The column for anyone fed up with bureaucracy, frustrated with delays or furious with poor service. Tell us your complaint and we'll try to fix it... A Mid-Levels reader signed up for a 6 megabyte bandwidth internet service with a telephone sales representative from PCCW's Netvigator. She later found that her building only supported 3MB bandwidth. 'I am appalled, to say the least, at the way Netvigator customer service has dealt with our account,' she said. 'A loyalty monthly package of either $180 for 6MB or $162 for 3MB was offered [in January]. I was initially a bit hesitant to go for the 6MB service, as our computer is mainly used for e-mail and surfing the net. The representative told me that 6MB would speed everything up, so I settled for it. 'But I did not see any change in speed. I still did not suspect anything until my neighbour told me in February that she had renewed her plan for $145 for 3MB. As much as she wanted to sign up for a 6MB account, it was not possible in our building. 'I was annoyed and phoned just to ask whether the 6MB service could be provided in our building on Robinson Road. The initial answer was there was no support. When I complained about paying for a non-existent 6MB plan, the representative said he had to confirm it with a technician.' Eventually the company confirmed that her building only supported the lower bandwidth connection. After a Take Action inquiry, Netvigator has apologised for the mistake and has lowered her monthly charges. PCCW said the sales agent involved has been reprimanded. 'That was a mistake on the part of our sales representative. We have apologised to the customer and she has accepted our arrangements. A 6MB service will be rolled out to the customer's location in the near future,' a company spokesman said. Because of wrong information given about a tax loan that Lai Wing-sze of Tin Shui Wai took out from Hang Seng Bank, she almost failed to obtain a mortgage from the same bank and was penalised for early payment of her tax loan. 'I would like to complain against a front-line staff member of Hang Seng Bank's Quarry Bay branch,' she wrote. 'When I visited the branch at the end of last year, I was told that borrowing a tax loan would not affect the mortgage application I was going to make. She especially told me that if the tax loan just covered the tax payment, it would not affect my credit rating. 'It turned out what she said was wrong. Taking out a tax loan did affect my credit. I only found this out by calling the bank's loans department. As I had to repay the tax loan early, I had to pay a penalty. 'My complaint is not just about the penalty charge. It is about the trouble Ms Chan had caused me by giving me wrong information.' In its reply to Take Action, Hang Seng Bank did not admit to any wrongdoing, but according to Ms Lai, a bank branch manager called her to apologise and she had been refunded more than $300, roughly equivalent to the penalty she was made to pay over the tax loan. 'According to the staff who handled Ms Lai's tax loan application, she had communicated to Ms Lai the bank's lending guidelines regarding the maximum debt-to-income ratio used in assessing a loan application,' a bank spokeswoman said. 'The staff had explained to Ms Lai that the term 'debt' referred to the total monthly loan payment, including mortgages and personal loans such as tax loans. We believe there may have been a misunderstanding. 'The bank manager has contacted Ms Lai and has settled the matter to her satisfaction.' A reader writes to warn about a danger spot on Upper Albert Road and asks if transport officials would consider setting up a pedestrian crossing. 'I live in Ridley House on Upper Albert Road in Central. Traffic whizzes along the road at dangerous speeds and fast-moving vehicles appear from nowhere behind a blind corner,' he said. 'Elderly people returning from their morning exercise in the Botanical Garden are hesitant to cross the road because of the blind spot that only makes it possible to see vehicles once they appear feet away. A crossing with pedestrian lights is vital if we wish not to see a horrendous accident very soon. 'I have written to the authorities on several occasions and yet nothing has been done.' The Transport Department said a crossing at this location was not feasible. 'The complainant wishes the government to put a crossing with pedestrian lights at the section of road fronting Ridley House. However, as only west-bound traffic at that section comes from a blind corner, the location is not suitable for a crossing for safety reasons,' it said in a statement. 'Pedestrians are advised to use the existing crossings (one at Glenealy) to cross the Upper Albert Road when travelling to and from Ridley House and the Botanical Garden.'