Be sure to read our Ultimate Consumerist Guide to Fighting Back, a go-to handbook for the dissatisfied consumer. Once you've decided to go the executive customer service right, be sure you read this first so you know what to say when you call the corporate avatar of your choice.

The Consumerist Executive Customer Service Index

ACS
Adelphia
Air Tran
Alamo
Alaska Airlines
Allegiant
Aloha
Amazon
America West
American Airlines
American Express
Amtrak
Apple
ATA
AT&T
AT&T Wireless
Bank of America
Barnes and Noble
Bell Canada
Best Buy
Blizzard
Blockbuster
Blogger
Bloomingdales
Blue Cross/Blue Shield
British Airways
Borders
Busey Bank
Buy.com
Cablevision
Charter Communications
Chase
Circuit City
Citibank
Comcast
Continental
cox
Delta
Direc-TV
Discover Card
Dish
Disney
Ebay
Enterprise
Equifax
Experian
Fedex
Frontier Airlines
Fry's
Gamefly
Geek Squad
Georgia Power
Helio
Home Depot
Humana
HSBC
IKEA
ING Direct
Insight
Keybank
Lenovo
Loew's
Macy's
Microsoft (and Xbox)
Midwest Airlines
Motorola
National City
Nicors
Northwest Airlines
Norton
Office Depot
Office Max
Orbitz
Paypal
Pitney Bowes
Qwest
RCN
Regions Bank
Register.com
Ryan Air
Samsung
Seagate
Sears
Sirius
Skybus
Sony Ericcson
Spirit Airlines
Sprint
Sports Authority
Staples
Symantec
T-mobile
Target
Time Warner Cable
TransUnion
Uhaul
United Airlines
United Health Care
UNUM Life Insurance
UPS
US Airways
US Cellular
Verizon landline/DSL/Fios
Verizon Wireless
Vonage
Wachovia
Walmart
Washington Mutual
Wells Fargo

In the event you can't find the info you are looking for here, you can scan our backlog of contact info, or use Google to uncover the addresses yourself. In the event you find something we don't have, feel free to share at tips@consumerist.com.

Researched by Alex Jarvis
Last updated: 11/07/2008

Janine Butler said, "This person could come into my home during the day, during the evening time. They could steal, rob, rape. We live in a scary time."

But this isn't just scary, she says - it's dangerous. Because they don't have cell phones, and her husband, Dave, is diabetic, she says her phone line is her lifeline.

"If he went into shock, he could die," she explained. "It is a life-threatening problem that we have without a phone."

Bob Gravely can't say if Qwest is looking at one particular person, but he did say they take any network disruption very seriously, and an investigation was under way immediately.

Stay alert, citizens! The Qwest slasher remains on the loose and is presumably armed with slashing tools. You or your phone line could be next!

Redmond couple told Qwest tech cut phone line [KTVZ] (Thanks to Geoffrey!)

Now it reads,

Your questions and concerns are very important to us.

In an effort to provide a faster response, and to ensure your personal security, we ask that you please use our online chat (available on most pages in the upper right corner), call or visit us at one of our retail locations. This will ensure the most complete and timely response to your questions and concerns.

Well, at least now they've provided an explanation (and there's at least one reader who agrees with them).

Remember, if you've tried to resolve a problem with your Qwest account and haven't had any luck, you can always try one of the people listed in their corporate directory.

(Photo: Getty)

Justin tried to contact Qwest last week to resolve a problem with their service. He clicked the "E-mail Us" link under "Residential" and a window popped up with the following message:

Your questions and concerns are very important to us, however we are no longer able to respond to email. Please consider the other contact options available.

The "Small Business" email option has been disabled, too.

Justin points out,

Email is an amazing tool for communicating complex technical problems. My intention was to email them a screenshot, which clearly shows the problem. Explaining this issue over the phone would be nearly impossible.

Email is also useful for contacting customer support when you don't have a lot of time to sit around waiting to be told how Very Important you are to the company. Apparently, however, it's too old fashioned for Qwest to deal with.

Remember, if you've tried to resolve a problem with your Qwest account and haven't had any luck, you can always try one of the people listed in their corporate directory.

(Photo: Getty)

"If you go online and you only have one choice of a subsidiary of one of these companies, it's not one-stop shopping," [Ev Liebman of New Jersey Citizen Action] said. "It's simply misleading. Consumers need to be aware that there are other companies providing similar services and possibly at lower prices."

Movearoo's sponsors disagree, saying it's just useful advertising for their services and not misleading.

"It's not unlike what other industries do when they provide services," said Frank Kellam, business development manager for Verizon. "You won't find the traditional phone companies on a similar site (cablemover.com) set up by the cable companies. It's not unique and it's not out of line."

They're right. But that's also why you should look for more comprehensive online help when you move.

Interestingly, you don't have to look very far: the company responsible for Movearoo's backend has a similar site called WhiteFence.com which offers a much broader list of companies to compare. (Although we see no mention of companies like Vonage on their site.)

Do you know of other websites that offer help with moving, and aren't just fronts for a few key players? Add them to the comments below.

"Aid or ad? New telephone hookup website blurs the line, critics say" [New Jersey Star-Ledger]
(Photo: Getty)

Here's a bunch of contact info for Qwest executives, lifted straight from their company directory. Got an issue with a residential landline or DSL? Problem with Qwest iQ Networking products? Concern about Qwest business related network support? Concern about Qwest marketing? Need to know who to send a lawsuit? Just need to get a message straight to the CEO? Inside, executive contacts for all of the above.

Issues related to residential dial tone lines (POTS) or DSL sales/installation:

Kruger, Paula
Executive Vice President-Mass Markets
Mass Markets
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St, 52nd Floor
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
paula.kruger@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 992 4005
Fax: +1 303 296 4252
Assistant
Williams, Cheryl A
Sr Executive Admin Assistant
+1 303 992 4001

Concerns regarding installation, order delays, or activation/turnup issues related to Qwest iQ Networking products (such as the popular Qwest Office Connect product):

Coon, Christina L
Vice President-Network Ops and Eng
Network Services
Qwest Communication Corp.
1801 California St, Floor 51
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
Christina.Coon@qwest.com
Assistant
Anthony, Diane M
Sr Executive Admin Assistant
+1 303 992 5949
Office: +1 303 992 6565
Fax: +1 303 296 4798

Concerns regarding any Qwest business-related network support (DS1, DS3, Ethernet services, trouble and repair, etc.)

Lucero, Amador B
Vice President - Network Ops and Eng
Network Services
Qwest Corporation
700 W Mineral Ave, MNA1622
Littleton CO 80120-0000
United States
Amador.Lucero@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 707 7168
Fax: +1 303 707 2005
Assistant
Rojo, Jaimee B
Sr Administrative Assistant
+1 303 707 7192

Tregemba, Robert (Bob) D
Executive Vice President - Network Operations
Network Services
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St, 5200
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
Bob.Tregemba@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 707 8000
Fax: +1 303 296 0286
Assistant
Eitel, Carolyn J
Sr Executive Admin Assistant
+1 303 707 8013

Concerns regarding Qwest marketing, possible PR contact:

Karlis, Richard
Director Marketing
Corporate Relations
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St, 50th Floor
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
rich.karlis@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 896 4465
Fax: +1 303 896 4982

Another possible PR contact:

Padilla, Frederic (Ric)
VP-Corp Social Responsibility
Corporate Relations
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St, 50th Floor
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
Ric.Padilla@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 896 9338
Fax: +1 303 896 4982
Assistant
Barbour, Debra (Debbie) J
Executive Admin Assistant
+1 303 896 5532

Legal contact (good to serve a lawsuit to):

Baer, Richard N
EVP-Gen Counsel
Legal
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St, 5200
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
Rich.Baer@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 992 2811
Assistant
Dominguez, Christine
Sr Executive Admin Assistant
+1 303 992 5021

Self-explanatory:

Mueller, Edward (Ed) A
Chairman and CEO
Ceo/Coo
Qwest Corporation
1801 California St
Denver CO 80202-2658
United States
Ed.Mueller@qwest.com
Office: +1 303 992 1414
Assistant
Houston, Brenda L
Manager Administration
+1 303 992 1414

RELATED: Email Addresses For Qwest Executives

(Photo: romulusnr)

Working
stephanie.comfort@qwest.net - Executive Vice President, Corporate Strategy
teresa.taylor@qwest.net - Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer
john.richardson@qwest.net - Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President

Bounced back
edward.mueller@qwest.net - Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer
richard.baer@qwest.net - Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary
william.johnston@qwest.net - Vice President, Chief Accounting Officer, Controller
frank.popoff@qwest.net - Found a press release referring to him, I believe he's on the Board.

RELATED
"Qwest Sells Woman "Cheaper" Package That Costs More, Has Unmentioned 2-Year Commitment, And Requires New Modem"

Customer service has been no help, so Matt emailed people at the executive level. Although several addresses bounced back the message, Matt did receive a promise that Qwest's executive VP that someone from customer service would contact him to resolve the matter. That was on March 31st, and he still hasn't heard back from anyone.

Here's the email Matt sent to the Qwest bigwigs:

Dear Teresa Taylor,
 
My name is Matt [redacted] and I am writing to you on behalf of my mother, [redacted]. Recently, she was the victim of some very bad customer service, of which I wanted to make you aware. My mother was satisfied with her service, but when she attempted to add a long distance plan to her decades-old account, adding to Qwest's bottom line, she was bumped off her plan, signed up for a two year contract without her knowledge, presented with false claims that she would save money, asked to pay an additional $60, and prevented from using the service for which she paid, for approximately a week at the time of writing.
 
My mother has had the same phone service for over three decades, including Qwest and your predecessors in the area, at the phone number [uh-oh redacted as well]. She has had DSL internet with Qwest for approximately 8 years, signing up for a 256 kbps line with an internal DSL modem. Her bill in February for these two services totaled approximately $63. For most of this time, she has been very satisfied, except for the times when her connection would be unavailable for days or weeks at a time. Tech support representatives were often completely unhelpful, despite keeping her on the phone for hours. On one occasion, over a three-day weekend, she had to wait three and a half days to have someone reset her password after she had forgotten it and accidentally erased it from her computer.
 
Recently, she made a phone call to Qwest to try to sign up for a long distance plan to replace her plan with AT&T. This should have been a simple call to add a relatively inexpensive service, but she was given a hard sell to change her plan. She was told that she could save $11 by switching to a bundle that would include phone and internet service at 1.5 mbps, and an additional discount for bundling her phone, internet, and DirecTV service. The operator failed to mention that she would be signing a two year contract with Qwest as part of the Price for Life program, the new bill for phone and internet would total approximately $66, she would be ineligible for the new DirecTV equipment that new customers receive, and that the service would fail to work with her current modem, requiring her to buy or rent a new one. Soon after, she was unable to use her internet and approximately a week passed before the issue was resolved when my mother and I spoke with someone in the sales department.
 
When I called into Qwest and had an opportunity to speak with a salesperson about the problem, she was the first person we found remotely helpful and was able to find the tech support operator, "Roger," who finally discovered the problem. It was at this point that the representative told us that my mother would have to pay $60 for a modem or pay $5 a month to rent the moment. She had the audacity to claim that my mother would still be saving $6 if she paid $5 every month in perpetuity for the modem, despite the fact that a $5 increase would bring the cost to $71, which would be $8 more than she paid on her February bill. My mother could receive credit for the time her internet was down before the source of the problem was found, but if she did not choose to take advantage of the offer to send a modem, she would have to keep paying for unusable internet.
 
I asked to have my mother's plan revert back to her original plan and after a long time spent on hold, I was told that this would not be possible as the plan was no longer offered. I asked to at least have the Price for Life contract removed and she was eventually able to do this after another period on hold. A supervisor offered to have the modem sent overnight with no additional shipping costs, but we were told that we would still have to pay for the modem. The operator gave us her personal work email to us so that we could contact her with further questions, which was a nice gesture, and my mother and I ended the call.
 
Although I am happy that we eventually discovered what had happened to bring my mother's internet down, we are both completely unsatisfied with the proposed resolution and the road which brought us here. As I said in the first paragraph of this letter, my mother had been satisfied with her service, but when she attempted to add a long distance plan to her decades-old account, adding to Qwest's bottom line, she was bumped off her plan, signed up for a two year contract without her knowledge, presented with false claims that she would save money, asked to pay an additional $60, and prevented from using the service for which she paid, for approximately a week.
 
We ask that you instead consent to a resolution which we believe is fair, where my mother receives local phone service, DSL internet at 1.5 Mbps, and a free modem that will make the service usable, at the same price she was already paying, as well as a free upgrade to new DirecTV equipment, discounts for bundling her current DirecTV with her phone and internet, and credit for the time she has been unable to use her internet service. We believe that the upgrade to 1.5 Mbps and new DirecTV equipment is fair for a long time customer whom has happily put up with so much frustration for years, and will prevent future confusion with tech support operators who have been unfamiliar with her current modem and TV equipment. This will also allow Qwest to stop maintaining an outdated line. If you wish to propose an alternative, please let us know. My mother is already looking at prices for competitors and working on a letter to Consumerist.com, the Better Business Bureau, and the Iowa Attorney General, so we ask that you respond to this message promptly or by April 4th at 5:00 pm at this address.
 
Thank you for your time, and your attention to this matter.

A company spokeswoman told the Rocky Mountain News there's no policy that requires field technicians to use urinal bags while they're out on a job.

The Communications Workers of America local hasn't filed a grievance.

One local administrative director said that while the union deals with a "a lot of silliness in corporate America," this one takes the [urinal] cake.

Urinal Bags Don't Sit Well With Union [WDSU]
(Photo: Getty)

My father grew up in Ottawa, a small Midwest town in Illinois. For the majority of his life, he had 2 full-time jobs. He was the receiving clerk for a hardware store and he was also a house painter. He went to work between 3 to 5 AM and rarely got home until after dark, 6 days a week. He was very active and self-sufficient so when in 1992 he was diagnosed with a particularly aggressive case of multiple sclerosis, he was devastated as was my entire family. His MS never went into regression and within 5 years he was wheelchair bound, in a nursing home, and very reliant on others.

In 2006, my mother and I moved to Owatonna, Minnesota so she could be near her family because she too developed major medial condition and needed familial support. Of course, my father also moved here to support her. He was placed in a local nursing home and was fairly content, with one large exception. After living 60+ year in the same town and becoming a something of a local fixture, it's only natural that he wanted to keep in touch with his friends and family there. Obvious answer, get a phone.

So enters QWest

With the permission and encouragement of the nursing home staff, he had a phone line put in that was independent of the building systems, so he could call out and people could call him without having to go through an operator. The very same day the line was put in, which had been done while he was in the dining room having lunch, he found he could not receive calls. Within a week, a technician checked his line and said everything was working perfectly. He was wrong. My father still could not receive calls. After yet another technician checked and failed to actually do anything about it, my father canceled his service.

The next month he received a bill. A bill for services not rendered.

Quickly, he called Qwest and explained that he never had service and did not think he should be required pay for nothing. The next month, received another bill. He called, again, and explained the situation, again, and said he was refusing to pay the bill. He was told that, according to their records, complete service ha been rendered and if he did not pay, they would send his account to collections. Since then, my father, mother and I have contacted Qwest numerous times trying to explain that, indeed, the line didn't operate correctly. We have been stonewalled and now my mother, who is retired and has large medical bills, has to pay the bill or her credit rating will drop. Of course, I have offered many times to pay the bill for them, but as I am not on the account and my parents won't accept the money or even tell me how much they must pay, I cannot.

Evidently Qwest's policy is that all customers are liars and that they themselves are infallible. They must need every single penny, as my father's bill cannot exceed $200. I understand, as it's also a lot of money to my parents.

I now know Qwest spells their name that way. Firstly, for the geographic allusion. Secondly, because U don't matter to them.

Sean

Another way to get Qwest's attention is to file an official complaint with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission. They'll forward your complaint to Qwest and follow up on it to make sure it gets resolved. Finally, you can also complain to the Minnesota Attorney General, Lori Swanson.

If you do end up having to pay the bill, make sure you get a copy of your phone records showing that no calls came through, then take Qwest to small claims court to recover the money you paid for the non-working phone. It's easier than it sounds and they might not even show up to argue, in which case you'll get a default judgment.

The email format for qwest is FirstName.LastName@qwest.com, and a list of their top executives can be found here. For more information about how to learn to launch an EECB, click here.

Overall rating / Company / Rating for Internet / TV / Phone
250 Verizon FiOS 84, 84, 82
222 Bright House 75, 69, 78
222 Cox 74, 69, 79
221 Verizon/DirecTV 73, 74, 74
221 Qwest/DirecTV 72, 74, 75
221 AT&T/Dish Network 72, 70, 74
214 Cablevision 72, 65, 77
208 Time Warner 71, 63, 74
199 Comcast 66 ,62, 71
188 Charter 61, 59, 68

Despite occasionally setting a house on fire, Verizon FiOS is clearly tops, while Comcast and Charter are scraping the bottom.

Internet, TV, phone [Consumer Reports]

"Thank you for bringing this issue to our attention. I work at Qwest, and I am Mac user with Qwest Broadband. I want to clarify that Qwest Broadband absolutely works with Macs. I apologize for the poor experience Ms. Case had with our technical support - it runs counter to our goal to provide outstanding customer service. We have Mac specialists in our technical support centers, and there is an online resource available for Mac users with Qwest Broadband at: http://www.qwest.com/internethelp/opsystems/mac/index.html#osten"

Thanks! Maybe that link should be shared with the grunt level customer and tech support staff. They didn't seem to be able to find it the nine different times our reader Lindsey called.

(Photo: Noël Lee)

When I received the modem and start up disc, none of the codes would work for my computer, nor my housemates. I called Qwest and was told that it was because I had a MacBook. During the month of June I called Qwest over nine times, and was repeatedly told in both polite and in rude terms that the problem was my Mac, not Qwest. During one call to Qwest, an employee told me that he could get it up and running in 30 seconds if my computer were a PC. When I asked him if any of his colleagues were trained for Macs, he told me that hardly anyone uses macs and Qwest should not have to train its employees in a practically obsolete system. He then transferred me, against my will, to the apple support line."

My computer is a 2007 Macbook that receives wireless at every coffee shop or business with wireless; i is not a problem with my computer. The apple support line should not have to pick up the pieces for Qwest employees.

The amount of time spent on the phone with Qwest in June, transfers directly to my cell phone bill. I went over my minutes for the first time in my cell phone contract by exactly the amount of time I was on the phone with Qwest. I admit, I do choose to have a cell phone instead of a landline. This means that 1-800 numbers cost minutes on my plan, yet if Qwest employees had been trained sufficiently in both Macs and PCs, I should have only had to make one phone call, and thus not go over my minutes. I do believe that part of my $57.54 monthly Qwest bill is to having access to customer service.

After this cell phone bill, I asked Qwest for a new modem to rent. I was sent a non-rental and charged roughly $100. I did not learn this until my bill at the end of July.

After receiving the new modem, I had the same series of problems with wireless not working in the household. After three more phone calls, I got a Qwest employee that knew Macs. He got the wireless up and running in under 30 seconds.

Shortly after the wireless got working, I got the bill for the charged modem. I immediately called billing and asked if I could have it transferred on my account as a rental. The first person I talked to did not think they could do it, but then I got them to transfer me to the Loyalties Department. The first person I talked to in loyalties, told me that they could change it to rental status, and because I was a loyal customer, he would give me three months for half price in recompense for all the previous trouble. He told me to wait three days to pay my bill, because he would start the discount that month. I was much relieved. Yet when I called to check on my bill five business days later, it had not changed.

When I called to check with billing they had two different computer profiles for me, one gave the information that loyalties had told me, the other had the higher bill. They could not rectify it, so instead of Qwest figuring it out its own internal error, they forced me to talk to Loyalties, billing, and customer care. I spent over two hours on the phone that day. I should not be the one communicating to each department in Qwest about Qwest's own internal error on my bill. Qwest should be taking responsibility for making sure their profiles on the customer's is correct. I believe this is what costumer service entails.

I canceled my service that day. This was the middle of August. I was told by Loyalties that my plan would be terminated, and essentially erase a month of service from my bill for all the inconvenience, and that she would send me a label with reference number for the modem, so that I wouldn't have to eat the cost of the modem. I never received a reference number. It took the final bill until mid-September to arrive. Loyalties was able to give me the one month discount. Yet the modem had not been credited. I had to call again for a reference number to send the modem back. Again I was told not to pay the bill for the modem.

I sent the modem back near the end of September. On September 26th, I received notification that Qwest was going to send my bill to a collection agency if I did not pay or make arrangements for payments. The bill in question was the combination of the $100 erroneous charge for the modem, the non-credited month of service and a partial month of service. All of these charges I had been told by three separate employees to wait to pay, yet apparently interdepartmental communication had failed again. I called on the 26th and paid everything except for the modem cost, asking if that would stop them from sending it to collections. The Qwest employee told me it would.

One week later, I got another notice to pay the $100 for the modem, or it would be sent to collections. Again, I called and asked to put a stop on the transfer to collections. Again, I was told it would not be sent. Yet today, I got both a collections notice for the $100, and a phone call from collections. It was both the rudest letter and phone call that I have ever received, and it was due to the fact that I waited to pay the bill because Qwest had told me to wait. I paid the collections agency in order to save my credit rating, then called Qwest. I was told that the $100 had been credited to my account and the collections notice was a mistake.

I am dumbfounded that this went to collections despite my communication with Qwest. I feel harassed by this continued ill treatment, and blatant irresponsibility by Qwest. This irresponsibility has added up to a $100 collections bill, a threat to my credit, a $89 charge in overage minutes on my cell phone, and two months of bills paid to Qwest for wireless service when no wireless service was being received in our house. My main complaint is that as an individual paying for a service, I should receive that service in exchange for my payment. I that service should malfunction or not perform with in the bounds of its contract, then the company should be responsible for fixing it. It
is not the individual's responsibility to call every department of a corporation to make sure they are getting proper customer service; it is the corporation's responsibility in exchange for monthly payment to give proper service to the customer.

My house has switched to Charter and they had us up and running immediately. The one time that we have had a problem, Charter came to our house, and fixed it for us, free of charge. They did not force us to stay on the phone for multiple hours, or try to tell us that it was our computer's problem.

Thank you for your time.

Sincerely,
Lindsey Case

(Photo: Getty)

(Photo: Getty)

The committee is reviewing the proposed legislation in a closed session today.

"Senate Deal on Immunity for Phone Companies" [New York Times]
(Photo: Getty)

According to Qwest, the new program notifies you that your computer is infected, gives you information on how to remove the infection, and then provides you with anti-virus software.

From their press release:

The Qwest(R) Customer Internet Protection Program (CIPP) notifies Qwest Broadband customers about viruses and malware that may be on their computers, informs them of safe Internet security practices and helps them clean viruses and malware from their computers. The CIPP is part of Qwest's ongoing commitment to make the Internet safer for customers and is available to residential and small-business Qwest Broadband ADSL* customers at no additional charge.

"Internet security is a top priority for Internet users and for Qwest," said Melodi Gates, Qwest director of risk management and chief information security officer. "Most people don't even know when their computers become infected, so Qwest's goal is not only to help customers get rid of the infections, but also to make sure customers are armed with information to maintain strong levels of Internet security going forward."

Qwest Customer Internet Protection Program Increases Security For Broadband Customers, Combats Spread Of Viruses And Malware [Qwest]
(Photo:Ken Lund)

Because he is billed through Qwest, he didn't get a notice and is now stuck with the package. He managed to make a compromise with DirecTV, but wanted to share his story as a warning about the perils of Sunday Ticket:

Today I noticed my DirectTV bill was higher than normal, I decided to look a little closer. Come to find out, DirectTV had auto-resubscribed me to NFL Sunday Ticket, although I canceled it after the season last year. Now, it was canceled with no issues or warnings. End of story, right?

Wrong...I called DirectTV billing and was told "Once you sign up for Sunday Ticket, you will always be auto-renewed, and you should have received a notice in your monthly statement that this was about to renew." I replied "But I don't get a paper bill from you, I get an e-bill from Qwest, since this was a bundle through them."

The guy then argued with me about receiving a paper bill, saying "You should still get a paper bill" and I pointed out my Qwest deal again.

He then told me that there was no way I was able to cancel the service once the season began without paying $230 in cancellation (the cost of the season) fees and there's no way I could get a credit.

When I argued the point that I had no warning about the auto-renew (since I'd signed up via Qwest, I dealt with their billing originally, and nobody there told met his), nor did I get a paper warning, and thus, I should be able to cancel and get a credit, he said "no, we cannot cancel it." I argued that "it's as simple as flipping a switch somewhere, you guys have changed/canceled all other channels I've asked in the past" but again he said "there's no way to do that with this package."

I asked "What if I decide to just cancel DirectTV entirely" and the response was "
We'd be sorry to lose you, but you're still paying for this Sunday Ticket, no matter what, we'll add it to your early termination fee."

Of course, I finally asked to speak to escalation, and was told "You are not going to vent to anyone else but me. And nobody else is going to be able to change this."

I gave up, called Qwest. They apologized, got me to a DirectTV "escalation specialist". He said the same thing "It's policy with sports packages,we can't cancel them or credit you in any way."

I asked "There's got to be a workaround, maybe you block those channels, but instead of putting a cancel in my bill, you just credit me, heck, I'll even take partial credit under the guise of something else." Stonewalled...

Asking, "well, how do I cut my bill down?" got a response of "You could kill HBO and Showtime, that'd save you $24". I asked about those great deals for new subscribers, could they give me that? Nope, new subs only. I finally asked "Well, I'd like to speak to a manager on this policy"

It does have a semi-happy ending -

When escalated to a manager, however, the manager came up with a "new" package that cut my bill right back down to normal, and kept it that way. It means having a bunch of football channels I'll never watch, but the prices will stay the same and magically, I get 30 more channels from now on. Not only that, she actually EXPLAINED why they can't remove the service once you have it (they pay for "slots" at the start of the sports season, and they can't get their money back). When it comes time for the Football package to auto-renew, I'll get emails now, so I can call in and cancel beforehand.

(Photo:meghannmarco)

From Wired:

AOL, AT&T, Cox and Qwest all responded to the survey, with a mix of timeliness and transparency.

But only Cox answered the question, "How long do you retain records of the IP addresses assigned to customers."

These records can be used to trace an internet posting, website visit or an e-mail back to an ISP's customers. The records are useful to police tracking down child-porn providers, and music-industry groups use them to sue file sharers. Companies have also used the records to track down anonymous posters who write unflattering comments in stock-trading boards.

Cox's answer: six months. AOL says "limited period of time," while AT&T says it varies across its internet-access offerings but that the time limits are all "within industry standards."

Comcast, EarthLink, Verizon and Time Warner didn't respond.

Some of the most sensitive information sent across an ISP's network are the URLs of the websites that people visit. This so-called clickstream data includes every URL a customer visits, including URLs from search engines, which generally include the search term.

AOL, AT&T and Cox all say they don't store these URLs at all, while Qwest dodged the question. Comcast, EarthLink, Verizon and Time Warner didn't respond.

When asked if they allow marketers to see anonymized or partially-anonymized clickstream data, AOL, AT&T and Cox said they did not, while Qwest gave a muddled answer and declined to answer a follow-up question. Comcast, EarthLink, Verizon and Time Warner didn't respond.

Which ISPs Are Spying on You? [Wired] (Thanks, Grace!)

We actually contacted the companies that were listed in the press [reports] and said our rules prohibit you from blocking consumers' access to any of the service providers... One had stopped blocking, but we heard complaints the next week that they were restricting access, sort of narrowing the pipe. We called them back and said, no, no, you can't artificially degrade [service] either.

FCC Chairman Martin to Telcos: No Blocking Iowa Calls [GigaOM via Boing Boing]
Consumer Complaint Form [FTC]
PREVIOUSLY: Cingular, Sprint, And Qwest Block Access To Free Conference Call Services
(Photo: Jiri Kopsa)

Bobby Henson, director of media relations for Verizon, told Consumers Union that the company charges the fee to "regain what we have been giving the customer for free."

• Comcast: No Fee
• Time Warner Cable: No Fee
• AT&T: $99
• Verizon: $69 FiOS, $79 DSL
• Qwest: $200
• Earthlink:$149

Dumping ISP may cost customers $150 [Boston Globe] (Thanks, j!)
(Photo: Maulleigh)

The 712 area code used by these services allow the local carriers to charge a number of subsidies to those carrying the incoming calls due to the location of the tiny, rural exchange. These fees are split between the local exchange and the "free" conference call company, which allows them to make a pretty penny. The fees for these calls made into 712 are higher than those charged by other exchanges, and AT&T/Cingular has in fact filed a lawsuit against these Iowa-based telcos for what Cingular claims are violation of a number of laws and FCC decisions.

Subject: Re: Cingular Wireless Customer Email - West - [CUST] (x)

Dear,

Thank you for taking the time to e-mail Cingular Wireless regarding your conference calling feature. I am happy to help you with your inquiry and I apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused.

Cingular Wireless has restricted various numbers from being dialed from the wireless handset. This was done because of billing issues regarding charges associated with calling certain chat and conference lines, or because of the potential for fraud posed by certain 900 and 976 numbers.

The information in the contract states, Cingular may choose not to provide service to certain classes of numbers. Examples include 976 and 900 numbers, and certain chat and conferencing services that result in the end user and/or Cingular being charged excessive rates.

We have identified a billing issue with these numbers that does not allow allow us to bill them correctly. You can still access these numbers from a landline phone.

We greatly appreciate the opportunity to serve you. Please let us know if we can assist in any other way, and thank you for choosing Cingular Wireless!

Sincerely,

Amanda Tabb
Cingular is now the new AT&T
Online Customer Care Professional

Free conference call providers are not staying silent. One, FreeConference, has characterized the move as "a coordinated effort to force you to use the paid services [telecoms] provide." As a temporary measure, they are evading the restrictions by offering free conference calls using numbers in the 641 area code. — CAREY GREENBERG-BERGER

AT&T/Cingular blocks cellular customers from free conference call services [Ars Technica]
(Photo: MrVJTod)

In the aftermath, reader David called Comcast and Qwest, expecting an abyss of pain. He was stunned then to receive polite, prompt, professional and thorough repair service. Writes David:

In the past I have been quick to criticize these companies, but I have to give them some serious props for their service yesterday. In the aftermath of the storm, the guys in the field are working incredible hours in terrible circumstances, and they couldn't have exceeded my expectations more!

In the face of adversity, humans can band together and achieve great things. Now if Qwest and Comcast could just attain that level of minimum competency on a daily basis.

David's letter, inside...

David writes:

— BEN POPKEN

A KUTV investigation broadcast yesterday found widespread fraud and overcharges among Qwest customers.

Some customers were being charged for directory assistance they didn't use, or for long-distance when they had long-distance with another company.

Third party "phone service" companies, like Discount Telecom Services, tell phone companies customers ordered certain services. The phone companies, like Qwest, then bill the customer and take a portion of the fraudulent fees.

According to an expert in finding false phone charges, "at least 80 to 90 percent of all phone bills are dirty."

If you find suspicious charges, question your phone company, and if the charges are unfounded, demand the company credits the charges back to the start date.

Check out our guide inside, and then check out your phone bill. — BEN POPKEN

(Thanks to Bubba!)

Here's the need-to-know basis:

• Ask your phone company for dry-loop DSL.
• Port your number to a VoIP provider to avoid breaks in service.
• Will require a credit card for billing
• May have to endure up to two weeks without DSL service.

Be sure to ask about pricing first. Depending on your provider, it may cost more than having bundled phone and DSL.

Or you could funk all that noise, drop your phone company all together, and get DSL-only service from a company like Speakeasy.

Cutting The Cord [Eat Our Brains via BoingBoing]

Meanwhile, DirecTV is billing him the full package rate and Brandon can't even watch football without standing by his window completely covered in tin foil. He's asking for your advice. Should he pay to get out of his 2 year contract and sell his DVR? Should he move? Should he download his shows? What about football?

What's a guy to do? Read Brandon's quandary after the jump.

I've been having problems with my DirecTV service which I have provided through Qwest. I live in an Apartment complex that only has Service through Qwest which provides DirecTV service. This really bothers me because I live in the middle of town where the Apartments directly next to ours get service provided through Cox. When I moved in in February I was weary about getting DirecTV because I'm such a huge fan of Cox Internet Speeds. Nonetheless I didnt have a choice, had to go with DirecTV for TV services.

After Qwest came and installed the DVR box I paid $100 for left, I discovered I didn't get any local channels. After calling DirecTV and Qwest I discovered that local channels are not available. I just bought a DirecTV DVR box so I record local channel shows. I record other things but I want to be able to record local shows as well. Recently i discovered that Qwest charges a $3.99 monthly fee to maintain a local-channeless Satellite. I never once receieved a bill for $3.99 or was not made aware of the charge. They came out and disconnected my service for non-payment. Now they want me to pay $25 plus the $40 to have my services restored.

I put up with paying DirecTV full price to have service without local channels. I contacted Qwest about turning off my services and they have nothing to offer. Their explanations on why I dont have local channels is because their contract with DirecTV doesn't allow them to upgrade their dishes. I have to watch local channels through an antenna and I get CRAPPT reception. It's ridiculous. I contacted DirecTV about getting the local channels that are provided on channel numbers 300+ and they said that due to legalities that they are unable to do that in areas that have local service available. Well I dont have local service available. I refuse to pay Qwest for their maintenance and reactivation fees because I shouldn't be paying full price for not having local channels anyways. DirecTV doesn't offer any sort of discounts. I'm paying for a DVR service I cant use fully and on top of that I had to sign a 2 year contract.

I'm just debating whether or not to pay $150 cancel my DirecTV service and live until February when I move without cable service. I figure I can make some of that $150 back by selling my DVR box I paid $100 for. There has to be sort of answer to this dillema. I am prefectly fine downloading TV shows if this is what I have to deal with. I'm just pissed I can't watch Football on Sundays. Wondering if you or your readers can offer up any suggestions?

Thanks,
Brandon

Verizon, Bellsouth and Qwest have all stepped forward to deny their involvement in selling confidential phone records to the NSA, leaving open the possibility that 1) they're lying or 2) MCI or Sprint did it.

We'll have to wait for the other pin to drop to find out whodunit.

In the meantime, try Skype. Or get service through Working Assets, long-distance and cellphone provider "for the Birkenstock crowd." You get a free George Bush doormat with every signup. (Thanks to Amy's Robot!).

Now that that's out of the way, the article itself alleges that five telephone companies — BellSouth, Sprint, Verizon, AT&T and SBC Communications — have been billing customers $12.95 a month for a service called the Email Discount Network, which supposedly gives a discount on products bought through their website. Charging people money for supposed discounts is pretty shady no matter how you look at it — nevertheless, it's all made worse by the fact that none of the customers actually asked to be signed up for this service. In industry speak, this is called cramming and it's illegal.

But check this out, an anecdote about a similar cramming from a different service called Axcess through Bell South. Trust us: take the jump. It's a hell of a quote.

When he asked the Axcess customer service rep to play back the recording of the authorization, he listened in amazement as he heard his boss answer affirmatively, authorizing the service. Hertz told his boss, who had no idea what he was talking about, until he put two and two together.

"A couple of months ago a guy came to our office, saying he was our new Bell South rep, and that as part of a promotion, we qualified for one additional phone line for free. Then, on a Friday after hours a guy called our office and was automatically transferred to my boss," Hertz said.

"He said he was with the phone company, and was ready to install the free line. My boss said he'd have to do it when the office was open, so the caller transferred him to the scheduling department."

Hertz says his boss was asked a number of questions that required him to say "yes" a lot. He said the questions were about the installation and not about any services. Yet when Hertz listened to the authorization recording, all the questions were about the service and none concerned any phone line installation.

So someone's lying here. And we're betting it's Bell South.

One last note: notice one company that's not on that list of telecoms? Qwest. Where we also got the graphic for this post. Jeez, those guys are looking like saints of the industry these days, aren't they?

Florida Opens "Cramming" Probe [Consumer Affairs]

What this means that, thanks to Nacchio, Qwest customers are practically the only people in the country who aren't currently in the NSA's massive database of phone records.

Why'd Nacchio do it? It probably wasn't any real concern over his customers' privacy. Actually, it looked like he did it because the legal department warned him it would open Qwest up to a massive class-action lawsuit. Of course, that legal quibble might have been unfounded, if the DoJ gets their way in dismissing lawsuits against these companies simply by stamping the court papers with a big, blocky TOP SECRET stamp.

Nod to Nacchio for "no" to NSA [Denver Post] (Thanks, Brandon!)

Take Danyel F.'s Qwest DSL box, for example. It had pretty sweet wireless built right in. After 14 months, it went belly up. Out of warranty, Danyel decided to rent a new one. Except that Qwest had decided to unbundle, smelling profit, decided to unbundle wireless from the same DSL modem in the meantime and charge extra for it.

It's only a few bucks, but it's the principle of the thing that stinks. Danyel's account after the jump:

On Friday afternoon, I got home to discover that my DSL box had decided that it didn't want to shuttle packets about for me anymore: it had a solid red light on the "power" box, and it glowed sullenly at me. I turned it off, turned it back on, and it still didn't work.

In the morning, I made the phone calls. It was, it seems, dead. And not worth replacing. And out of warranty, since I'd owned it for 14 months. And while it rented for $3 a month back when I decided to buy it, it was now $5 per month.

Until the guy asked me, "do you want the premium package, with wireless?"

What? The classic package was the Actiontec GT-701 W, which had a very nice wireless antenna on it. "Oh, yeah. We've changed. We now offer the GT-701. Same device, no wireless. If you want the wirless, you get the 2Wire. It's $8 per month. And we don't support any devices except those two."

That's right. Getting the same functionality now costs $3 per month more, and if I expect future technical support, I'd better shell out the extra few bucks.

I did it, but I'm not proud.

Muni Wireless has read an advance copy and offers up an overview. Most interesting is the per-household figure of $2,000—the amount we as citizens paid for through the various government-sanctioned breaks for the phone companies.

This news is especially enlightening as all the Baby Bells continue to merge back into Ma Bell 2.0.

From Muni Wireless's report:

• The phone companies pulled a bait and switch. In order to offer DSL over copper, it was not necessary to have state regulation changed. Their plan was to get rid of regulations and enter long distance.

• The Bell mergers resulted in the death of the state plans for fiber optic broadband. Over 26 states had fiber optic projects closed when the mergers of SBC and Verizon were completed. That affected almost 80% of all phone customers in the US.