have you been a customer of the organization? * Indicate your level of agreement with the following statement. The response I received addressed my problem specifically

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between addressing of problemand length of association of the customer

H10:In

the population, there exists no relationship between addressing of problem and

howprofitable customer is to the organization. To the best of your knowledge, the organization thinks you represent which level of profitability? * Indicate your level of agreement with the following statement. The response I received addressed my problem specifically

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship addressing of problem and howprofitable customer.

Page 12 of 29

H11:In

the population, there exists no relationship between addressing of problem and

significance of incidence. Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * Indicate your level of agreement with the following statement. The response I received addressed my problem specifically

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between addressing of problem and significance of incidence.

H12:In

the population, there exists no relationship between tone of response from the

organization and tone of complaint letter from the customer. Would you describe the tone of your COMPLAINT letter? * Which best describes the tone of the response letter

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between tone of response from the organization and tone of complaint letter from the customer.

H13:In

the population, there exists no relationship between tone of response from the

organization and tone of praise letter from the customer. Would you describe the tone of your PRAISE LETTER? * Which best describes the tone of the response letter

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between tone of response from the organization and tone of praise letter from the customer

H14:In

the population, there exists no relationship between how many times the company

responds and significance of incidence. Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * How many times did the organization contact you regarding your letter?

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value<

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between how many times the company responds and significance of incidence.The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.338

H15:In

the population, there exists no relationship between refund or discount and length of

association of the customer with the organization.

Page 13 of 29 How long have you been a customer of the organization? * Did the organization provide a refund or discount on future services as part of its response?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between refund or discount and length of association of the customer.

H16:In the population, there exists no relationship between refund or discount and howprofitable
customer is to the organization. To the best of your knowledge, the organization thinks you represent which level of profitability? * Did the organization provide a refund or discount on future services as part of its response?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between refund or discount and howprofitable customer.

H17:In the population, there exists no relationship between refund or discount and significance of
incidence. Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * Did the organization provide a refund or discount on future services as part of its response?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between refund or discount and significance of incidence.

H18:In

the population, there exists no relationship between non-monetary compensation and

length of association of the customer with the organization. How long have you been a customer of the organization? * Did the organization provide nonmonetary compensation?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between non-monetary compensation and length of association of the customer.

H19:In

the population, there exists no relationship between non-monetary compensation and

howprofitable customer is to the organization. To the best of your knowledge, the organization thinks you represent which level of profitability? * Did the organization provide non-monetary compensation?

Findings: We fail to reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists norelationship between non-monetary compensation and howprofitable customer.

Page 14 of 29

H20:In

the population, there exists no relationship between non-monetary compensation and

significance of incidence. Objectively, in your assessment, the encounter you wrote about in your letter was; * Did the organization provide non-monetary compensation?

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value<

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between non-monetary compensation and significance of incidence. The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.240

H21:In

the population, there exists no relationship between non-monetary compensation and

satisfaction of the customer with the organization. Did the organization provide non-monetary compensation? * Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the organization

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value<

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between non-monetary compensation and satisfaction of the customer. The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.287

H22:In

the population, there exists no relationship between refund or discount given and

satisfaction of the customer with the organization. Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the organization * Did the organization provide a refund or discount on future services as part of its response?

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value<

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between refund or discount given and satisfaction of the customer. The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.259

H23:In the population, there

repeat purchase.

exists no relationship between satisfaction level and likelihood of

Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the organization * Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statement. If I had to choose again, I would be less likely to choose this organization

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between satisfaction level and likelihood of repeat purchase. The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.478

H24:In

the population, there exists no relationship between satisfaction level and

recommendation from customer.

Page 15 of 29 Please indicate your level of satisfaction with the organization * Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statement. I would recommend this organization to a friend or an acquaintance

Findings: We reject the null hypotheses as p-value>

Conclusion: There exists arelationship between satisfaction level and satisfaction level and recommendation from customer. The strength of relationship in terms of Cramers V statistic is 0.567

Page 16 of 29

Conclusion:
Crosstab analysis performed on the data set gives us a fair idea about the association existing between various factors that affect the service quality we receive. There exist a large number of factors that may affect the service quality to a large extent. Through the analysis we also unearth various factors that may not have a significant impact on the service delivery by the service organizations. A tabular representation of the various relevant factors we have considered that affected the service quality has been presented along with Cramers-V that reflects the strength of association between the two factors in descending order.

Sr No
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Factor 1
addressing of problem size of the organization time taken to response from the organization tone of response from the organization time taken to response from the organization special employee indicated as author in response mail addressing of problem addressing of problem refund or discount tone of response from the organization non-monetary compensation time taken to response from the organization special employee indicated as author in response mail refund or discount time taken to get a response from the organization refund or discount special employee indicated as author in response mail non-monetary compensation

Factor 2
length of association of the customer receiving of response from the organization and length of association of the customer tone of praise letter from the customer IIM Indore affiliation in the complaint/praise mail length of association of the customer significance of incidence how profitable customer is length of association of the customer tone of complaint letter from the customer length of association of the customer significance of incidence significance of incidence how profitable customer is how profitable customer is significance of incidence how profitable customer is how profitable customer is

Cramers V
0.214 0.193 0.191 0.187 0.182 0.170 0.166 0.165 0.161 0.160 0.156 0.154 0.146 0.142 0.131 0.130 0.101 0.100

Page 17 of 29 1.

2.

Page 18 of 29 3.

4.

Page 19 of 29

Letters and Replies

1. Sudhanshu Ranjan (2012PGP377) Organization Name: Shyam Swaad Restaurants, Lucknow

2. Yogesh Shivdas (2012PGP354) Organization Name: Redbus

Page 20 of 29

Page 21 of 29

3. Ashish Kumar Mallik (2012PGP070)

Page 22 of 29

4. Rahul Kumar (2012PGP286)

Page 23 of 29

5. Hitesh Kumar Chand (2012PGP)

My mail to the service provider:

HITESH KUMAR CHAND <p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in>

Billing discrepancy which is still unresolved

1 message

From: HITESH KUMAR CHAND Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:59:03 AM (UTC+05:30) Chennai, Kolkata, Mumbai, New Delhi To: MPCG-CSG-VODAFONECARE; Nodal Mpcg (MPCG-NE), Vodafone India Subject: Billing discrepancy which is still unresolved

Hi, I would like to bring to your notice a billing issue which is still not unresolved despite regular follow up for 2 and half months. Issue in detail I am hiteshkumarchand, Using Vodafone postpaid mobile number: 9584389111 Since July-2012 (Madhya Pradesh state sim). On 28-March I called Vodafone customer care to downgrade my postpaid connection to lowest possible plan (at that time Rs 98). Customer care confirmed my request and informed me, the plan of Rs 98 will be activated from 1-Arpil. I clearly asked him is there something else I need to do from my side since I will be out of station for 2 months (for project work and hence not be available in Indore). He assured me no issue with me leaving Indore. At the end of April when i checked my bill, it was showing Rs 199. I called customer care and informed him there is an issue with bill on your website and i won't pay till it is shorted out. The customer care told me i will have to come to Indore city customer care center to resolve bill related issue. I didn't pay the bill then. When i came to Indore on 12-Jun my number was blocked and I was fined Rs 200 along with two months bill charged at Rs 199 per month.( Now start the most terrible part of story) I called customer care and told him the situation I am in , he start shouting at me and said its my fault. He was very rude in talking and not willing to understand my situation. He informed me I will have to go to customer care center to resolve my issue. On 14-Jun i check with customer care center in Indore and they agreed that there is a system issue where in on one page Bill amount has been calculated using Plan Rs 199 and on another it is Rs 99. They accepted their fault and took off the

Page 24 of 29

fine and extra charges. Then a new issue raised, they informed me that corrected bill will be generated only after Jun-20 and sim will be active after due payment. I waited till 21-Jun and to my surprise still there is bill discrepancy!!!!!!! At one web page it is showing Rs280 and on another Rs.380. In the final payment section it is showing Rs380 (where previously it was Rs.680).

Suffering I went through Now I would sincerely ask Vodafone, why even after so much follow-up and drama still matter is unresolved? You can very well imagine who much I would have suffered because of Vodafones fault. This is my primary number in Indore. And it is dead from last one month. I have missed many important calls, messages and mails. This has caused me economically and put a tremendous mental pressure. Its easy for Vodafone to say sorry, But couldnt they have find a quick solution to my problem. Even after accepting their fault they are again asking me to wait for 6 more days!! (From 14-June to 20 June) When Vodafone had to fine customer , it doesnt delay for a second. But when it comes to solving my genuine problem you need a whole month?? Couldnt Vodafone have activated my line temporally for 6 days? Couldnt it have diverted calls/messages to my alternative number? Couldnt they have given me a temporary sim? Vodafone could have, but it didnt. Because doing so doesnt fetch Vodafone revenue.

Untrained customer care And your Indore customer care is salt to injury. They are always ready with excuses. I am not been hyperbolic here. Let me give some examples here. I brought my delhisim (Again Vodafone sim !!! Gods knows why I bought Vodafone sim in delhi!! ). I needed 3G urgently while on roaming in Indore. So I recharged 3G pack (Jun-13). But I was getting only 2G speed. So, I called Indore customer care and shared my problem. To wash off his hand he said its a Delhi sim, for 3G call Delhi customer care. No issues, I called Delhi customer care, they called its none of their problem, please call Indore customer care. I again called Indore customer care. This time again he said he is not responsible, I should call Delhi customer care. By then I was out of my mind. I was on roaming and every call was costing me. And your customer care was playing with me as if I am a tennis ball, from one court to another. I forced him to see at his end and tell me solution to problem. He reluctantly put me on hold and after sometime told me to select Idea network. I did that but alas!!! No 3G. On 14-Evening I decided enough with Vodafone, and went to buy a new sim. Then the biggest surprise breaked on me by a local pan wala shop owner, that Vodafone has been ban by HC from providing 3G in Indore since 14-April !!!! A local pan wala is aware of Vodafones services but your customer care is not!!!(I think you should hire that pan wala. He has easily save you from many shame full incidents which are about to happen if you continue with your current customer care.)

Page 25 of 29

Customer Care representatives terrible behaviour Also your customer care is highly uncultured. On 12-Jun, when I called your customer care, he was talking was as if he is paying me to use this sim. His words were Ye to aap to pehalesochnachahiyetha (you should have seen it coming), One time conformation is not sufficient, in the 2 months we called you 4-5 times to confirm down gradation of your Plan. But since you never received the call, we did not downgrade the scheme. On 14-Jun customer care store confirmed that they had actually received the request for down gradation and is downgraded. But your customer care (on 12-Jun) told me that my plan had never been downgraded (I hope you can now appreciate customer repealing skills of your customer care executives now).

Request and suggestion: I am using Vodafone from last 8 years. No matter which city I am in, I use to trust on Vodafone. But from now onwards I doubt I will trust Vodafone anymore. This is first time I used Vodafone post paid connection and believe me its a really pain to bear with you people. I request you to please see in to the issue. And update your website with the correct bill. Well it seems unfair( to me) to ask you more when you are not even able to do your basic duties but still I would like to suggest some points to improve upon :

Please improve knowledge of your customer care representatives Please give priority to out of station customers, when a customer is on move he needs maximum support from you In condition like mine, where I had been asked to wait for 6 days despite being fault from Vodafone side, please have some quick backup solutions. Like temporary sim, call diverting to other number. Because for Vodafone every call may not be important but for me it is Please give more power to your customer care representatives so that these kind of issues can be resolved on mobile only (In my case, My campus of IIM Indore is 16 km away from city, I have to sacrifice entire half day to come to city to discuss with your customer care store representatives)

Looking forward to reply: Looking at Vodafones current culture of laid back working, I am not expecting a reply sooner than 2 weeks. But I would like to stress here, I will not make my due payment unless my billing details are corrected. And a mail to me telling what took you so long to solve the issue. Hope at least this time you will try to keep up your promise of We care for you.

Page 26 of 29
Thanks and Regards,

Hitesh Kumar Chand

G Block, Room no :314 Indian Institute of Management (IIM) PrabandhShikar, Rau-Pithampur Road Indore 453331 +91-982-663-8227 This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law or may constitute as attorney work product. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, notify us immediately by telephone and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or (ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication. Thank you.

Response I got from service provider:

Re: Billing discrepancy which is still unresolved
4 messages AbhishekSood (MPCG) <Abhishek.Sood@vodafone.com> To: "p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in" <p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in> Sun, Jun 23, 2013 at 1:06 PM

Dear Hitesh,

Page 27 of 29

Greetings from Vodafone!!!! As discussed over the telecon, I would look into the matter and update you with a solution by tomorrow. Regards, Abhishek
From: Voice Of Customer (MPCG-NE), Vodafone India Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 11:59 AM India Standard Time To: MP-csk-voiceofcustomer Subject: FW: Billing discrepancy which is still unresolved

AbhishekSood (MPCG) <Abhishek.Sood@vodafone.com> To: "p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in" <p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in>

Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM

Dear Hitesh, As discussed over the telecom, PFB the details..Waivers have been processed and the amount payable is rs 387.62/Amount payable 206.72

BILL Date 1st May 2013

Actual Amount 406.72

waiver 200

Page 28 of 29

1st June 2013 Total Regards, Abhishek

280.9 687.62

100 300

180.9 387.62

From:AbhishekSood (MPCG) Sent: 23 June 2013 01:06 PM To: 'p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in' Subject: Re: Billing discrepancy which is still unresolved
[Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden]

HITESH KUMAR CHAND <p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in> To: "AbhishekSood (MPCG)" <Abhishek.Sood@vodafone.com> Hi , I have paid the bill and here is the bill payment receipt. Thanks, Hitesh
[Quoted text hidden]

Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Vodafone.pdf 59K

AbhishekSood (MPCG) <Abhishek.Sood@vodafone.com> To: HITESH KUMAR CHAND <p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in>

Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 4:50 PM

Dear Hitesh, The number has been reactivated. Regards, Abhishek

VodafoneCare<vodafonecare.mpcg@vodafone.com> Reply-To: vodafonecare.mpcg@vodafone.com To: p12hiteshk@iimidr.ac.in

Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 9:02 PM

Page 29 of 29

Dear Hitesh, Thank you for your email dated 23/06/2013, regarding service related issue on your Vodafone Mobile number 9584389111. Further to our telephonic conversation today we have informed that feedback, regarding your complaint has already been shared with the customer care team. We assure you to provide better service in future. Further, your service request number is 147679400 and closure of your complaint will be process by 26/06/2013 18:00 and time lines for the closure will be based on the resolution and time lines can be change for the same. We regret the inconvenience you have experienced and realize that this experience with Vodafone has left a lot to be desired. However, we stand by our commitment to provide the highest levels of service excellence. In case you need further assistance, please do call or email us. We will do our best to help you. Happy to help, SwapnilSant Vodafone Care Contact numbers Vodafone Care

: 111 or +91-9713097130