This article will focus on when an audit should be done and expectations. This article is written with general information, to inform the reader; to create a broad understanding of when, why and the benefits of this type of telecommunications audit.
Wouldn’t it be wonderful to receive a refund from a telecommunications provider? Or perhaps reduce current telecommunications costs without changing vendors?
Money talks (True Results):
- Refund amount $23,200 – A top-10 law firm was paying for services in New Jersey at a location they vacated in 2011. The services were turned over to the incoming tenant (alarms line services for an internal vaults and enhanced security system with call out functionality). Law firm finance never knew to change the carrier invoice responsibility from them to the tenants. The tenant never questioned why they didn’t receive an invoice but could work all of the services. The lease was clear the tenant was responsible for the payments to the carrier. In the end the tenant paid the law firm for the usage for over eight years and the carrier bill to responsibility was changed.
- Reduced monthly expenses by $5,000 per month – A casino was paying for services in Washington at a location that was closed in 2013.
- Savings of $2,800 per month – A client who had several years of expansion would “cookie cutter” order the same package of services for each new location. Through the audit process it was discovered for the last eight facilities, which were small square footage, several of the ordered phone lines were never installed to the phone system – there was no space on the connection boards for the lines. By “disconnecting” the never hooked up services the client saved over $2,800 a month.
- Savings of $532 per month – A casino forgot to disconnect Internet/phone services when the audit project was completed. These services were “active” but not used for 12 months.
- Refund $178,000 from AT&T – An equities firm located in Texas had a telecommunication expense of $35,000 per month. The error was the long-distance timing increments, and the problem went back to the contract inception.