Dan Munns Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 Hi all, We have some request types which have an SLA which is set by a regulatory body. As such these call types, when logged, shouldn't be able to be placed on hold as this will muddy the waters as far as what has breached. Is there a way of stopping some calls from being placed on hold and thereby stopping the timers? If not can I request that this functionality be added? Thanks, Dan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Ainsworth Posted May 16, 2019 Share Posted May 16, 2019 Hi Dan, Under a Service for each request type you can define sub-statuses. Each sub-status lets you define if it is an active or on-hold status. In your case you can define one or more sub-statuses that are all active. This will re move any option to put the request on hold. Hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Ainsworth Posted June 3, 2019 Share Posted June 3, 2019 Hi @Dan Munns Did you manage to have a look at the sub-status feature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Munns Posted June 3, 2019 Author Share Posted June 3, 2019 Sorry @James Ainsworth I have been a little snowed under and haven't had a look at this yet. I will try it out in my test service tomorrow and post back then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Munns Posted June 4, 2019 Author Share Posted June 4, 2019 Hi @James Ainsworth Unfortunately this doesn't seem to work. On my test service I created a single active sub-status: Yet on the requested created afterwards I can still put a call on hold: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Ainsworth Posted June 4, 2019 Share Posted June 4, 2019 Hi Dan, I'm seeing the same thing as you. This was not expected. I've asked development to see why this might be case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Ainsworth Posted June 11, 2019 Share Posted June 11, 2019 Hi Dan, I've since confirmed that removing the on-hold option is not available. I've raised a change request to have a look at making this optional. I'll update this post once it is scheduled for development. Regards, James Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Munns Posted June 11, 2019 Author Share Posted June 11, 2019 Thanks @James Ainsworth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now