- Report: #60632
Complaint Review: Charter Communications
| Charter Communications 9335 Prototype Dr.
Reno, Nevada U.S.A. |
|
Charter Communications rips off and lies to customers! They are corrupt and unethical! Reno Nevada
*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Charter is not operating "unethical or shady"
*Consumer Comment: A Blighted Ghost-town and State
*Consumer Suggestion: CHARTER'S UNETHICAL - JUST READ AND THINK!
*UPDATE Employee: NA UNTIL NEXT TIME...INSIDE REPORT.
*UPDATE EX-employee responds: Charter is not being unethical in this case.......
*Consumer Suggestion: follow up/response
*Consumer Comment: Color me foolish
*Consumer Comment: Color me foolish
*Consumer Comment: Color me foolish
*UPDATE EX-employee responds: The non-cable fee oddly is logical...
*Consumer Suggestion: Have you tried a lawyer?
*Consumer Comment: Cable is a subscription service!
Does your business have a bad reputation?
Fix it the right way.
Corporate Advocacy Program™
I can pre-pay my bill as much as 10 days in advance, and still get charged. Now they are going to raise the "non cable use fee" from $5.00 to $10.00. So for my reward for subscribing to internet servise for $29.95 a month, Charter thanks me by adding almost 50% extra on my bill for NOTHING! My decision to not buy cable television is my right, paying for service only after it has been provided is my right. Charter is stealing from me and many others, and it's wrong.
I started my account before Charter took over, and never had this problem with the last company. I would not be suprised if they charged everyone in their area wheather they were a subscriber or not. How can a company charge customers for NOTHING in return, or cost them a cent. The cable lines were already here and I already had a cable install which I paid for. Because Charter has an inferior product compared to Direct TV is not my fault.
This company has a monopoly in this area, so they essentially blackmale people by making penalties so outragous that Charter forces them to pay either way. This company also lists these charges on the bill in a way that is deceptive and sneaky. This company is evil and should be stripped of it's license. How do people make it known? Can the FCC do anything? They are the ones who gave the license in the first place. I have seen many complaints about Charter, and I believe every one! I hope Charter execs go to HELL!
Josh
Reno, Nevada
U.S.A.
This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 06/13/2003 04:59 PM and is a permanent record located here: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/Charter-Communications/Reno-Nevada-89521/Charter-Communications-rips-off-and-lies-to-customers-They-are-corrupt-and-unethical-Re-60632. 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.
Click Here to read other Ripoff Reports on Charter Communications
If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:
Search Tips#1 UPDATE EX-employee responds
Charter is not operating "unethical or shady"
AUTHOR: Diomenas - (United States of America)
SUBMITTED: Friday, February 10, 2012
Maybe before you throw around such heavy words, you should do a little bit of precursory research into what exactly it is that you are complaining about.
When you sign up for cable service with ANY provider, not just Charter Communications, you are signing a 'verbal contract'. Verbal Contracts are binding just as much as written/signed contracts. The contract is then mailed out to you with your first bill of service. The cable industry as a whole operates on a Pre-Bill billing method, as do several Telecom companies (try reading your Cell Phone bill every once in a while, they do the same thing). This means that the company bills you for the services they will provide you over the course of the next month (normally fix set to run from x to y where x is the date your services started on and y is the date prior to x in the next month.).
With this contract, you agree to pay the bill by a certain date (usually 15 days from x) and also that if you didn't, you would be charged a late fee, which by the way is normally a static $20 to $40 depending on company, it is not based on a percentage of your monthly rate as several have said before. Your submittal of payment for your first bill is a binding 'signature' of acceptance to both the verbal and the written [delivered by bill] contract. Paying for a service delivered with a contract is legally binding as having accepting the terms of the contract. Maybe if you are this quick to jump the gun on companies operating legally, you should read all bills of service before you pay them (and I don't just mean read what you are paying for, read the entire bill including all of the small print).
As for the "non-cable" fee for having internet only, this fee is levied due to the way Cable Internet operates. Cable based services run through a single pipeline. Internet and Phone services utilize 'channels' of cable service to deliver their content. Internet typically run within the +2db to +20db range on RF wavelength which is the same location that most basic cable services (including your broadcast stations) operate on. Phone runs on the +4 to +22 range. In order to allow you to receive Internet or Phone, basic cable has to be delivered as well. If you have a tv and broadband cable internet, you have basic service if you put two and two together. For this reason, most cable companies (not just Charter) charge a basic access fee to recoup lost costs of delivering basic service for free. By the way, did I mention that this access fee is normally cheaper than the company sells their basic service for? So in essence, you are getting basic cable at a discounted rate. I understand the whole "whether I wanted it or not" dilemma, but the issue is that Charter (or any other cable operator) are not the ones that created the methods in which their services are delivered, they simply implement them. If you want it to change, then develop a better method of delivering Cable Access Internet Phone and TV services, get the idea patented, and then approach the big dogs of the industry (Comcast, Time Warner, Charter) and pitch it as a game changing technology for their company. Seems to me that if you previous company wasn't charging you these fees, maybe there is a reason they sold out to Charter. Most cable companies that are purchased by Charter (and other larger conglomerates) are companies with financial struggles who are unable to maintain their network any longer. This is the case with some of the most historic purchases (if you want proof check out the acquisition of Marcus Cable by Charter Communications, this was one of their largest single purchases and the purchase was to buy out a company ran by one of the industry giants of the time).
The final point "Charter Communications Has a monopoly" is a joke. Maybe you should read more into the Cable Communications Act of 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_Communications_Act_of_1984) which governs how a Cable company operates. Cable companies are required to bid on municipalities. Local governing agencies are required to review bids that are offered and accept the company of their choosing. What this means, is that your local governments ultimately determine which cable companies are allowed to operate within your city/region. Cable franchises must submit claim for territory in their bid, if approved, the cable company is the sole operator of that franchise. They are then responsible for maintaining the lines in that area and delivering service to a percentage of every household within the franchised limits (normally they are only required to service up to 70% of the total number of occupied households based on annual census). Due to franchising of service areas, no two cable companies (note that I said CABLE companies) will operate in the same area at the same time unless the companies have a mutual agreement to permit the primary operator to provide carrier access (leased lines) to the secondary company for a nominal fee. I agree that this is outdated and despite being originally design to promote competition (by defranchising the large operators that owned entire states and regions in the 80s), it does not anymore. However, until the laws are re-written, it is still the law. For this reason alone, you cannot state that a cable company has a 'monopoly', simply for the fact that a monopoly is an unfair advantage gained from less than admirable business tactics. Cable 'monopolies' are gained by operating within the law. If you truly want to know more, research it, but several large companies (Charter included) are currently and have been actively petitioning the FCC and Supreme Court to challenge these regulations and De-monopolize cable districts, which would allow all cable providers to provide service in any area. Granted, this doesnt mean if you don't like Charter you could just up and switch to Bright House, the cable operator of your choice would still require physical presence in you area to provide the service, the government (or a single governing organization) would own the cable lines, and the cable operators would be required to pay leasing fees to utilize them. This has potential for both good and bad. The good, you get fair competitive pricing on your services. The bad, if the company or organization that owns the lines, doesn't maintain them properly or promptly, then all providers [and their customers] would suffer. Changes to the regulations in such a way, would require further legislation to ensure that service access lines are maintained properly and that a certain percentage of all inbound profits the owning company makes be spent on said maintenance (this is how copper POTS phone lines are governed).
Hopefully I have been able to dispel some of the myth that I see floating around in the original post and its rebuttals.
I don't consider myself an Industry expert, but I have been involved in the telecommunications industry for several years. I am not currently an employee of any cable operator, and my opinions [and factual information] are certainly not biased.
One last note, the original poster mentioned having seen many complaints about Charter, I beg them to answer this question. When do you not find negative comments regarding X service provider? In most cases, those who have nothing negative to say, tend to say nothing at all when it comes to providing feedback on a company and its operation. You will find just as many complaints if you search and scour the internet for Comcast, Time Warner, Bright House, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, DirecTV, Dish Network, Adelphia, et al. You name the company and do the same searches for them that you did for Charter, you will find just as many if not more negative results. The fact is, that the only time people think to mention their service provider online, is when they are frustrated by them, angry, or upset. Food for thought.
#2 Consumer Comment
A Blighted Ghost-town and State
AUTHOR: Jr - (USA)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, January 25, 2012
#3 Consumer Suggestion
CHARTER'S UNETHICAL - JUST READ AND THINK!
AUTHOR: Josh - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Sunday, December 19, 2004
#4 UPDATE Employee
NA UNTIL NEXT TIME...INSIDE REPORT.
AUTHOR: NA - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Thursday, December 16, 2004
I AM NOT HAPPY WORKING FOR CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS. INSIDE THE CALL CENTER AT IRWINDALE, THE MEXICANS EMPLOYEE GOT BETTER CHANCES TO GET PROMOTED OR MORE SALARY BECUSE THE FACILITY MANAGEMENT MOST OF THEM ARE MEXICAN TOO MANY FAVOURTISM.
MANAGEMENT INSIDE DO NOTHING BUT DOING THE SAME JOB OVER AND OVER WITH LESS RESULT.DOES THE CALLCENTER DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH CUSTOMER SERVICE.
AND THE COMPUTER AND TELEPHONE SYSTEM ARE ALL F**K UP TO MANY PROBLEMS. CUSTOMERS ARE GETTING CHARGE FOR PPV MOVIES WITH OUT SUB ORDERING IT. I DID SOME INVESTIGATING...WE HAVE A DEPT BUILDING THAT WOULD BETTA TESTING OUR PPV SYSTEM AND THEY WOULD JUST PICK ANY CUSTOMERS ACCOUNT AND IT COULD RESULT SUB BILL TO GO HIGH. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS IS INCREASING THIER RATES BY NEXT YEAR 2005.
NOT BECAUSE TO BETTER SERVICE OR BECAUSE TO BUY BETTER EQUIPMENT..MAYBE THE CFO MR CARL VOGEL NEEDS TO SECURE HIS FINANCIAL AND THE REST OF COORPORATE SALARY TO INCREASE.
I KEEP ASKING THE MANAGEMENT TO GET TRANSFER TO DIFF DEPT SO I COULD UPGRADE MY SKILLS, INSTEAD , THE MEXICAN APPLICANTS GOT MORE CHANCE OF ANY OPEN POSSITION.
JUST BECASUE I AM NOT THIER BUDDY DRINKING AFTER WORK. CHARTER COORPORATE IS SAME OLD SHIT. I WAS TRYING TO REPORT SOME ISSUES AT COORPORATE AT ST LUIS.THEY TOTALY JUST DID NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT.
I THINK CHARTER IS A MONOPOLY, THAY FORCE US TO GET INTO STOCK MARKET OF CHARTER AND I THINK THE MORE EMPLOYEE SIGN UO FOR STOCK THE MORE IT GOES UP AND WILL MAKE THE NONE EMPLOYEE INVESTOR BELEIVE WOW THEY ARE PICKING UP GOOD BUSINESS.
NOT KNOWING BY THE HLEP OF EMPLOYEES STOCK AND SOME OF MR.PAUL ALLEN'S POCKET MONEY ON IT AND THAT MAKES THE STOCK LOOK GOOD FOR CHARTER. THIS IS BUNCH OF BOLONY. UNTIL NEXT TIME...INSIDE REPORT.
#5 UPDATE EX-employee responds
Charter is not being unethical in this case.......
AUTHOR: Jenelle - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Nothing in your posts point out Charter being unethical. Every reply to this post has had one tone: YOU HAVE OPTIONS. Whether you choose another option is YOUR CHOICE. As for the cost of wireless...have you reported that company for not providing a lower cost equipment for those that can't afford it?
I am assuming here (and you know where assumptions can lead you...) that DSL is not available in the "rural part of Reno" you reside in. Living in a rural area has its pro's and con's. In your case, lack of available alternate internet providers is a con. If DSL is not available, then have you also filed a report against your local telephone company for not having that service available in your "rural" area?
As for the charges for basic service which you CHOOSE not to use not being charged by the previous company... there is a reason why they were bought out (and normally that reason has to do with moolah.) Please refer to my last post... the telephone company charges for a basic line whether you use it for phone calls or not. This is the same basic philosophy. It is BUSINESS.
As for the billing...am I to assume that you don't have a phone? Please refer to Beverly's 1st post. You are billed in advance for that service as well. Again, did you post a report against your telephone company as well?
Charter's billing system puts your bill due about 10 days into your billing cycle. You have a grace period of about another 10 days before a late fee is assessed. At that point you are approx 20 days into your billing cycle. 10+10=20. Is 20 days INTO your billing cycle too far in advance? Be logical.
The 10 day grace period is better than my credit cards... one day late and a $29 late fee is assessed. And don't let that $29 late fee take me over the limit, or else I get another $29 over-the-limit fee added too. This teaches us adults to pay our bills on time to avoid additional fees. Your late fee can't be more than $5. Find me a company that doesn't charge late fees...
So until you come up with something conniving or unethical or legally wrong, in my opinion you will continue to get the same responses as ALL of the replies to your report. Is everyone else "missing the point"?
If you are considering filing reports on all the companies who's logical policies you don't like, can you please file one for me too?!? I think that its unfair to have to pay security deposits, long distance charges and my worst irritation...paying before you pump at the gas station if you are paying with cash.
CHARTER IS NOT RIPPING YOU OFF IN THIS CASE. If you are crossing your fingers that another cable company will buy Charter out, then please look up Time Warner, TCI, COX etc. on this site to see their reports.
Thank you for your time and goodnight.
#6 Consumer Suggestion
follow up/response
AUTHOR: Josh - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Tuesday, November 02, 2004
Suggesting consumers just terminate service from a company that conducts their business unfairly doesn't solve anything and allows an unethical company to continue to operate without impunity. I worte this because I want to do something about Charter ripping us off!
For the record, I started my service with another provider that was taken over by Charter after the fact. Only then did the charges for 'NOT' buying television service begin. That is also when the late fees started being charged for not paying 'ENOUGH' in advance.
I understand the concept of paying in advance, I just don't agree with being charged late fees for service that is not paid an arbitrary amount of days prior to any service I get from them.
#7 Consumer Comment
Color me foolish
AUTHOR: Beverly - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 30, 2004
So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there.
But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees.
In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others.
I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly.
I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are.
There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all.
So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!
#8 Consumer Comment
Color me foolish
AUTHOR: Beverly - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 30, 2004
So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there.
But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees.
In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others.
I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly.
I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are.
There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all.
So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!
#9 Consumer Comment
Color me foolish
AUTHOR: Beverly - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 30, 2004
So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there.
But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees.
In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others.
I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly.
I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are.
There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all.
So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!
#10 UPDATE EX-employee responds
The non-cable fee oddly is logical...
AUTHOR: Jenelle - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Saturday, October 30, 2004
To accept the above fact while being upset with another company with the same principal is unfair, in my opinion.
A possible solution is to sit down and determine all actual costs of your internet service and speeds (including non-cable fees.) Compare that number to silimlar services with dsl or dial-up to make a decision on what best suits your needs.
Remember list any applicable equipment costs/rentals/purchases and contract terms, if any.
Good luck to you. I hope this helps a small bit with your frustration.
#11 Consumer Suggestion
Have you tried a lawyer?
AUTHOR: Beverly - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Wednesday, October 27, 2004
There are a lot of law firms out there just looking for new class action suits to file, this looks like it might be right up their alley. Give a few of 'em a call. Can't hurt, you, might hurt Charter enough to straighten up their act.
It would be one thing to offer a discount to cable subscribers. But to do the reverse and charge someone for NOT having a service is wrong.
And, yes, the FCC might just have something to say about it, have you called them? Have you called your town government? Local papers? Most states have a citizen's utility board that governs these sorts of charges too, start with your Secretary of State's office to see who regulates them in your state.
There's a lot you can try. I can't guarantee results, but it seems to me that there's going to be someone that will listen and act on this.
But, by the way, it is unlikely that they have a monopoly on internet service in your area. Have you contacted your local telephone company about a DSL line? Plus, there's always dial-up services which are a lot faster than they used to be. There are other options out there, including Direct TV which also provides internet service. Use your overpriced internet service to find an alternative that suits you better.
But, also, you have to acknowledge that cable, internet, your telephone, and most other services bill for the service portion of their fees in advance. Your phone company charges your fee for usage in advance and then bills you for your actual calls during the next billing cycle. This helps to minimize their losses when people don't pay -- and you have to honestly accept the fact that we're all penalized because of the few who DON'T pay their bills. You'll find most utilities do it this way and as long as they tell you in advance what you will be charged and when, it is your choice to accept those terms or not.
Whew, this has turned into a book. Anyway, as you can see, there's plenty you can do and plenty of choices you have... it might just take a bit of digging.
#12 Consumer Comment
Cable is a subscription service!
AUTHOR: Carla - (U.S.A.)
SUBMITTED: Friday, March 12, 2004

