MegaPath

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/03/11) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer signed a 3-year contract with MegaPath on 1/8/which is due to expire on 1/8/The Customer cancelled his account early on 1/26/The Company provided Customer with a cancellation credit and the Customer was only billed for half of the Early Termination Fees (ETF) due and owedThe Company has found no justification in the Customer account history to waive Early Termination Fees for disconnectionThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2015/03/16) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Megapath took over for CovadWe don't agree or recall signing up with MegapathWe did not change service to MegapathWe did them a favor by simply staying with the service that we had been using for yearsIf Megapath can provide a signed contract as they allege on 1/8/13, then we will agree to pay $for an ETF to resolve this issueAgain, we have no recollection of signing anything with Megapath

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/10/06) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and reviewed the history of trouble tickets on the accountOn July 25, 2014, the Customer requested a speed upgrade from EoC to The Company attempted to perform this upgrade, but extensive interior wiring work was needed at the Customer's site, which proved to be cost prohibitiveThe Company identified the system issues that prevented the Customer's upgrade service order from being terminated and caused connectivity issues for the Customer in short discrete intervalsThe Company found alternative channels to cancel the upgrade orderThe Customer's SLA terms dictate that credit be given after outages of hours or more, and although there were no reported outages of more than one hour, the Company gave the Customer a Customer Satisfaction credit for month's chargesThe Company considers this matter closed

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2014/06/06) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's responseThe Early Termination Fee Schedule that was in effect at the time the Customer signed his contract is posted on the company website, and the contract advises reading that Schedule prior to signing the contractThe salesperson involved with his account stated that no guarantee of reduced ETFs was promisedThe account is currently active, but if it is closed, the ETF will be applied per the terms of the contractThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2014/06/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The response that Megapath has sent to Revdex.com is flawed and cannot be accepted as, in my opinion, it distorts reality both through its statements and its omissions I will explain in line with the Text Megapath Statement: The Company has investigated the Customer's responseThe Early Termination Fee Schedule that was in effect at the time the Customer signed his contract is posted on the company website, and the contract advises reading that Schedule prior to signing the contract Reality: The Early Termination Fee Schedule which was valid at the time I have signed the contract is not the The Early Termination Fee Schedule that Megapath tried to apply to meIn fact, it doubled the ETF on the schedule posted on the web (without sending any notice to customers) Specifically, at the time I decided to terminate the contract, the ETF posted on the web was already increased to the full amount owed until the expiration of the contract.(In approximate numbers, at the time I decided to terminate the contract which was in November 2013, that meant $as opposed to $under the contract terms a year before) I signed the contract with Megapath AFTER I have carefully checked the The Early Termination Fee Schedule that was in effect at that time and posted on the web but not mentioned in dollars and cents on the paperSince it was an item of concern, as explained in my previous notes, I secured its conditions in writing from the sales person who sold me the contractIt is my understanding that Megapath is legally bound by contract law to respect it Megapath Statement: The salesperson involved with his account stated that no guarantee of reduced ETFs was promised Reality: The salesperson did not offer a guarantee of reduced ETFs, it offered a guarantee of the ETFs which were in force at the time I have signed the contract As such I did not ask for any favor but I am asking Megapath to respect the contractual terms agreed upon Megapath Statement: The account is currently active, but if it is closed, the ETF will be applied per the terms of the contractThe Company considers this matter closed Reality: Megapath has avoided to state clearly what are the contractual terms it abides to, as it is has the capability of changing the information on the website and then use it to justify its actionsThe root of the issue is that the Early Termination Fee Schedule are posted on the company web site thus subject to unilateral change but are not mentioned in dollars and cents in the contract papers (only as web links) -- thus the reason I secured the written explanation from the sales personThis business practice should be cease as it is flawedThe ETF should be included in dollars and cents in the written contract that is received by the customer Additionally, since I did not use the Megapath service since September (which can easily be checked) and since my first attempt to terminate the contract was made in November -- when I was prepared to pay in full the termination fees according to the terms of the contract and even more, since Megapath has avoided constantly to discuss the issue despite the tickets I have opened, it is fair that my contract should be terminated with the date of the first ticket opened for the purpose of terminating the contract Nove and the ETF to be calculated based on the terms of the contract as it was signed and specified in writing by the sales personThis would be half of the amount owed until the contract termination, calculated from the date the termination was initiatedGoes without saying that the payments that I made since the date mentioned above should be credited toward the ETF I understand that Megapath desires to keep the issue at a very vague level as its approach avoid respecting its contracts at the cost of their customers, may become a serious liabilityIn my case, I believe that the first step to take is for Megapath to state clearly, in no equivocal terms what are its intentions with my account in terms of termination date and chargeI want the issue closed as well and I believe that my requests are reasonable

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/08/15) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintThe Customer initially had a lineshare product, which required the use of the existing landline voice line (which also was used to provide the DSL)When the Customer notified MegaPath of the move, and during subsequent contacts with the Customer, MegaPath informed the Customer that due to the lineshare product, he would need to move the landline to the new location before we could move their DSL service to the new locationIn lieu of this, MegaPath offered the Customer an option to order a dedicated line instead, which was available at a slightly higher price but would let them avoid moving the landlineThe Customer agreed to the new product, ordered on July 25, and set for a timely installationHowever, the Customer cancelled his service before the installationMegaPath has processed the Customer's cancellation request and the Customer's account is closedThe Company considers this matter closed

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/10/29) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintThe Customer contacted us on two occasions about his speed issues, but both issues required further troubleshooting and he did not respond to our attempts to follwith him to correct the issuesPer our Service Level Agreement, the Customer can upgrade, downgrade or cancel service within days with no penaltyThe Customer did not cancel his service until four months after installation; therefore, he is responsible for the outstanding balance of monthly charges incurred and the Early Termination FeeThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/10/31) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) The company is wrong and is lyingI contacted the company at least six timesI talked to accounts payable each time I called and told them I would not be paying until they gave me the service I had signed up forI was told each time they understoodThat they created only two tickets is a separate matter and in no way is an indication of the number of times I calledI agreed to going through the process of setting up a second ticket when it became clear the first one wasn't being solvedI did not see the point of having them create any further tickets considering the first two had done no good, but did not stop calling themI will not pay for service that was never provided, regardless of their day nonsenseTHEY NEVER PROVIDED THE GUARANTEED SERVICEI gave them ample time to provide the service guaranteed by the contract and finally cancelled due to lack of performance

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 9, 2015/04/09) */ Received response via email: Revdex.com Complaint #: XXXXXXXX Customer name: [redacted] Company Response: The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer's service outage was resolved by the carrier performing a replacement of the Fcable to restore serviceThe Customer will receive a SLA credit to compensate for the outage incurred between March 9, and March 18, The Company has found no justification in the Customer account history to waive an Early Termination Fee for disconnectionThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 11, 2015/04/10) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) A credit for this service outage for days is not sufficient to cover the loss of business as a result of not having available our primary phone linesWe should be able to terminate the agreement with no penalty and purchase service through another providerThis has been a recurring problem and it will happen again in the future if we [redacted] not change phone service providers

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/04/23) */ The Company has attempted to investigate the Customer's complaintHowever, the Company is unable to locate the Customer's account with the information provided in the complaintThe Company requests that the Customer provide additional information in order for the Company to fully investigate the Customer's complaint (i.eaccount number, invoice number and/or any invoice) Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 12, 2015/05/13) */ The cr Megapath refers to in their emails is #XXXXXXX the invoice needing a refund is XXXXXXXX and the account number on the invoice is XXXXXXXXWe just received another billing from them as they can not automatically withdraw money from our account Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 14, 2015/05/22) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer's account was cancelled on 11/14/The Customer made two payments for services dated after their cancel dateThe Company has issued credits for both payments back to the CustomerCompany considers this matter closed Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 16, 2015/05/27) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) Megapath only reimbursed our company for one month not twoWe will consider the manner closed once we received the second reimbursement of $and stop receiving monthly billingsThe one reimbursement of $was received on 01/28/We received another billing on May 12, advising us our visa was declineThe visa was declined as we had to close the account because they continued to withdraw money monthly for a service we terminated

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/06/23) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintWhen the Customer's number was ported, it triggered a change in our system and all assigned phone lines began billingThere was no indication in the Customer's contract that he should be receiving a free phone seat so per the Customer's request, the second seat was cancelled and credits totaling $were given for charges incurred since the line began billing in NovemberThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 7, 2014/06/25) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) While the only resolution with the company was to terminate the lineThey keep referring to a contract which doe snot existWe signed a contract almost years ago with he original IPsince then like with all phone companies when you make changes - i.eadd or delete lines no new contract were offered of signedMegaPath has certainly never offered a contract with our services This is nothing more than the company not wanting to honor what has been done for yearsThe contract would be the last several years of bills with the line at no charge

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/09/16) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintWe have refunded all charges on the Customer's account, including the Early Termination FeeThe account now has a zero balance and has been closedThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2014/09/22) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) I had to play phone tag for a month and chains of email to get anything doneAbsolutely rediculous

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 6, 2015/10/14) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Company will credit the Customer the fees related to the installation charges within two billing cyclesThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 8, 2015/10/31) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 8, 2014/04/15) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintThe Customer's email capability was originally shutdown because the volume of daily outgoing emails violated the Terms of Service and activated the Spam Abuse ProtocolThe Customer was informed of this, and was instructed on how to reset her password to re-start email servicesMultiple trouble tickets were then closed because the tickets addressed the same issue, and the Customer had received instructions on how to resolve the issueThe Customer's request for credit is inappropriate because email is not a billed service; therefore, there were no fees paid for email to credit back to the accountThe Company considers this matter closed with the Revdex.com Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 11, 2014/04/17) */ This situation has not been resolved, and we would appreciate your continued attempts to do so Our vendor seems to discount their responsibility as an email provider because they roll the price for email into their other chargesThey fail to acknowledge that their complimentary email service serves to attract and widen their customer baseMore importantly, a dysfunctional email system such as the one Megapath runs infects customers' ability to access links and other information sent by email but accessed by internet, many of which require rapid responseEmail is essential for any business today; therefore, we maintain that they shirked their responsibility and caused us tremendous problems, regardless of specific charges on an invoice Thank you for your efforts on our behalf Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 13, 2014/04/22) */ The Company has received the Customer's response and again, respectfully disagrees that any credit is dueIf the email outage had been caused by a service disruption or error on the Company's part, then if appropriate under the Service Level Agreement (SLAs), the Customer could seek an SLA creditHowever, in this instance, the outage was initially caused by the Customer's actions, which violated the Terms of Service and activated Spam Abuse ProtocolsMegaPath informed the Customer of the block and violation, and then advised the Customer on how to reinstate her email serviceThe secondary part of the outage was due to the Customer's failure to reinstate the email serviceTherefore, any prolonged outage in this situation was not due to action or inaction on the part of the Company, and therefore, SLA credits are not appropriate in this situationThe Company considers this matter closed

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/05/16) */ We have reached out to the customer directly for further clarifying information and are in the process of resolving this complaint Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 8, 2014/05/23) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintBecause there was a delay between when the Company sent the shipping label to the Customer and when the equipment was returned, initially, the Company was not able to track the equipment through the shipping system and, therefore, the equipment's status was shown as unreturnedHowever, as a result of our investigation, we have confirmed that the Customer returned the equipmentWe have now credited the account for the returned equipment and the collection efforts were cancelledThe Company considers this matter closed

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 9, 2015/01/29) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the account. On November 14, 2014, the Company issued Customer a credit for the October and November invoices. Customer was contacted to request credit... card information which would give customer an immediate refund. Customer chose the option for a refund check. The Company's records indicate that a refund check in the amount of $193.34 was issued to Customer on January 6, 2015 and cashed by Customer on January 21, 2015. The Company considers this matter closed.

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 9, 2015/03/03) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer has been credited back for early termination fees on the accountCustomer's account has been cancelledThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 11, 2015/03/05) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) I am completely satisfied with the cancellation of the early termination feesI will also contact my credit card companyShould any further fees be charged to my credit card regarding this closed account, I will resubmit a separate complaint referencing this resolutionThank you for your assistance in this matter

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 11, 2015/08/24) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountAfter a technician visited the Customer's site, it was determined that the site would require extensive inside wiring for services, which is the Customer's responsibilityThe Customer received several email notifications from the Company's Provisioning team with an estimated quote to complete the extensive inside wiring upon approval from the CustomerThe Customer informed the Company that they were exploring wiring options with a third partyThe Company was not contacted to confirm that the extensive inside wiring work was completedThe Customer then cancelled their service before the end of their contract term, therefore incurring Early Termination chargesThe Company has found no justification in the Customer account history to waive an Early Termination Fee for disconnectionThe Company considers this matter closed Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (3000, 13, 2015/09/09) */ (The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.) MegaPath's response is without merit for several reasons First, MegaPath insinuates that I have the responsibility under the contract to pay to have my house rewired in order to accommodate MegaPath equipmentThis is not what the contract statesWhat the contract actually states, under Note on page of the service agreement, is that any costs incurred by me in having rewiring services performed are not the responsibility of MegaPathThis is a non-issue as I have not requested MegaPath to pay to rewire my home; instead, I opted to not purchase its services and MegaPath never provided me services Second, because MegaPath never provided me services, I should not be billed for those servicesIn fact, under MegaPath's own policy, I never even had a final contract with MegaPath under which they could rightfully bill meThe service agreement states that "This Service Order need only be executed by SubscriberMegaPath may accept or decline the Order as provided hereinMegaPath's provisioning of the Service shall indicate it's acceptance of the order." The parties [redacted] not dispute that MegaPath did not provide servicesThus, MegaPath did not satisfy conditions set forth in its own policy to show acceptance, and without acceptance there is no contractNor did MegaPath give any other indication that I would be liable for payment prior to sending me its first bill for services that were never provided Third, Section III(E)(2) of the Fee Schedule indicates that when a circuit cannot function during installation, I have the right to reject the circuit without a cancellation or early termination feeI was never giving the option to accept or reject a circuit under this provision, as the circuit was never even installed, and therefore never testedPursuant to this provision, the billing start date does not begin until the customer has accepted the circuit after installationAgain, no installation took place, and the circuit was not testedTherefore, no billing start date accruedhence my surprise at receiving a bill for this circuit Fourth, MegaPath's Fee Schedule states that Early Termination fees apply "if you decide to terminate or cancel an installed circuit or service before the Term is complete." In this instance, no installation occurredFrom this language, it is obvious that my situation is not one that is subject to early termination fees Finally, MegaPath claims to offer a 30-Day Satisfaction GuaranteeThis policy reads that "if, during the first thirty (30) calendar days after installation, you notify MegaPath that you are not satisfied with MegaPath's Internet Service and request that your service be discontinued, we will terminate your Service Order and relieve you from the remaining term of your service commitment." Again, the 30-Day trial period accrues after installation occursin my case, there was no installationNonetheless, when I spoke with a representative in Billing at MegaPath, I was told that I should have cancelled within Days of the technician arriving at my homeThis is in contradiction to MegaPath's written policy, because installation was not completed when the technician came to my home In sum, MegaPath never provided me services, and acknowledged in its reply that it never provided me services, as I would need to perform extensive rewiring for it to [redacted] soThe technician never installed a circuit in my home through which I could receive servicesThe provision of these services is required to finalize the service agreement between myself and MegaPath, as MegaPath accepts the agreement by providing servicesWithout services, no contract exists between MegaPath and meEven if a contract existed, it would fail for lack of consideration because I have received no services from Megapath For the reasons set forth above, should be resolved by MegaPath and the collection agency dismissing any remaining charges from my account and closing same Final Business Response / [redacted] (4000, 20, 2015/10/27) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Company's field service technician completed installation at the Customer's siteIt was determined that the site would also require EIW (Extensive Inside Wiring), which is the responsibility of the Customer to completeThe Services were activated when it was confirmed that the local carrier delivered the loop for the circuitThe Company's Provisioning team provided an estimated quote if the Customer wanted the Company to perform any of the additional EIW workThe Company followed up with the Customer on several occasions about the EIWThe Customer informed the Company that they were exploring wiring options through a third partyAll charges are valid, as the Company terms and conditions specifically state that EIW is the responsibility of the Customer and the Company starts to bill once the loop for the circuit is confirmed at the siteThe Company has found no justification in the Customer account history to waive any feesThe Company considers this matter closed Pg of the Fee Schedule and Services Exhibit: Section ETerms and Conditions for Installation of Specific Broadband Services Installation and Pg of the Fee Schedule and Services Exhibit: Section ETerms and Conditions for Installation of Specific Broadband Services Circuit Acceptance Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (4200, 23, 2015/11/16) */ MegaPath's response is a contradiction to the section of their Fee Schedule and Services they are trying to use as their defense Pg of the Fee Schedule and Services Exhibit: Section ETerms and Conditions for Installation of Specific Broadband Services Circuit Acceptance This section states "Delivery of any circuit with Provider installation is completed by a MegaPath-contracted technician who installs any internal wiring required, connects the CPE, and tests the entire circuit to ensure its proper operationIf the circuit functions at the speed originally ordered by Subscriber, then Subscriber is deemed to have accepted this circuit when the MegaPath-contracted technician completes his or her test (billing start date)." The contracted technician did NOT install any internal wiringIn their response, MegaPath acknowledges that there was no internal wiring installed because my house needed "Extensive Inside Wiring"Therefore, installation was not complete/finalized allowing for the start of the billing date Furthermore, there's failure of consideration - there were no services received from MegaPath; thus, the fees are not due Show original message

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2014/05/29) */ The Company has investigated the Customer's complaintThe Customer's account has been credited for the charges erroneously accrued after service was supposed to be moved to a new locationThe Customer has also been given credit for charges billed from January 6, to April 2, while installation of service at the new location was pendingThe porting process was completed and the installation was complete as of May 23, The Company considers this matter closed

Final Consumer Response / [redacted] (2000, 6, 2014/02/25) */ Please cancel this complaintI was able to resolve the issue with the vendor

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/04/17) */
XXXXXXXX
Company Response:
The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer's chronic call quality issues were determined to be caused by their third party internet
providerThe Company does not guarantee call quality on third party internet connections and as such cannot waive the total ETF feesThe Company has waived the late fees, half of the ETF fees and has credited all equipment charges to the accountThe Company considers this matter closed

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/18) */
The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer has experienced several outage issues which were determined to be caused by the ILEC loopsThe loops have since been
repairedThe Company's Billing department is currently working to resolve the billing issues with the CustomerThe Company considers this matter closed
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/06/24) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
We've asked for them to waive any termination fees on account of the SLA not being upheldMany of the issues were not due to ILEC loops, either, but due to improper configuring of our routing and phone systems (for example, the voicemail did not function on our most active business line due to a technical mistake--they didn't set the voicemails to delete from their system-- and the voice quality suffered due to QoS not being enabled)We never, at any point of our service, received the full mbps we had paid forWhether this was due to their router not properly bonding the DSL connections or due to bad ILEC loops, we did not have the patience to find out (after two months of unacceptable performance, hours over the phone following up on support tickets and billing questions, and customers repeatedly unable to contact us)
Furthermore, the phones we purchased from Megapath never worked satisfactorilyAs we've stated in multiple emails and phone calls, we would like to return all equipment to Megapath as well as have any early termination fees waivedEven if the phones did work properly, they cannot be transferred to another service due to the locked down VoIP routing and restricted firmware on the phonesWe've had to purchase new phones for our new service
In sum, the service and equipment never functioned as agreed during our entire time with Megapath, and we will only consider the billing issues resolved once the issues of termination fees and equipment invoicing have been addressed

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/03/04) */
The Company has investigated the Customer's complaint and researched the history of the accountThe Customer's tickets in November and December were both addressed by our AgentsThe ticket in November was closed when it was found
that the issue had been resolved and the Agent had not received a call back regarding any issues from the CustomerThe ticket in December was closed after the issue was resolved and the Customer denied FST and requested to cancelA credit has been issued to the CustomerThe Customer's account has been closedThe Company considers this matter closed
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (3000, 7, 2015/03/05) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Megapath's response to my complaint is about as satisfactory as the recent performance of their outsourced technical support, which is not satisfactory whatsoever! Specifically, when I called back Technical Support on 11/25/I explained that my Internet connection's performance had been extremely slow varying from Kbps to Kbps for over days and that reprovisioning the line on 11/21/had "fixed" the issue for less than hoursI requested that the issue be escalated to the ILEC and specifically stated that I would not be available between 8:A.Mand 5:P.MWednesday, 11/26/Naturally, I received a voice mail at 9:A.Mthe following morning while I was at work which stated that "traffic was passing" and if I failed to call back within hours the ticket would be closedWhile I hesitate to call anyone a bald faced liar, this gentleman professed to observe traffic traversing my Internet connection while both my daughter and I were at work and all our computers were shut down completelyFurthermore, I was presented with the Hobson's choice of driving home on the eve of the Thanksgiving Holiday, calling Technical Support and troubleshooting the connectivity problem and still waiting until the following Monday for a technician to be dispatched or, instead, driving the hours to my sister's house for our planned Thanksgiving dinner as I chose to **Perhaps Megapath has failed to inform their outsourced Indian support staff that Thanksgiving is a major American holiday during which people frequently travel away from home to visit familyIn any event Ticket # XXXXXXX may have been closed when I failed to call Technical Support back on Thanksgiving (Thanksgiving??), but the issue was hardly resolved
I called Technical Support to open Ticket #XXXXXXX on Monday, 12/01/2014, and explained that my Internet connection had been down during Megapath system maintenance from 2:A.Muntil 1:P.M11/20/2014, that the performance of my Internet connection had been substandard since coming back online subsequent to Megapath system maintenance, and that I needed to have the problem definitively resolved as soon as possibleAfter first trying to sell me on a new service contract which I declined, I was finally transferred to a support technician who actually performed cooperative testing on my DSL line and determined that there were indeed problems that needed to be escalated to the ILEC (AT&T) and then opened a trouble ticket with AT&TAt last something was being done to address the problem! Wednesday morning, 12/03/2014, the AT&T technician called me from the MPOE outside my apartment building and asked me to check the speed of my Internet connectionI reported that my connection was performing at only Kbps, and the AT&T technician said he saw additional issues that he would reportShortly after that call, my Internet connection went down entirelyI have never refused a Field Technician until Saturday 12/06/when I answered a call from Technical Support and explained that I had decided to change ISPs and no longer needed a technician to be dispatchedAt that time I also asked the Support Technician to cancel my account effective immediately
When I called to request a billing adjustment on Monday 12/08/2014, the Account Manager cited my refusal to allow a technician to be dispatched on 12/06/after I had told Megapath Technical Support to cancel my account immediately to deny a billing adjustment for the substandard Internet performance I had experienced from 11/20/through 12/03/and only made a small allowance for the time my Internet connection was completely dead
As for Megapath account XXXXXXXX being canceled, I am relieved as it took two separate requests on 12/06/and 12/08/followed by a confirmation response via email and an exit survey to accomplish this featHowever, this completely ignores the fact that on 12/15/I received an email from Megapath entitled "Important Legal Notice Regarding Transfer of Service" and stating that effective 12/31/my account was being transferred to GC Pivotal LLC d/b/a Global CapacityI have subsequently received invoices via email from Global Capacity, a company with which I have never done businessDid Global Capacity somehow obtain my account information and email address by osmosis or was this data provided without my permission by Megapath? Who is responsible for tranferring an account that was supposed to have been canceled on 12/12/XXXX XX days later to Global Capacity if not Megapath staff? Megapath cannot even bother to correct their own error in transferring the account of a customer whose account was canceled?
Megapath certainly seems to like closing matters prematurelyThey push Technical Support to close tickets rather than resolve problems (Yes, there is a difference) and then claim that the issue is settledThey push customers to call Technical Support on a major holiday then close the ticket when the customer fails to call back and again claim that the issue is settledIn none of these cases has anything truly been resolved
I am utterly dismayed by the treatment Megapath has afforded a loyal customer of years standingMy recent dealings with Megapath, however, have reaffirmed my conviction that I most definitely made the right choice changing to a more customer service oriented ISP despite my initial reticence
Final Consumer Response /* (3000, 10, 2015/04/21) */
(The consumer indicated he/she DID NOT accept the response from the business.)
Megapath's response to my complaint is about as satisfactory as the recent performance of their outsourced technical support, which is not satisfactory whatsoever! Specifically, when I called back Technical Support on 11/25/I explained that my Internet connection's performance had been extremely slow varying from Kbps to Kbps for over days and that reprovisioning the line on 11/21/had "fixed" the issue for less than hoursI requested that the issue be escalated to the ILEC and specifically stated that I would not be available between 8:A.Mand 5:P.MWednesday, 11/26/Naturally, I received a voice mail at 9:A.Mthe following morning while I was at work which stated that "traffic was passing" and if I failed to call back within hours the ticket would be closedWhile I hesitate to call anyone a bald faced liar, this gentleman professed to observe traffic traversing my Internet connection while both my daughter and I were at work and all our computers were shut down completelyFurthermore, I was presented with the Hobson's choice of driving home on the eve of the Thanksgiving Holiday, calling Technical Support and troubleshooting the connectivity problem and still waiting until the following Monday for a technician to be dispatched or, instead, driving the hours to my sister's house for our planned Thanksgiving dinner as I chose to **Perhaps Megapath has failed to inform their outsourced Indian support staff that Thanksgiving is a major American holiday during which people frequently travel away from home to visit familyIn any event Ticket # XXXXXXX may have been closed when I failed to call Technical Support back on Thanksgiving (Thanksgiving??), but the issue was hardly resolved
I called Technical Support to open Ticket #XXXXXXX on Monday, 12/01/2014, and explained that my Internet connection had been down during Megapath system maintenance from 2:A.Muntil 1:P.M11/20/2014, that the performance of my Internet connection had been substandard since coming back online subsequent to Megapath system maintenance, and that I needed to have the problem definitively resolved as soon as possibleAfter first trying to sell me on a new service contract which I declined, I was finally transferred to a support technician who actually performed cooperative testing on my DSL line and determined that there were indeed problems that needed to be escalated to the ILEC (AT&T) and then opened a trouble ticket with AT&TAt last something was being done to address the problem! Wednesday morning, 12/03/2014, the AT&T technician called me from the MPOE outside my apartment building and asked me to check the speed of my Internet connectionI reported that my connection was performing at only Kbps, and the AT&T technician said he saw additional issues that he would reportShortly after that call, my Internet connection went down entirelyI have never refused a Field Technician until Saturday 12/06/when I answered a call from Technical Support and explained that I had decided to change ISPs and no longer needed a technician to be dispatchedAt that time I also asked the Support Technician to cancel my account effective immediately
When I called to request a billing adjustment on Monday 12/08/2014, the Account Manager cited my refusal to allow a technician to be dispatched on 12/06/after I had told Megapath Technical Support to cancel my account immediately to deny a billing adjustment for the substandard Internet performance I had experienced from 11/20/through 12/03/and only made a small allowance for the time my Internet connection was completely dead
As for Megapath account XXXXXXXX being canceled, I am relieved as it took two separate requests on 12/06/and 12/08/followed by a confirmation response via email and an exit survey to accomplish this featHowever, this completely ignores the fact that on 12/15/I received an email from Megapath entitled "Important Legal Notice Regarding Transfer of Service" and stating that effective 12/31/my account was being transferred to GC Pivotal LLC d/b/a Global CapacityI have subsequently received invoices via email from Global Capacity, a company with which I have never done businessDid Global Capacity somehow obtain my account information and email address by osmosis or was this data provided without my permission by Megapath? Who is responsible for tranferring an account that was supposed to have been canceled on 12/12/XXXX XX days later to Global Capacity if not Megapath staff? Megapath cannot even bother to correct their own error in transferring the account of a customer whose account was canceled?
Megapath certainly seems to like closing matters prematurelyThey push Technical Support to close tickets rather than resolve problems (Yes, there is a difference) and then claim that the issue is settledThey push customers to call Technical Support on a major holiday then close the ticket when the customer fails to call back and again claim that the issue is settledIn none of these cases has anything truly been resolved
I am utterly dismayed by the treatment Megapath has afforded a loyal customer of years standingMy recent dealings with Megapath, however, have reaffirmed my conviction that I most definitely made the right choice changing to a more customer service oriented ISP despite my initial reticence