- Report: #926819
Report - Rebuttal - Arbitrate
Complaint Review: CenturyLink and Direct TV
CenturyLink and Direct TVPO Box 91156 Internet United States of America
CenturyLink and Direct TV Bullies, Arrogant, and Zero Customer Service Internet
I also contacted CenturyLink (hereinafter CL) and told them to continue my internet service, but to discontinue the land telephone line.
They discontinued my services as of May 11, 2012. I had a $95.97 credit with these businesses, as a result of prepaying for services for the month of May. I had bundled so my contact was with CL.
On June 14, 2012, I renewed my contract with CL and DT, because of bonuses offered to me. I again bundled services.
On or around June 28, 2012, I received a notice that my services would be disconnected for non-payment of services. I called CL and was told my services were being disconnected for non-payment of approximately $193.91. They told me that I owed them for the internet services to date, as well as $95.97. This was the $95.97 credit I had coming from DT.
As was explained to me, CL paid the DT part of my bill to DT and then sought payment from me. They paid the $95.97 that I did not owe; this amount was a bill for charges between the date of disconnection (May 11, and the date of the new contract June 14). I did not have services between these dates. The customer service rep told me to pay the balance of what I owed to date for the internet services and she would set aside the $95.97 that was a refund DT would pay to me so I could
pay CL. I paid everything owed other than the $95.97 refund DT owed CL.
On July 12, 2012, my services were disconnected for non-payment of the $95.97 refund owed on the books to me, (I had not received this refund at this time.)
I want to be clear that this $95.97 was the money DT owed to CL because CL paid for services I did not contract for or receive because my contract was ended. I had paid the monies I owed in full and owed neither DT nor CL any money.
I spoke to DT and CL about this disconnection threat and they offered to set up a payment plan. I declined this offer since I did not owe any money to DT or CL, it was money DT owed to CL.
On July 20, 2012, I received my full refund check from DT and immediately sent a cashier's check in the amount of $95.97 to CL/DT. My services were restored. Services had been disconnected from July 12 to July 23.
Beginning July 12, 2012, when they disconnected my services I started to demand that the contract with DL and CL be discontinued due to the demand for payment by me to DL/CL of money I did not owe and refused to pay and the unjustified disconnection of services.
DT and CL informed me that the contract was valid and to terminate it would result in an early termination charge of approximately $400. I was so angry and outraged about the disconnection of my services based on no wrong doing on my part, that I demanded that they end the contract. As a result, they terminated the contract and charged about $400.
Once I cooled down and considered the battle that would ensue to take DT to court and have the law determine that the contract had been violated by DT and was no longer enforceable, and because I suffer from PTSD when extremely agitated, I decided to reactivate the tv services and pursue my remedies through the attorney general's office.
When I called DT to instruct them to restart the services, I was informed that I would not be eligible for the incentives offered to me when I initially signed the contract with them. No one at any time told me that ending the contract would result in the permanent termination of the incentives.
I decided to pursue remedies through the consumer protection duty of my Oregon Attorney General and reactivated my contract under duress and protest.
As a result of the loss of bonuses, I reduced services to the minimum.
I feel these actions by CL and DT are violations of our contract and I should be allowed to discontinue my contract with these
companies without penalties. I should also be given credit for the time services were disconnected without a lawful
cause, and for the charges of reconnection of my services.
In the event that the contract is considered legitimate, I demand that the bonuses granted upon activation of this contract should be restored, and that I not be charged for reconnection.
I believe that CL and DT practiced unlawful debt collection when they demanded that I pay them $95.97 for a time period that I did not receive services from DT, and they knew it.
I have spent hours on the telephone with these two companies trying to resolve this situation. They have been stolid and unwilling to negotiation with me. They insist that the contract is valid, they disregard their efforts to collect monies I did not owe, disregard the fact that there was no notice given that bonus services granted upon the activation of a new contract would be revoked under any circumstances, and have been a bully about the entire situation.
It appears to me that DT and CL have no regard for the law and are willing to use whatever strong arm tactics they choose to force their unfortunate customers to do their will.
Thank you for defending the consumers against the unlawful practices of large companies that have no incentive to comply with the laws of contract and lawful debt collection.
As a result of my complaint to FCC, CL wrote a cold and uncaring letter, just short of a form letter that did not address my concerns in any way that indicated a resolution was to be considered or offered. They continued to be cold and bullying in their attitude.
Furthermore, when I reactivated my land line and requested the same phone number I had in May of 2012, I was told I could have it. They reactivated my phone, but with the wrong number. I called and requested that the correct number be attached to my phone and was told that it was taken care of.
The correct number was not attached and so I again called CL to get it attached and was told that the people needed to correct the problem was not in and I would have to call again. I asked if they could call me to avoid the automatic wait for an agent and was told that they could not do that, in effect, they were too busy and I would have to call again.
I think I have a perfect example of how CL and DT have no, or worse than no customer service standard, are bullies that know the consumer is helpless against them and their tactics short of going to court, and that it will take some huge powerful lawsuit or publicity to get their attention.
I have 62 years old and thought the old days of bullying and unlawfully enforcing unlawful or unfair contracts ended with the dispersal of AT&T...obviously I was wrong.
Thank you for being willing to give a forum to the unfortunate consumer that does business with DirectTV and/or CenturyLink.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 08/13/2012 07:47 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/CenturyLink-and-Direct-TV/internet/CenturyLink-and-Direct-TV-Bullies-Arrogant-and-Zero-Customer-Service-Internet-926819. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year.
Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report.
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:Search Tips
In order to assure the best results in your search:
- Keep the name short & simple, and try different variations of the name.
- Do not include ".com", "S", "Inc.", "Corp", or "LLC" at the end of the Company name.
- Use only the first/main part of a name to get best results.
- Only search one name at a time if Company has many AKA's.
Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.
- Business's (11)
- Lawyers and Law Firms (5312)
- Administrative Law (11)
- Admiralty & Maritime Law (27)
- Agricultural Law (2)
- Alternative Dispute Resolution (10)
- Antitrust & Trade Regulation (1)
- Appellate Practice (72)
- Aviation & Aerospace (11)
- Banking Law (90)
- Bankruptcy (380)
- Business Law (232)
- Civil Rights (55)
- Class Actions (30)
- Commercial Law (13)
- Communications Law (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Construction Law (83)
- Contracts (7)
- Corporate Law (75)
- Criminal Law (668)
- Debtor & Creditor (51)
- Education Law (14)
- Elder Law (77)
- ElectionCampaign & Political (0)
- Eminent Domain (5)
- Employee Benefits (7)
- Energy (0)
- Entertainment & Sports (17)
- Environmental Law (43)
- Family Law (13)
- Finance (0)
- Government (14)
- Government Contracts (2)
- Health Care (1)
- Immigration (482)
- Indians & Native Populations (1)
- Insurance (90)
- Intellectual Property (526)
- International Law (33)
- International Trade (0)
- Internet Law (7)
- Investments (1)
- Labor & Employment (12)
- Legal Malpractice (92)
- Litigation (20)
- Media Law (1)
- Medical Malpractice (13)
- Mergers & Acquisitions (0)
- Military Law (5)
- Natural Resources (10)
- Occupational Safety & Health (0)
- Personal Injury (842)
- Products Liability (21)
- Professional Liability (0)
- Real Estate (361)
- Securities (169)
- Taxation (142)
- Technology & Science (0)
- Toxic Torts (0)
- Transportation (2)
- Trusts & Estates (368)
- White Collar Crime (1)
- Wills & Probate (7)
- Workers Compensation (242)
- Zoning, Planning & Land Use (10)
- Legal Services (32)
- Arbitrators/Mediators (7)
- Automotive Expert Witnesses (0)
- Bail Bonds (0)
- Court Reporters (1)
- Electronic Data Discovery (1)
- Expert Witnesses (1)
- Forensic Experts (1)
- Jury Selection (0)
- Legal Assistants (8)
- Legal Speakers (2)
- Litigation Support (2)
- Medical Expert Witnesses (1)
- Other (14)
- Paralegal (5)
- Private Investigators (6)
- Process Servers (7)
- Translators/Interpreters (0)
- Miscellaneous Business Services (19)