🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:04:44 -0500, "Ian Storrs" <storrs@bellsouth.net>
wrote:

(...)

ba.internet is a local group for San Francisco Bay area internet
discussions.  The ba does *NOT* mean Bell Atlantic.

If you don't read a particular newsgroup, please do not post to it.

Thanks.

-- 
Jeff Liebermann  150 Felker St #D  Santa Cruz CA 95060
(831)421-6491 pgr (831)426-1240 fax (831)336-2558 home
http://www.cruzio.com/~jeffl   WB6SSY
jeffl@comix.santa-cruz.ca.us   jeffl@cruzio.com

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:04:44 -0500, "Ian Storrs"
<storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>
>Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
>SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4 months.
>Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and closing
>trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
>customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they are
>unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
>
>Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers (victims).
>
>"Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
>still does not
>work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to TAC.
>It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this issue,
>despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a total
>waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
>totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician had
>possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been exhausted.
>
>
>Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted time on
>this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
>companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will take
>full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
>
>
>Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their current
>methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
>spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two companies
>it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders are
>handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
>companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is by far
>the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
>Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality control
>departments, if such a thing exists.
>
>Regards,
>Ian Storrs
>"
>
>
>


It's unfortunate that some people are too far from their CO or perhaps
their Telephone Companies SUCK.  But it's not Speakeasy's fault.

Overall, they're excellent.

Perhaps the fault is not entirely with Speakeasy, but they are the only
point of contact for the end user. I cannot call COVAD, unless I pretend to
be an ISP. I cannot call Bellsouth. The process which Speakeasy has to
follow up trouble tickets is useless. What good is it if they cannot even
track an issue to completion? What good is it if COVAD technicians close
trouble tickets without resolution, or openly lie? The buck stops with the
ISP, that's what COVAD says, that's what Speakeasy says, and who am I to
disagree? A pox on all of them.
/Ian

"Jose Ogando" <jose3030@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:skt3bsk16kspbucjb7ik67ntmeckqoqqjt@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:04:44 -0500, "Ian Storrs"
> <storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
> >SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4
months.
> >Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and closing
> >trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
> >customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they are
> >unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
> >
> >Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers (victims).
> >
> >"Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
> >still does not
> >work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to
TAC.
> >It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this issue,
> >despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a total
> >waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
> >totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician
had
> >possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been exhausted.
> >
> >
> >Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted time
on
> >this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
> >companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will
take
> >full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
> >
> >
> >Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their
current
> >methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
> >spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two
companies
> >it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders
are
> >handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
> >companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is by
far
> >the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
> >Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality control
> >departments, if such a thing exists.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Ian Storrs
> >"
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> It's unfortunate that some people are too far from their CO or perhaps
> their Telephone Companies SUCK.  But it's not Speakeasy's fault.
>
> Overall, they're excellent.
>
>

Unfortunately many, if not most, of the ISP's started with dial up service
where the equipment was in their shops and as such, under their control.
The new system has lots of problems.  I'm going through my own issues and I
personally feel that Covad is the major problem.  They have the ISP's
convinced that the is the ILEC's (and I'm sure it is partially), but their
own handling lacks a lot.  I'm trying to find an ISP who will offer
Northpoint or Rythms, but all in my area seem to deal with Covad for
residential service.  I could probably sell a hundred users in my
neighborhood (1,100 homes) but won't until they take a customer first
attitude.

Good luck.


Ian Storrs <storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:MIms4.4076$jQ3.10099@news2.mco...
> Perhaps the fault is not entirely with Speakeasy, but they are the only
> point of contact for the end user. I cannot call COVAD, unless I pretend
to
> be an ISP. I cannot call Bellsouth. The process which Speakeasy has to
> follow up trouble tickets is useless. What good is it if they cannot even
> track an issue to completion? What good is it if COVAD technicians close
> trouble tickets without resolution, or openly lie? The buck stops with the
> ISP, that's what COVAD says, that's what Speakeasy says, and who am I to
> disagree? A pox on all of them.
> /Ian
>
> "Jose Ogando" <jose3030@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
> news:skt3bsk16kspbucjb7ik67ntmeckqoqqjt@4ax.com...
> > On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 21:04:44 -0500, "Ian Storrs"
> > <storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
> > >SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4
> months.
> > >Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and
closing
> > >trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
> > >customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they
are
> > >unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
> > >
> > >Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers
(victims).
> > >
> > >"Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
> > >still does not
> > >work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to
> TAC.
> > >It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this
issue,
> > >despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a
total
> > >waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
> > >totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician
> had
> > >possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been
exhausted.
> > >
> > >
> > >Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted
time
> on
> > >this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
> > >companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will
> take
> > >full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
> > >
> > >
> > >Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their
> current
> > >methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
> > >spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two
> companies
> > >it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders
> are
> > >handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
> > >companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is
by
> far
> > >the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
> > >Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality
control
> > >departments, if such a thing exists.
> > >
> > >Regards,
> > >Ian Storrs
> > >"
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > It's unfortunate that some people are too far from their CO or perhaps
> > their Telephone Companies SUCK.  But it's not Speakeasy's fault.
> >
> > Overall, they're excellent.
> >
> >
>
>

They already know things are in a mess.

If you want to do some good send all of the information you have to the North
Carolina Utilities Commission (the address is in the front of the phone book).

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 22:10:06 -0500, "Vaughn" <vaughn@vebuck.com> wrote:

>Unfortunately many, if not most, of the ISP's started with dial up service
>where the equipment was in their shops and as such, under their control.
>The new system has lots of problems.  I'm going through my own issues and I
>personally feel that Covad is the major problem.  They have the ISP's
>convinced that the is the ILEC's (and I'm sure it is partially), but their
>own handling lacks a lot.  I'm trying to find an ISP who will offer
>Northpoint or Rythms, but all in my area seem to deal with Covad for
>residential service.  I could probably sell a hundred users in my
>neighborhood (1,100 homes) but won't until they take a customer first
>attitude.

Phoenix Networks will be offering Rhythms DSL to residence users in many areas
in the next couple of months.

See http://www.phoenixnetworks.net/getdsl.html

I only qualified for IDSL which is a variant of ISDN and at my location had
no physical constraints. I am aware that the root cause of my problem was
probably the telco, but in 4 months Covad failed to even meet with them
despite my requests. Of the eight or so trouble tickets I opened, Bell
closed 2, the others were closed by COVAD themselves. None of these closed
tickets resulted in me having service. I pleaded with them to assign one
technician to pursue this for me and they did not. They prefer to play ping
pong between themselves, the ISP and Bell. No one took responsibility for my
service. All I received was inaccurate, untimely and inadequate support. I
analysed the trouble logs and the breakdown for delays was BS 30%, Speakeasy
20% and Covad 50%.
/Ian


"Will Kramer" <willardk_NOSPAM@acedsl.com> wrote in message
news:7c14bsglun334bprlrm6n69qdgt02u2mfr@4ax.com...
> Didn't you forget a third party here?...the telephone company that
> provided the loop?  Yes its crazy the way these DSL installs need to
> be coordinated but usually the biggest problem is the loop thats
> installed....did they ever give you the measured electrical distance?
>
>
> Will
>
> "Ian Storrs" <storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
> >SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4
months.
> >Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and closing
> >trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
> >customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they are
> >unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
> >
> >Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers (victims).
> >
> >"Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
> >still does not
> >work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to
TAC.
> >It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this issue,
> >despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a total
> >waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
> >totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician
had
> >possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been exhausted.
> >
> >
> >Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted time
on
> >this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
> >companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will
take
> >full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
> >
> >
> >Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their
current
> >methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
> >spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two
companies
> >it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders
are
> >handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
> >companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is by
far
> >the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
> >Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality control
> >departments, if such a thing exists.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Ian Storrs
> >"
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Didn't you forget a third party here?...the telephone company that
provided the loop?  Yes its crazy the way these DSL installs need to
be coordinated but usually the biggest problem is the loop thats
installed....did they ever give you the measured electrical distance?


Will

"Ian Storrs" <storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>
>Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
>SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4 months.
>Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and closing
>trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
>customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they are
>unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
>
>Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers (victims).
>
>"Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
>still does not
>work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to TAC.
>It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this issue,
>despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a total
>waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
>totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician had
>possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been exhausted.
>
>
>Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted time on
>this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
>companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will take
>full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
>
>
>Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their current
>methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
>spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two companies
>it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders are
>handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
>companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is by far
>the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
>Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality control
>departments, if such a thing exists.
>
>Regards,
>Ian Storrs
>"
>
>
>

Why?  DSL is not a regulated service, and therefore
is not within the purview of the PUC.

"Don Brady" <dbrady@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:jf+xOBYudGkRljDzuHVv1DQ4Ac8g@4ax.com...
> They already know things are in a mess.
>
> If you want to do some good send all of the information you have to the
North
> Carolina Utilities Commission (the address is in the front of the phone
book).

I'm very sorry to read about the problems you've had. I did a bit of
research before getting DSL. I talked to people I knew who had taken the
local Telco service and read through this Newsgroup as well as reading a
lot of evaluations at www.dslreports.com. before making a decision

It seems to me that the problems fall mostly into 2 areas:

1. Telco/state of the wiring in the area
2. Installation service (Covad, Northpoint....etc), state of the internal
wiring at the residence/business AND the quality of the technicians.

You as the ultimate customer should be shielded from all the crap that goes on.
Your ISP (Speakeasy?) should champion your cause by escalating your
situation with Covad. It's Covad's job to liase with the Telco, and if
there are problems Covad should get them resolved. Your ISP has
subcontracted the installation of, and provision thereafter, of your DSL
service. Covad install their DSLAM's in the local Telco's CO's. They are
in contact with Telco staff every day, and they should know who to talk to
about getting a problem fixed. I know the Telco's bitterly resent the
arrival of DSL competition. These guys still think like the old,
pre-breakup AT&T (We don't care because we don't have to, we're TPC). As
far as they are concerned these guys are trespassing because *they* own
the 'final mile'. Trouble is, despite all their litigation and 'dirty
tricks' the regulatory authorities do not share their views of the world.
If Covad do their job, you should get your service.

If I were in your position I would certainly write/email the CEO of
Speakeasy a short synopsis of your problem (just the facts, strip out the
emotion and get somebody who isn't aware of the situation to proof read
your letter)and also copy your State PUC. If this person realizes that you
will not go quietly into the night and that you will share your
unhappiness with whoever appropriate, I do believe you will get results.
You have to make it abundantly clear that the pain of doing nothing will
vastly outweigh the pain of getting the situation resolved. In fact I'd
also email Walt Mossberg at The Wall Street Journal. He is very
influential and the progress of broadband is bound to be an important
issue for him. 
 
Good luck, and remember it's not your fault, it's that others cannot be
bothered to do the job that they are paid for.

Regards

Pajoh

In article <Lcms4.3579$qf4.9690@news1.mco>, "Ian Storrs"
<storrs@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> Below is the final e-mail concerning my order for DSL from COVAD and
> SPEAKEASY. These two companies failed to get the line working in 4 months.
> Indeed it seems that all they are capable of doing is opening and closing
> trouble tickets in an effort to stall the end users. They openly lie to
> customers about resolution dates for technical issues. In short they are
> unprofessional and border on fraudulent.
> 
> Open letter to COVAD, SPEAKEASY and their potential customers (victims).
> 
> "Covad came to my house for the 3rd time, only to confirm that the line
> still does not
> work, which should have been obvious from my almost continuous calls to TAC.
> It soon became evident that NOTHING had been done to resolve this issue,
> despite assurances by e-mail, phone and in TAC updates. This was a total
> waste of my time, as were all previous visits. This level of service is
> totally unacceptable. This order is cancelled, and the Covad technician had
> possession of the router when he left. All good faith has been exhausted.
> 
> 
> Furthermore, I am billing Speakeasy and Covad for 7 hours of wasted time on
> this order at $75 per hour totalling $575. Let me make it clear to both
> companies that I am so upset by the way I have been treated that I will take
> full advantage of the legal system to secure this compensation.
> 
> 
> Finally I would like to make it clear to both companies that their current
> methods for installation and support are totally inadequate. As I have
> spoken and emailed with at least 20 different agents of these two companies
> it has become evident that NO ONE seems to have control over how orders are
> handled, there is no internal communication between or within these
> companies, and customers are treated with absolute disregard. This is by far
> the worst end user experience I have had in any commercial transaction.
> Please have the decency to forward this complaint to you quality control
> departments, if such a thing exists.
> 
> Regards,
> Ian Storrs
> "
-- 
Do I dare disturb the universe, 
for in a minute comes 
decisions and revisions, 
that a minute will reverse.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 20:02:38 -0800, "Someone" <someone@somewhere.com> wrote:

>Why?  DSL is not a regulated service, and therefore
>is not within the purview of the PUC

Not true. 

The Utilities Commission licenses Covad and BellSouth to operate in this state
and therefore has the inherent ability to impose conditions on renewal of such
authorization and to determine whether the companies are operating in the
public interest.

Some states have already exercised substantial supervision of DSL.

For a couple of recent examples see the Rhythsm press release at
http://www.rhythms.com/pr/gapetition.html  concerning Rhythms' petition to the
Georgia PSC .  That release cites a recent ruling by the Pennsylvanai
Commission.   Similar actions by other commissions to promote DSL competition
have taken place in Minnesota and other states.   The Covad site I believe has
details of action Covad has taken in some states.

Documents on the FCC site indicate that the FCC will be asking all states to
become involved in DSL line sharing regulation. 

Also, the FCC relies in part on the states for advise on the extent of CLEC
competition when considering applications by ILEC's to offer long distance
services.

On Mon, 21 Feb 2000 22:40:30 -0800, pajoh_lublewski@yahoo.com (Pajoh Lublewski)
wrote:

>.....
>If I were in your position I would certainly write/email the CEO of
>Speakeasy a short synopsis of your problem (just the facts, strip out the
>emotion and get somebody who isn't aware of the situation to proof read
>your letter)and also copy your State PUC. 
>...

All good advise, but please write *to* the Utilities Commission, and do not
just send them a copy of a letter to someone else.

Many people and organizations will not act on a copy of a letter to someone
else, since it is unclear on the face of matters why they got the copy, and
they have not been requested to do anything in particular.

At last report the NCUC had only received *two* written complaints relating to
DSL.   Unless that number goes up, it is very hard to make a case that this is
an area in need of urgent intervention