Capezio Stores

At the beginning of January, Mr. ** [redacted]came into the local office in Fulton and informed the company that he intended to port his land line number to [redacted].  Fulton Telephone Company (FTC) then received a request from [redacted] to port the number.  I have attached the “Local Response Form”...

and the “Local Service Request Form” that we filled out when we received the request.  Our Customer Service department completed the Port Request paperwork and a date of January 25th was established as the date for the port to happen.  On that date, we completed the porting process on our end and relinquished the number to [redacted] for use for Mr. [redacted].  I have attached an image entitled “Port Verification” to show a screen capture as evidence that Fulton Telephone Company completed its required procedures.  At that time we could no longer keep his landline active as we no longer had ownership of his number.  Since Mr. [redacted] was porting his number, a cancellation of services was processed on January 25th as well since FTC would no longer be providing voice services.  Mr. [redacted] then called into the local office and stated that his home phone had been cut off.  Mr. [redacted] was then informed that we could not keep the phone active after the porting process was complete and that [redacted] would have to switch his number to the device that they provided to him for his voice services.  Mr. [redacted] then stated that [redacted] had notified him that the porting process could take up to 48 hours once started and that he was still within that 48 hours.    After the 48 hours had passed, we have had subsequent phone calls with Mr. [redacted] and, in an attempt to resolve the issue, we requested to have a call with Mr. [redacted] and a representative from [redacted] on 1/26/18.  We did receive a call from Mr. [redacted] and [redacted] from [redacted] and assured them that we had completed our porting procedures.  Mr. [redacted] then called into our office after hours on 1/31/18 stating that his phone with [redacted] was still not working.  On 2/1/18 FTC then called Mr. [redacted] again requesting that we speak with him and an [redacted] representative that was in charge of the porting process on their end.  Mr. [redacted] stated that he had a doctor’s appointment and that he would call back with an [redacted] representative.  FTC did not receive a call back from Mr. [redacted] later that day.  On 2/2/18 [redacted] from [redacted] called the local office and spoke with our manager [redacted].  Mr. [redacted] informed [redacted] that FTC had completed all of their required processes for porting and that they should be able to successfully port the number for Mr. [redacted].  [redacted] then stated that he would begin work on porting the number for Mr. [redacted].  3 days later FTC initiated a phone call with Mr. [redacted] and he stated that his voice services were now operational with [redacted].   In regards to the complaint about Mr. [redacted]’s DSL issues.  Our records indicate that during 2017-2018 Mr. [redacted] had only opened one service ticket for his voice/DSL services.  That ticket was initiated on November 30th 2017 3:40 P.M. CST for slow DSL.  Upon entry of the service ticket, a technician was dispatched to the home on November 30th 2017 at 4:25 P.M. CST.  The technician then reported that the customer’s modem was trained at the correct speed and also verified that speed was being attained.  The ticket was then closed.  On January 4th our records indicate that Mr. [redacted] arrived at the Fulton Telephone Company local office and demanded that credit be issued to his account for his DSL services not working for the month of December.  Mr. [redacted] was then advised that he had not reported his DSL services being out during December and that credit would not be able to be issued.  Due to the customer disconnecting DSL services and being advised that credit could not be issued, Fulton Telephone Company had considered this issue closed.