One-time security code texts fail to arrive but texts sent from other phones do arrive

[NY]

My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model) with a
Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.

Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text message fail
to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is confined to one site.

But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone, it
arrives.

Any suggestions as to how to investigate and fix this? Can mobile phone
carriers such as Vodafone enable diagnostics that record the receipt of the
text to their system and then the forwarding of it to the phone?

I've tried accessing the relevant web sites which send one-time
security-code texts, using either Firefox or Google Chrome, but it makes no
difference which browser is used. Also I've tried specifying her number in
national (07748 xxxxxx) and international (+44 7748 xxxxxx) format.

[Theo]

NY <m...@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model) with a
> Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.
>
> Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text message fail
> to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is confined to one site.

It's quite possible that the different sites use a common service to send
SMS, and something is wrong with that service. I know AQL is a popular one,
but there are no doubt many others.

In the case of AQL they offer a free trial:
https://portal.aql.com/sms/
so a long shot would be to sign up, send test SMS, and then see if those are
delivered. If not you can take it up with AQL.

But I don't know how you would find out if that site used AQL in
the first place (maybe the website source code has clues, but not if it's
all done in the backend on the server).

Care to share an example of one of the sites?

> But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone, it
> arrives.
>
> Any suggestions as to how to investigate and fix this? Can mobile phone
> carriers such as Vodafone enable diagnostics that record the receipt of the
> text to their system and then the forwarding of it to the phone?

I think you'd have to ask Vodafone. They may be able to tell if the SMS is
ever presented to their system. However, I don't hold out much hope of
getting through the customer service scripts to find somebody with access to
the logs.

Theo

[Dave Royal]

Are you sure you are sending an SMS and not one of Google's RCS text
messages. Try sending one from an old phone, or an iphone.
--
(Remove numerics from email address)

[AJL]

On 9/29/2023 4:48 AM, NY wrote:

> My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model)
> with a Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.
>
> Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text
> message fail to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is
> confined to one site.
>
> But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone,
> it arrives.
>
> Any suggestions as to how to investigate and fix this? Can mobile
> phone carriers such as Vodafone enable diagnostics that record the
> receipt of the text to their system and then the forwarding of it to
> the phone?

Most of my sensitive sites give me a choice of email or text for the
security code. If this choice is available, perhaps a workaround?

Fortunately being one-time you only have the hassle once (per
device/site)...

[David Taylor]

I've had this as well.

There's a special type of text message used for these security codes, and I'm
sorry, but I can't recall the name. It's something like ones without a number.

You may be able to set a phone not to receive these, so perhaps that option is set?

I can't now recall how it was fixed but the provider either fixed it or told me
how. This with O2 (after moving from Virgin). Try asking Vodafone.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: https://www.satsignal.eu

[VanguardLH]

From what I've read, on your phone with Vodafone service, call 198 to
get to their message center.

I've read the Vodafone will disconnect your SMS service is not used
within the last 3 months. But you say your texts to her phone are
received by her, so SMS service must still be active.

https://readus247.com/vodafone-message-center-numbers/
The Vodafone Message Center number is a unique number that allows
customers with a Vodafone SIM card to send and receive text messages.
It acts as an intermediary between the cellular network and the
customer’s device, allowing them to stay connected. The SMS gateway
safeguards, transmit, transfigures, and deploys Short Message Service
(SMS) notifications.

To me, that sounds like the VMC is a different number than the phone
number. Are you sending to her phone number, or to a special number,
like 45372, that isn't in phone syntax?

Additionally, the SMSC is used to store and forward messages when a
recipient’s device is turned off or out of range.

Again, looks like texts are sent to a different number than the phone's
own cellular phone number. SMSC is a store-and-forward scheme. Out of
range could mean her phone doesn't have enough signal strength to
receive texts (which, as I recall, requires lower power than making or
receiving phone calls). Is she always in the same place, like at home,
when trying to get those security code texts? How many bars for signal
strength does she see on her phone? More accurate would be to go into
Android settings -> About phone -> Network, and check the dBm strength
noted there.

You would think with a store-and-forward scheme that the texts would
show up when the phone was turned on (obviously texts should not be sent
and discard when the device is not responding, like powered off) and
within range to receive SMS messages. Would be nice if there was some
other way to see stored texts that have not been successfully sent to
the phone, like a web site at Vodaphone where you log into your account
to check on pending SMS messages. I don't use Vodafone to see if they
let you log into your account to check on pending texts. Alas, logic
doesn't dictate function.

[The Real Bev]

That would be nice, but they asked for my cell number long ago and
insist on using it now -- with no other option. Moreover, they say I
only have to do it once, but they lie -- every damn time I contact them
they have to send me a text code. I've had the same land-line number
for 60 years and the same email address since google started offering
gmail. I've had it up to HERE with Security Theater.

Granted, these people give me free money once a month, but STILL!

> Fortunately being one-time you only have the hassle once (per
> device/site)...

Assuming honesty and competence.


--
Cheers, Bev
"The primary purpose of any government entity
is to employ the unemployable."

[AJL]

On 9/29/2023 8:59 PM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 9/29/23 9:14 AM, AJL wrote:

>> Most of my sensitive sites give me a choice of email or text for
>> the security code.

> That would be nice, but they asked for my cell number long ago and
> insist on using it now -- with no other option.

My sensitive sites have both my cell and email on record. Perhaps that's
why they give me a choice.

> Moreover, they say I only have to do it once, but they lie -- every
> damn time I contact them they have to send me a text code.

My sites give me the choice when first signing on to a new app or
device: Require the security code only once after the password is
entered the first time, or require the password + security code be
entered on every visit. I think the latter is overkill and have never
used that option.

> I've had the same land-line number for 60 years and the same email
> address since google started offering gmail. I've had it up to HERE
> with Security Theater.

If my sensitive sites were to get hacked it would be a nightmare for me
so I'm happy to have the extra security.

Further there is added security with the system in that if I get a
security code text or email that I DID NOT request I know my password
has been compromised and can take immediate action.

> Granted, these people give me free money once a month, but STILL!
>
>> Fortunately being one-time you only have the hassle once (per
>> device/site)...

> Assuming honesty and competence.

I have around 20 sensitive sites mostly medical and financial and so
far nary a problem (knocks on wood)...

[VanguardLH]

Some institutions will work with auth apps. My bank integrates with
Authy (authy.com). I could have them send an e-mail with the login
security code, but it may take 2 or 3 times before I actually get it.
Actually they only work with SMS, but Google Voice will send copies of
texts as e-mails to me. That was my first workaround. Then I found
they work with the Authy app (which I have to load before having them
send a code since I don't want it left running all the time). I used
the desktop version of Authy on my Windows desktop. Haven't bothered to
get their Android version.

Check with your bank if they work with an auth app, and which one.
Eliminates having to send the code via text, and wait for the text.

[Dave Royal]

On 30 Sep 2023 00:30:42 -0500 VanguardLH wrote:
>
>Some institutions will work with auth apps. My bank integrates with
>Authy (authy.com).

Here in the UK I've never come accross an 'institution' that offered OTP
using an app like Authy or Google Authenticator. My bank has a
code-generating device and has had one for a decade or more. All the
others adopted SMS and/or email when they were required to use 2FA. Cheap
for them, and they'd rather you used their banking app so they don't care
if it's unreliable.

All the sites I authenticate with a OTP app are techy - github, mozilla,
... Apart from one: I had to set up OTP 2FA with Adafruit which is a US
tech shop. Well done them. They specified Authy but both andOTP on this
Android tablet and FreeOTP on my iphone work fine. (Both are offline so
not sync'd.)

The SMSes I get are just ordinary SMSes, though they may have a special
way of feeding them to mobile operators. Occasionally they don't arrive
but usually they do - eventually.

>I could have them send an e-mail with the login
>security code, but it may take 2 or 3 times before I actually get it.
>Actually they only work with SMS, but Google Voice will send copies of
>texts as e-mails to me. That was my first workaround. Then I found
>they work with the Authy app (which I have to load before having them
>send a code since I don't want it left running all the time). I used
>the desktop version of Authy on my Windows desktop. Haven't bothered to
>get their Android version.
>
>Check with your bank if they work with an auth app, and which one.
>Eliminates having to send the code via text, and wait for the text.

[Chris]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/29/23 9:14 AM, AJL wrote:
>> On 9/29/2023 4:48 AM, NY wrote:
>>
>>> My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model)
>>> with a Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.
>>>
>>> Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text
>>> message fail to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is
>>> confined to one site.
>>>
>>> But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone,
>>> it arrives.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions as to how to investigate and fix this? Can mobile
>>> phone carriers such as Vodafone enable diagnostics that record the
>>> receipt of the text to their system and then the forwarding of it to
>>> the phone?
>>
>> Most of my sensitive sites give me a choice of email or text for the
>> security code. If this choice is available, perhaps a workaround?
>
> That would be nice, but they asked for my cell number long ago and
> insist on using it now -- with no other option.

That doesn't sound right. There should always be an alternative. What
happens if your phone is stolen? Or you change number?

> Moreover, they say I
> only have to do it once, but they lie -- every damn time I contact them
> they have to send me a text code.

That's usually because you don't retain the cookie. I have the same as I
set Firefox to never store them permanently.

[The Real Bev]

On 9/30/23 1:11 AM, Chris wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/29/23 9:14 AM, AJL wrote:
>>> On 9/29/2023 4:48 AM, NY wrote:
>>>
>>>> My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model)
>>>> with a Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.
>>>>
>>>> Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text
>>>> message fail to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is
>>>> confined to one site.
>>>>
>>>> But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone,
>>>> it arrives.
>>>>
>>>> Any suggestions as to how to investigate and fix this? Can mobile
>>>> phone carriers such as Vodafone enable diagnostics that record the
>>>> receipt of the text to their system and then the forwarding of it to
>>>> the phone?
>>>
>>> Most of my sensitive sites give me a choice of email or text for the
>>> security code. If this choice is available, perhaps a workaround?
>>
>> That would be nice, but they asked for my cell number long ago and
>> insist on using it now -- with no other option.
>
> That doesn't sound right. There should always be an alternative. What
> happens if your phone is stolen? Or you change number?

I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
another. I have found that people who say that my call is important to
them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would probably
regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I have to pay.

>> Moreover, they say I
>> only have to do it once, but they lie -- every damn time I contact them
>> they have to send me a text code.
>
> That's usually because you don't retain the cookie. I have the same as I
> set Firefox to never store them permanently.

I accept every cookie that anyone wants to give me and I don't bother to
delete them. I figure any resources they waste trying to figure out how
to sell me stuff is to MY benefit.


--
Cheers, Bev
Just as you cannot explain snow to a summer insect, so also you cannot
explain ski resorts to someone who walks uphill willingly. --ErikL

[VanguardLH]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
> have to pay.

Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
to get them to resolve a problem.

First-level techs answering incoming support calls are keen on reciting
canned replies from a database. They throw some keywords at the
database to get a list of candidate responses. Often they'll have you
do actions that you already performed before calling them. Desite you
telling them that you did that, they'll still want to read to you their
canned responses. Often I pretend that I did what they wanted: they say
to do what I've already done, I pause as though I was doing it, and then
say that didn't work, and they move on to their next canned response.
Eventually when it becomes clear that they've ran out of canned
responses, I use the special trigger word: escalate. No matter how long
you discuss the problem, they won't release it, but they are also under
pressure to handle as many calls as possible, so they want to move onto
the next call.

State you want to ESCALATE the issue to a higher tier of tech support,
and ask if they'll give you an issue ticket number, so if you call later
you can refer to the ticket number to avoid the rigamarole of going
through 1st level techs again. Saying "escalate" triggers them to end
the call after issuing a ticket to send to higher support. Sometimes
the call ends at that point, and you wait for higher support to call you
back, or you get redirected to another department, but be sure if
redirected that you get the name of that higher support department, and
possible what number to call to reach them directly. If the redirection
fails (you get disconnected), you have a number to reach that department
instead of having to go through 1st level support again.

[The Real Bev]

this is the BEST outcome. "Average" outcome is somewhat different.
"Elevate" also seems to work. I do that after their first wrong/stupid
attempt. The phrase "next tier" is sometimes helpful.

The 'chat' functions are kind of worse because if you move to a
different tab/screen the bastards will probably kick you off for
non-responsiveness.

The real killer -- "Let me put you on hold..." and the dial tone kicks in.

--
Cheers, Bev
"Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On
it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of,

every human being who ever was, lived out their lives." -- Carl Sagan

[NY]

On 29/09/2023 12:48, NY wrote:

> My mother has a Samsung Android phone (not sure of the exact model) with
> a Vodafone monthly-billing SIM.
>
> Various web sites which send a one-time security code by text message
> fail to deliver a code - so it's not a problem that is confined to one
> site.
>
> But if I send her a text to the same number from my Android phone, it
> arrives.

Mum phoned me last night with the solution. She'd asked in her local
Vodafone shop a few days earlier and the guy wasn't sure but said he'd
think about it. She went back in yesterday after talking to me, and the
guy said "I'm glad you've come back. A thought occurred to me after
you'd gone. Let me check something."

It turned out that her phone has two apps, both called "Messages". One
was the Samsung SMS app, and the other was the Google app. Somehow
*both* were set to receive text messages. Mum had only been looking in
the Samsung app - that was the one which was on one of her home screens
- and didn't know about the Google one which was only present on the
Apps screen. I'd never heard of the Google "Messages" app either, and
when I'd seen it on my own Apps screen I'd thought that it was the same
one (the Samsung app) as on my Home screen - same name and similar icon.

There were loads of text messages in the Google app, all the "never
arrived" one-time codes from banks, credit-card companies etc. The
Vodafone guy reconfigured the phone to make the Samsung app the *only*
recipient for SMS messages.

Someone in this thread talked about different protocols for text
messages, and I think that is what had happened on Mum's phone. Text
messages from *people* (me, my sister, friends, etc) were being received
on the Samsung app, but automated texts from banks were going to the
Google one, maybe because they used a different protocol.

So, problem solved.

[Chris]

VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>> have to pay.
>
> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
> to get them to resolve a problem.

Why don't you you move?

Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.

[The Real Bev]

We find it unacceptable too, we just can't do anything about it. OTOH,
we have good dentistry :-)

--
Cheers, Bev
"I am working for the time when unqualified blacks, browns and
women join the unqualified men in running our government"
-- Cissy Farenthold

[VanguardLH]

To whom would you complain about service you don't like?

[Stan Brown]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:32:10 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
> I have found that people who say that my call is important to
> them are lying through their teeth.

Just once I would love to hear a company being honest:

"Your call is important to us, but not important enough for us to
hire enough service reps to answer the phones in a reasonable time."

--
Stan Brown, Tehachapi, California, USA https://BrownMath.com/
Shikata ga nai...

[Stan Brown]

On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 22:41:51 +0100, NY wrote:
> Mum had only been looking in
> the Samsung app - that was the one which was on one of her home screens
> - and didn't know about the Google one which was only present on the
> Apps screen. I'd never heard of the Google "Messages" app either, and
> when I'd seen it on my own Apps screen I'd thought that it was the same
> one (the Samsung app) as on my Home screen - same name and similar icon.

As a new owner of my first Samsung phone, I observed that Samsung has
its own Messages, Phone, and Contacts apps. None of them seems
markedly better than the Google versions (because Google is, you
know, the creator of Android), and Contacts at least has a noticeably
crappier interface.

In another thread I asked how to change the default contacts app to
Google from Samsung, since there doesn't seem to be any way to do it
in Samsung's UI. Unfortunately, no one has posted a reply giving a
procedure. One person did suggest installing the Google Phone app and
setting that as default phone app (which Samsung's UI seems to
provide for), and I'm about ready to try that if nothing better turns
up.

[Wally J]

Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote

> As a new owner of my first Samsung phone, I observed that Samsung has
> its own Messages, Phone, and Contacts apps. None of them seems
> markedly better than the Google versions (because Google is, you
> know, the creator of Android), and Contacts at least has a noticeably
> crappier interface.

Hi Stan,
I've seen you over on the Windows newsgroup helping people a lot.
That's good of you - where you seem to be relatively new to the Android ng.

I tried to respond to your previous thread but I didn't really have enough
knowledge to help you out. I also have a Samsung Galaxy and I do NOT use
the Google apps if I can help it (for privacy reasons, that's why).

If you have any questions, I can help you with what apps I use, but bear in
mind I'm different from most people because my goal with apps is privacy.

1. Messages => last known good open source version of PulseSMS 5.4.6.2816
2. Contacts => opencontacts.open.com.opencontacts version 28.0
3. Dialer => com.simplemobiletools.dialer version 5.16.0 (46)

> In another thread I asked how to change the default contacts app to
> Google from Samsung, since there doesn't seem to be any way to do it
> in Samsung's UI. Unfortunately, no one has posted a reply giving a
> procedure. One person did suggest installing the Google Phone app and
> setting that as default phone app (which Samsung's UI seems to
> provide for), and I'm about ready to try that if nothing better turns
> up.

I tried responding to your post when I first saw it but then I realized it
was too tough of a question for me to answer properly so I canned it.

Here, for the record, is the _unfinished_ response I made days ago for you.
NOTE: THIS IS UNFINISHED as I gave up when it got too deep for me to help.

===< cut below here for my unfinished response >===
Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote

> I've spent a couple of hours Googling, and while I found lots of
> copies of the same few answers, none of them worked.[*]
> MY SETUP: Android 13 Samsung Galaxy A54 5G phone, a couple of weeks
> old. I'm using the factory Samsung Phone app.

Be careful when describing icons for dialers because they all look alike.
And they're all named "Phone" so you really have to note the package name.
<https://i.postimg.cc/wBqYjyVT/phone01.jpg >

You're probably talking about com.samsung.android.dialer (which is one of
the many phone dialers I have on my Samsung Galaxy A32-5G T-Mobile phone).

Notice in the screenshot three "green" "phone" dialers - all look alike.

What I currently use on a similar phone (A32-5G, Android 13) is described
in gory details on some of the threads at the XDA Developers' web site.
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/m/galaxya325g.11604613/recent-content>
XDA Developers should have a section for the Samsung Galaxy A54G also.

> I don't like the UI in
> the Samsung Contacts app, so I downloaded the Google Contacts app
> from the Google Play Store, since I used and liked it on my old
> phone.

Likewise, based on my search just now, I think the Samsung contacts
app is called <com.samsung.android.app.contacts> on the Galaxy series.
<https://i.postimg.cc/W38s6RNj/contact01.jpg>

> It works just fine, and can connect to the Samsung Phone and
> Messages apps when I want to make calls and send texts.
> I removed the Samsung Contacts app icon from my home screen and
> added the Google contacts icon to my home screen.

You can also uninstall any app, including system apps, using adb.
C:\> adb shell pm uninstall -k --user 0 com.samsung.android.app.contacts
This works for the user (not admin) without needing to be rooted.

Note it's "better" than just removing it from the homescreen.
You can _always_ get it back if you need to, by the way, using adb.
C:\> adb shell cmd package install-existing com.samsung.android.app.contacts

The reason re-installing works is that the APK is _always_ saved on Android
for _every_ app (which is why and how those Android APK archivers work).

WIP WIP WIP WIP unfinished WIP...

===< cut above here for my unfinished response >===

[David Taylor]

Delighted to hear that's fixed.

Perhaps my suggestion about different message types may have been correct.

[Dave Royal]

On 30 Sep 2023 22:41:51 +0100 NY wrote:
>
>
>Mum phoned me last night with the solution. She'd asked in her local
>Vodafone shop a few days earlier and the guy wasn't sure but said he'd
>think about it. She went back in yesterday after talking to me, and the
>guy said "I'm glad you've come back. A thought occurred to me after
>you'd gone. Let me check something."
>
>It turned out that her phone has two apps, both called "Messages". One
>was the Samsung SMS app, and the other was the Google app. Somehow
>*both* were set to receive text messages. Mum had only been looking in
>the Samsung app - that was the one which was on one of her home screens
>- and didn't know about the Google one which was only present on the
>Apps screen. I'd never heard of the Google "Messages" app either, and
>when I'd seen it on my own Apps screen I'd thought that it was the same
>one (the Samsung app) as on my Home screen - same name and similar icon.
>
>There were loads of text messages in the Google app, all the "never
>arrived" one-time codes from banks, credit-card companies etc. The
>Vodafone guy reconfigured the phone to make the Samsung app the *only*
>recipient for SMS messages.
>
>Someone in this thread talked about different protocols for text
>messages, and I think that is what had happened on Mum's phone. Text
>messages from *people* (me, my sister, friends, etc) were being received
>on the Samsung app, but automated texts from banks were going to the
>Google one, maybe because they used a different protocol.
>
>So, problem solved.

There /are/ two types of messages on Android phones - old style SMSes and
Google's new RCS. Bank codes use ordinary SMSes.

Samsung are switching to Google's app as the default message app - it
started last year - but somehow this phone ended up with SMSes only going
to Google's app. Maybe SMSes can only go to one.

Your messages to her were going as RCS messages not SMSes. Did they arrive
in /both/ apps?

Googling, most people seem to prefer Google's message app. This is an
Android tablet so I can't use either.

[David Taylor]

On 01/10/2023 07:47, Dave Royal wrote:
> There /are/ two types of messages on Android phones - old style SMSes and
> Google's new RCS. Bank codes use ordinary SMSes.

Just by chance, I found the message type for SMS security confirmation messages.

They are called "Short Code SMS" messages, and on one verification message, I
noted that I could not reply to it.

[Dave Royal]

On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 09:00:46 +0100, David Taylor wrote:

> On 01/10/2023 07:47, Dave Royal wrote:
>> There /are/ two types of messages on Android phones - old style SMSes
>> and Google's new RCS. Bank codes use ordinary SMSes.
>
> Just by chance, I found the message type for SMS security confirmation
> messages.
>
> They are called "Short Code SMS" messages, and on one verification
> message, I noted that I could not reply to it.

They come from a "short code" instead of a phone number. Businesses and
organisations use them and some aim to be memorable. Anyone in the UK who
travels by train will know the short code for the Britsh Transport Police
- 61016.

Apart from the originator code I'm pretty sure they're just SMSes as far
as the phone is concerned.
--
(Remove any numerics from my email address.)

[Chris]

At the end of every call you have the option to provide feedback.

Or you ask to cancel the service and they will ask why. Simple really.

[Chris]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/30/23 2:47 PM, Chris wrote:
>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>> have to pay.
>>>
>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>
>> Why don't you you move?
>>
>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>
> We find it unacceptable too, we just can't do anything about it.

Why not? I thought the customer was king in the US? I keep being told that
if people don't want a feature it wouldn't sell in the US. The market is
perfect.

> OTOH,
> we have good dentistry :-)

We don't have ruinous medical bills *and* good healthcare :p

[Jörg Lorenz]

Am 01.10.23 um 00:20 schrieb The Real Bev:

> On 9/30/23 2:47 PM, Chris wrote:
>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>> have to pay.
>>>
>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>
>> Why don't you you move?
>>
>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>
> We find it unacceptable too, we just can't do anything about it.

Why? You can quit the contract. You have the legal right to do that
because of the substandard service level (= not fullfilling the contract).

--
Morituri te salutant

[David Taylor]

Thanks, Dave. At one stage (after VM transferred phone to O2) I was able to
get normal texts, but not those from "short codes". I can't recall now whether
it sorted itself or whether I had to contact O2. So I had wondered whether
that might have been related to the OP's problem.

BTW: the "Visual Voice Mail" still doesn't work despite activating it, so
another of VM's failed promises!

[Adrian]

In message <MPG.3f8296a85...@news.individual.net>, Stan Brown
<the_sta...@fastmail.fm> writes

>On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 09:32:10 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
>> I have found that people who say that my call is important to
>> them are lying through their teeth.
>
>Just once I would love to hear a company being honest:
>
>"Your call is important to us, but not important enough for us to
>hire enough service reps to answer the phones in a reasonable time."
>

"Your call doesn't really make any difference to us, but for appearances
sake, we need to provide this facility."

Adrian
--
To Reply :
replace "bulleid" with "adrian" - all mail to bulleid is rejected
Sorry for the rigmarole, If I want spam, I'll go to the shops
Every time someone says "I don't believe in trolls", another one dies.

[Frank Slootweg]

Stan Brown <the_sta...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
[...]
[A bit of thread drift:]

> In another thread I asked how to change the default contacts app to
> Google from Samsung, since there doesn't seem to be any way to do it
> in Samsung's UI. Unfortunately, no one has posted a reply giving a
> procedure. One person did suggest installing the Google Phone app and
> setting that as default phone app (which Samsung's UI seems to
> provide for), and I'm about ready to try that if nothing better turns
> up.

AFAIK, someone *did* post a suggestion which AFAIK is the correct one.
It involves the settings *of* the Google Contacts app, i.e. not settings
*in* the app and not some general Samsung setting.

I don't have two contacts apps, but I have two browsers - Samsung
Internet and (Google) Chrome - and AFAICT your problem is similar, i.e.
two apps - one Samsung and one Google - for the same function.

So I'll try to give instructions:

(Samsung) Settings -> Apps -> tap <name/icon of Google Contact app> ->
Defaults -> probably says 'Set as default' or '... app' -> tap that
description -> now you should get two buttons, one for the Samsung
Contacts app, one for the Google app -> tap the Google one and use the
back arrow till you're back.

If that doesn't work, do the same for the app 'Chrome' (or 'Samsung
Internet') and see how it should work

[The Real Bev]

Contracted entities are a small part of the problem. This is generic to
ALL businesses/agencies offering a 'contact us' phone number or chat line.

What's most bothersome is trying to make a medical appointment and being
told that you will receive a call-back which never happens in spite of
repeated calls. Ultimately we drove into Los Angeles to the actual
office. New doctor, but still...

--
Cheers, Bev
"Incontinence hotline, can you hold?"

[The Real Bev]

Check a box. Nobody has ever showed any actual interest in why I
canceled an account -- including at the bank where I'd had an account
for over 20 years. Today I suspect that if a bank saw someone that
angry standing in a line they'd probably call the SWAT team.

[The Real Bev]

On 10/1/23 2:19 AM, Chris wrote:
> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/30/23 2:47 PM, Chris wrote:
>>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>>> have to pay.
>>>>
>>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>>
>>> Why don't you you move?
>>>
>>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>>
>> We find it unacceptable too, we just can't do anything about it.
>
> Why not? I thought the customer was king in the US? I keep being told that
> if people don't want a feature it wouldn't sell in the US. The market is
> perfect.

People can be convinced that they want/need stupid stuff.

Consider cable. When cable TV started up cities granted charters to a
single company to run wire in that city. A monopoly. You want cable TV
or high-speed internet, you have ONE choice. Ultimately charters were
no longer needed, but at this point if a new company wanted to offer
internet service it had to run its own NEW lines -- a prohibitively
expensive undertaking in most cases.

Minor exception for AT&T which had previously run wire to pretty much
every home in the country and which had been updating its big wire; the
ones from the street to the house were truly pitiful, as we found out
when they ran fiber (at a BIG discount) and yanked out the old stuff a
few years ago. Now we have TWO broadband providers and prices have
dropped considerably; you just have to keep swapping service to take
advantage of 'introductory' pricing. Easy to do with a phone call now,
the wire/fiber is already in. Life is good.

>> OTOH,
>> we have good dentistry :-)
>
> We don't have ruinous medical bills *and* good healthcare :p

The quality of healthcare depends a lot on luck. SOMEBODY has to get
the docs that were in the bottom 10% of their med school classes, and if
you're lucky it's someone else. The office staff is nearly always
incompetent, but it wasn't always that way. Medicare is a tremendous
deal, but it doesn't improve the quality or timeliness of service.

Docs now work out of several offices and your GP is probably only
reasonably nearby one day a week or maybe every two weeks. If you're in
pain they'll shoehorn you in THIS week... maybe...

[AJL]

On 10/1/2023 9:40 AM, The Real Bev wrote:

People pissed at off topic stuff please read no further.

> Docs now work out of several offices and your GP is probably only
> reasonably nearby one day a week or maybe every two weeks. If you're in
> pain they'll shoehorn you in THIS week... maybe...

I'm fortunate in that if my PCP can't see me there's an Urgent Care
facility nearby that is walk in and can usually see me within an hour.
Fortunately they take my insurance so my co-pay for the visit is $15
(the same as my PCP)...

[VanguardLH]

Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>>> have to pay.
>>>>
>>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>>
>>> Why don't you you move?
>>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>>
>> To whom would you complain about service you don't like?
>
> At the end of every call you have the option to provide feedback.

Not available every time, or not available at all for a particular call
center or in-house tech support. Most times, sending feedback is like
continually pressing a cross-walk button that isn't connected. Also, if
sending feedback is easy then, yes, I'll do it. However, if I have to
wade through a ton more of voice prompts, and waste even more of my
time, then feedback costs me more than I'm willing to waste on it.
Also, if the problem got resolved, the point of working through the
problem was to get rid of it, and move on to do work. Sending feedback
adds to the troubleshooting time which I might not be able to afford,
especially after a really long tech call. At times I've had to do the
disconnect, because I have to leave for an appointment, or getting the
work done is more important than the immediate need to fix a problem
which is separate from doing the work. Throwing more time at a problem
isn't necessarily the best choice of your time.

Instead I will often ask to talk to a manager. They're the ones
responsible for their crew, not some joker that is completely
disconnected from the support group. If they won't release the phone
call to a manager, feedback isn't going to do any good, either.

Alas, feedback is often so generic, like your voting instead of
describing, that such feedback is worthless for knowing how to act on
it.

> Or you ask to cancel the service and they will ask why. Simple really.

I don't cancel services simply because I encounter an inept person.
However, just because I report a problem doesn't mean they will know how
to fix it. Sometimes the answer you get is not what you want, but there
isn't a good one. Have you quit helping in Usenet for the same reason?

[VanguardLH]

The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 10/1/23 2:17 AM, Chris wrote:
>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>>>> have to pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you you move?
>>>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>>>
>>> To whom would you complain about service you don't like?
>>
>> At the end of every call you have the option to provide feedback.
>>
>> Or you ask to cancel the service and they will ask why. Simple really.
>
> Check a box. Nobody has ever showed any actual interest in why I
> canceled an account -- including at the bank where I'd had an account
> for over 20 years. Today I suspect that if a bank saw someone that
> angry standing in a line they'd probably call the SWAT team.

I remember when many Comcast customers threatened they were going to
cancel their service (TV, Internet, or both) because Comcast dropped
Usenet service. One, it was mostly a vacuous thread. Almost none of
those whiners quit any service from Comcast. Two, of those that did
carry out their threat, that loss in revenue was trivial to the cost of
manpower and resources in operating a Usenet service, and a few lost
customers wasn't going to affect their bottom line.

If any company was really going to feel an impact on the loss of you as
their customer, they'd be far more motivated in helping you resolve
problems. For a small company with a few customers, a loss of one or a
few customers significantly impacts their survival. For a company with
hundreds of thousands of customer, nah, you aren't that important as a
single customer, but get a bit more help if you are an enterprise
customer spending a hell of a lot more money with them. They know
economics, too.

[The Real Bev]

We have those too. Absolutely worthless. All I wanted was a splinter
removed, but nope -- stupid cow just dug around for a while and gave up.
Friend was told she had to go to the REAL ER after waiting perhaps an
hour to be seen, and I have no idea how much they charged for that.

Anything the urgent care people can deal with I can probably deal with
myself -- hey, I've got band-aids, polysporin, alcohol, peroxide and Ace
bandages! Oh yeah, aspirin, ibuprofen and cranberry juice.


--
Cheers, Bev
"Life is actually fair. It just doesn't seem to be common
knowledge that 'fair' sometimes sucks." -- Jim Cook

[Stan Brown]

On 1 Oct 2023 16:10:25 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> (Samsung) Settings -> Apps -> tap <name/icon of Google Contact app> ->
> Defaults -> probably says 'Set as default' or '... app' -> tap that
> description -> now you should get two buttons, one for the Samsung
> Contacts app, one for the Google app

Unfortunately not. It says "Default in this app" and when I tap that
I get a new page:

Set as default
Contacts
Select whether to use this app instead of your
browser app when you go to supported web
addresses.
Open supported links [ *]
Supported web addresses <-- grayed out
Open by default <-- halfway between gray and white
Clear defaults [Clear]

The slider for "open supported links" is set on. I didn't tap the
Clear button.

Samsung seems to be moving to prevent changing default applications.
The path you suggested, which _seems_ as though it should let us make
an app the default for its main function, actually controls only
whether the app handles some links itself or ships them to a browser.
(At least, that's what the text says. Whether Samsung means what it
says is an open question.)

It's really quite annoying -- I didn't realize Samsung was going to
put up so many roadblocks to my chosen apps, like Microsoft Windows.
And I'm dreading further annoyances that may be introduced with this
weekend's update. The description of the update says some settings
may change, but naturally doesn't say which ones. Oy vey!

> If that doesn't work, do the same for the app 'Chrome' (or 'Samsung
> Internet') and see how it should work

Chrome, under Defaults", says "Browser App Chrome". That seems to be
how it should be, but the Samsung UI treats contacts differently.

[Stan Brown]

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 09:23:03 -0700, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 10/1/23 2:17 AM, Chris wrote:

> > [quoted text muted]

> >
> > At the end of every call you have the option to provide feedback.
> >
> > Or you ask to cancel the service and they will ask why. Simple really.
>
> Check a box. Nobody has ever showed any actual interest in why I
> canceled an account -- including at the bank where I'd had an account
> for over 20 years. Today I suspect that if a bank saw someone that
> angry standing in a line they'd probably call the SWAT team.

I was with Consumer Cellular 2015 until a couple of weeks ago, and
when I canceled they never asked why, just sent multiple emails
saying "we want you back".

And to return to this thread's topic, when Consumer Cellular went to
2-factor authentication earlier this year, the options for a code
were text message or email. Every time I chose the text message, and
not once did it arrive. (This was once a month or more, since I had
to go through it to pick up my bill.) Then I would select email,
which did arrive (after a minute or two). It really does seem like
amateur hour over there.

[Stan Brown]

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 12:13:26 -0500, VanguardLH wrote:
> Not available every time, or not available at all for a particular call
> center or in-house tech support. Most times, sending feedback is like
> continually pressing a cross-walk button that isn't connected. Also, if
> sending feedback is easy then, yes, I'll do it. However, if I have to
> wade through a ton more of voice prompts, and waste even more of my
> time, then feedback costs me more than I'm willing to waste on it.
>

My big bugaboo is that the surveys always seem to ask questions where
none of the options is the right answer, but they don't let you
proceed unless you pick one. That's when I hang up.

Email surveys have the same issue plus a second annoyance: I've
interacted with two reps at the company with a couple of days,
because the first one didn't solve the problem or what they said
would happen didn't happen. The survey says something like "your
interaction with (company name)" but doesn't tell me which of the two
interactions they're talking about. That email goes straight to
trash.

In any case, I highly suspect all these surveys are just theater, and
don't make any difference in the company's operations. If they took
the feedback into account, they'd have to spend more money to provide
better service, and of course that's not going to happen.

[AJL]

On 10/1/2023 10:58 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
> On 10/1/23 10:06 AM, AJL wrote:

>> People pissed at off topic stuff please read no further.

>> I'm fortunate in that if my PCP can't see me there's an Urgent Care
>> facility nearby that is walk in and can usually see me within an
>> hour. Fortunately they take my insurance so my co-pay for the visit

>> is $15.

> We have those too. Absolutely worthless.

YMMV. I've always had good service at mine.

> Friend was told she had to go to the REAL ER after waiting perhaps an
> hour to be seen, and I have no idea how much they charged for that.

Probably depends on her insurance. My co-pay for an emergency room visit
is $50.

> Anything the urgent care people can deal with I can probably deal
> with myself -- hey, I've got band-aids, polysporin, alcohol,
> peroxide and Ace bandages! Oh yeah, aspirin, ibuprofen and cranberry
> juice.

But you can't write prescriptions...

[Stan Brown]

The solution was to replace Samsung's Phone app with Google's, as I
just reported in the other thread, "Re: Samsung phone app, Google
contacts app".

[candycanearter07]

On 10/1/23 00:21, Wally J wrote:
> Likewise, based on my search just now, I think the Samsung contacts
> app is called <com.samsung.android.app.contacts> on the Galaxy series.
> <https://i.postimg.cc/W38s6RNj/contact01.jpg>

How do you create these images?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

[Chris]

VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>> Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> VanguardLH <V...@nguard.LH> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I will have to deal with their Customer Service function in one way or
>>>>>> another. I have found that people who say that my call is important
>>>>>> to them are lying through their teeth. If I had to do it I would
>>>>>> probably regard the investment of an hour of my time as the price I
>>>>>> have to pay.
>>>>>
>>>>> Just an hour? I've too often been on the phone well over 4 hours trying
>>>>> to get them to resolve a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Why don't you you move?
>>>> Here, in the UK, that level of "service" would be unacceptable.
>>>
>>> To whom would you complain about service you don't like?
>>
>> At the end of every call you have the option to provide feedback.
>
> Not available every time, or not available at all for a particular call
> center or in-house tech support.

Here, pretty much any CS centre has it. If not you simply ask to make a
complaint and they are required to take it. If they don't respond within
14-28 days you take it to the ombudsman.

>
>> Or you ask to cancel the service and they will ask why. Simple really.
>
> I don't cancel services simply because I encounter an inept person.

It's the threat of cancellation that gets you noticed. No need to actually
cancel. Unless you're genuinely unhappy, of course.

> However, just because I report a problem doesn't mean they will know how
> to fix it. Sometimes the answer you get is not what you want, but there
> isn't a good one. Have you quit helping in Usenet for the same reason?

There are particular people I don't help on usenet.

[Wally J]

candycanearter07 <n...@thanks.net> wrote

>> Likewise, based on my search just now, I think the Samsung contacts
>> app is called <com.samsung.android.app.contacts> on the Galaxy series.
>> <https://i.postimg.cc/W38s6RNj/contact01.jpg>
>
> How do you create these images?

My phone is normally always displayed on my Windows machine.

That way my phone display is about two feet tall and a foot wide (or so).
Easy for me to see and easy for me to interact with mouse & keyboard.

I just merge screenshots of the display & then edit using Windows freeware.
Easy peasy.

If you need more information, check out Usenet archives for the r.p.d ng.
<https://groups.google.com/g/rec.photo.digital>
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.freeware>
<https://groups.google.com/g/alt.comp.microsoft.windows>
etc.

[candycanearter07]

Ooh cool.

[Ken Blake]

On Sun, 1 Oct 2023 12:49:22 -0700, AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:

>On 10/1/2023 10:58 AM, The Real Bev wrote:
>> On 10/1/23 10:06 AM, AJL wrote:
>
>>> People pissed at off topic stuff please read no further.
>
>>> I'm fortunate in that if my PCP can't see me there's an Urgent Care
>>> facility nearby that is walk in and can usually see me within an
>>> hour. Fortunately they take my insurance so my co-pay for the visit
>>> is $15.
>
>> We have those too. Absolutely worthless.
>
>YMMV. I've always had good service at mine.

As have I, but I've only had two experiences with it.

[Ken Blake]

That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
whether they are referring to me or my wife.

[AJL]

On 10/2/2023 7:43 AM, Ken Blake wrote:
> AJL wrote:

>> The Real Bev wrote:
>>> AJL wrote:

>>>> People pissed at off topic stuff please read no further.

>>>> I'm fortunate in that if my PCP can't see me there's an Urgent
>>>> Care facility nearby that is walk in and can usually see me
>>>> within an hour. Fortunately they take my insurance so my co-pay
>>>> for the visit is $15.

>>> We have those too. Absolutely worthless.

>> YMMV. I've always had good service at mine.

> As have I, but I've only had two experiences with it.

Perhaps I use it more than I should for simple stuff since it's often
easier than going to the PCP and the cost is the same (YMMV). Most
recently the SO woke feeling bad. She called the PCP but couldn't get in
until late afternoon so went to Urgent Care and was back home by 9AM.

I also have a Virtual Doctor available for simple stuff. My insurance
company is always suggesting I use it since (I'm guessing) they run it
and it probably costs them less...

[Frank Slootweg]

Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
[...]

> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
> whether they are referring to me or my wife.

I would hope that they would send messages for your wife to your wife
(unless she doesn't have a phone (AFAIK, she has a computer)) and
messages for you to you. There's this thing called 'privacy'.

[The Real Bev]

Perhaps they use the same email address.

I use MY email address for a lot of hubby's stuff because he's just
unsuited to dealing with the crap that I take in stride. Comes with the
territory :-) To be fair, he does solve most of my computer and physics
problems.

--
Cheers, Bev
Will give investment advice for food.

[Jörg Lorenz]

Am 02.10.23 um 16:46 schrieb Ken Blake:

> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
> whether they are referring to me or my wife.

Does your wife not have her own smartphone and her own e-mail-address?
And you are surprised about the mess? You seem to have a set-up almost
nobody else has.

--
Morituri te salutant

[Ken Blake]

On 2 Oct 2023 17:37:17 GMT, Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid>
wrote:

>Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>[...]
>
>> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
>> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
>> whether they are referring to me or my wife.
>
> I would hope that they would send messages for your wife to your wife
>(unless she doesn't have a phone
> (AFAIK, she has a computer)) and

She no longer has either. Everything comes to my phone number and my
e-mail address..

[Ken Blake]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 12:23:17 -0700, The Real Bev <bashl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On 10/2/23 10:37 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>> Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
>>> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
>>> whether they are referring to me or my wife.
>>
>> I would hope that they would send messages for your wife to your wife
>> (unless she doesn't have a phone (AFAIK, she has a computer)) and
>> messages for you to you. There's this thing called 'privacy'.
>
>Perhaps they use the same email address.

Yes. She had her own, but she's no longer able to deal with e-mail.

[Stan Brown]

On Mon, 2 Oct 2023 08:36:12 -0700, AJL wrote:
> Perhaps I use it more than I should for simple stuff since it's often
> easier than going to the PCP and the cost is the same (YMMV). Most
> recently the SO woke feeling bad. She called the PCP but couldn't get in
> until late afternoon so went to Urgent Care and was back home by 9AM.
>
> I also have a Virtual Doctor available for simple stuff. My insurance
> company is always suggesting I use it since (I'm guessing) they run it
> and it probably costs them less...
>

Kaiser offers a free nurse advice line, and some past insurers I've
had do also. (Of course Kaiser's understaffed call center software
makes it unnecessarily hard to actually talk to a nurse, but that's
another story.)

I find it really helpful to be able to describe my symptoms when I'm
not sure if I need urgent care, a routine doctor visit, or just self-
care at home - especially since both urgent care and the doctor are
an hour's drive away.

[Frank Slootweg]

Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> On 2 Oct 2023 17:37:17 GMT, Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
> >[...]
> >
> >> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
> >> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
> >> whether they are referring to me or my wife.
> >
> > I would hope that they would send messages for your wife to your wife
> >(unless she doesn't have a phone (AFAIK, she has a computer)) and
>
> She no longer has either. Everything comes to my phone number and my
> e-mail address..

I'm sorry to hear that! Of course I didn't mean to offend. The best to
the both of you.

[Chris]

There's also a thing "carer". Many, many people are carers for others so
are responsible for their doctor's appointments. This is a system failure.

[Frank Slootweg]

You are right of course and we are well to aware of what a "carer"
entails. But I was responding in the context about what I knew about Ken
and his wife. But, as Ken wrote, sadly their situation changed.

[Ken Blake]

On 3 Oct 2023 13:44:18 GMT, Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid>

wrote:

>Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>> On 2 Oct 2023 17:37:17 GMT, Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Ken Blake <K...@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>> >[...]
>> >
>> >> That reminds me that I sometimes get e-mail or text messages from my
>> >> medical insurance company or a doctors office that don't tell me
>> >> whether they are referring to me or my wife.
>> >
>> > I would hope that they would send messages for your wife to your wife
>> >(unless she doesn't have a phone (AFAIK, she has a computer)) and
>>
>> She no longer has either. Everything comes to my phone number and my
>> e-mail address..
>
> I'm sorry to hear that! Of course I didn't mean to offend.

I didn't think you did.

>The best to
>the both of you.

Thanks very much, Her condition is terrible, but at least she seems to
be pretty stable--not getting worse-- for now.