If there are problems with my equipment from the customers house to my hand off to upstream providers, in this case primarily AT&T, I will continue to help *** or others resolve these problems and at my discretion I may help sometimes without charging customers with their equipment past my
hand off but that is not part of my service nor my agreement with customers.Thanks,***
This customer came into my office claiming that every time they have purchased Internet service in the past if they paid for X mbps they got X mbps. I explained to them that our service has never been sold that way and that is not in our agreement. I further explained that we have had problems with this site and sat down at my computer and verified that from the radio outside their house to my access point I was getting at the time more than 10 times the "up to" download speed we were offering. The customer then talked more about how they were using the service and made it clear they are actually using it at two houses which is a violation of my agreement. I recommended this customer have the other legal household and person setup their own service but this has still not been done yet. I then further explained to this customer that the decisions made by companies like speedtest.net to route traffic in ways that are not at all consistent with Internet traffic is not something I have control of. I also explained to this customer that if I wanted to I could do the same thing other Internet providers do and setup a speedtest server in my office so tests are done to my servers deceiving customers in my opinion instead of other Internet locations but explained that I think that practice is not actually helpful in resolving this particular problem with Internet speeds and how traffic is handled and often illegally prioritized by other companies than mine. I recommended repeatedly that they quit doing multiple speedtests one right after the other as I have clearly seen historical patterns where when multiple speedtests are run the later tests are not prioritized. I further explained that once traffic leaves my network I have absolutely no control over the fact that companies like AT&T prioritize their own traffic over mine which is illegal. I explained that I pay for a 1gbps circuit from AT&T and that it never delivers the 1gbps and AT&T seems to be clearly prioritizing their traffic. I further explained that this really is a political problem and if the customer continues I would like to put in equipment that I own that could be put at their house to create data that could actually gather data regarding where the bottlenecks are coming from.However, after all these things took place in my office the customer still insisted that it was my legal duty to provide always X mbps even though I clearly only have ever advertised "up to" X mbps for different service levels. I explained that if this customer is not happy with the fact that during peak hours they may be getting speeds that are only as fast as customers paying less per month they would need to decide if they want to go with a slower service because most of the time they do have faster speeds available. Because this customer was clearly trying to setup a legal scenario where they could claim that I had a duty to legally provide always X mbps even though again, I clearly have only ever advertised "up to" X mbps we were clearly at a impasse and even the suggestion I made such as letting me put equipment at their house to actually document the problem were being ignored this customer chose to threaten me that the were going to contact the Revdex.com. Because I have had clear conflict in the past with the Revdex.com and the fact that they illegally report information about my business that isn't even factual and I said to the customer, "Good luck." It was and is an absolute lie that I told this customer that I do not care about the problem. It is also and still is against my agreement to allow this customer to use their service with two different houses and two different families and unless I am notified in writing that this has stopped their service will be terminated because that is not fair to other customers.This is a problem that goes far beyond the Revdex.com ability to dispute because they do not have the authority to regulate the Internet. I even have letters in my office when dealing with illegal actions of AT&T from the California CPUC they they do not regulate the Internet which is a clear lie because they have tried to regulate any providers of Internet services and in fact tried mandating Wireless ISP's to get approvals from the CPUC during the early years of the Obama administration.I have no doubt that if this customer had service from AT&T in the past for X mbps they may have always received X mbps. This kind of illegal prioritizing of some customers traffic over others is normal illegal immoral actions that companies like AT&T do. I know for a fact though from several other people and companies that AT&T does not offer always X mbps when they advertise X mbps.Furthermore, if the Revdex.com chooses to take on this issue with Root Automation when they clearly haven't with companies like AT&T I will sue the Revdex.com not only for working to target my business but for the information they have had posted on their web site about my business that was and is false and their tactics of only correcting their falsified data if a business is willing to acknowledge that they have any value at all in helping customers dispute things with business owners other than showing that they do not have the integrity nor power to handle issues where there are both federally and states regulated Telecommuncations companies who routinely steal from tax payers competing against companies like mine who have never ever taken even a dime of taxpayers money to build my network.Sincerely,[redacted] dba Root Automation
If there are problems with my equipment from the customers house to my hand off to upstream providers, in this case primarily AT&T, I will continue to help *** or others resolve these problems and at my discretion I may help sometimes without charging customers with their equipment past my
hand off but that is not part of my service nor my agreement with customers.Thanks,***
This customer came into my office claiming that every time they have purchased Internet service in the past if they paid for X mbps they got X mbps. I explained to them that our service has never been sold that way and that is not in our agreement. I further explained that we have had problems with this site and sat down at my computer and verified that from the radio outside their house to my access point I was getting at the time more than 10 times the "up to" download speed we were offering. The customer then talked more about how they were using the service and made it clear they are actually using it at two houses which is a violation of my agreement. I recommended this customer have the other legal household and person setup their own service but this has still not been done yet. I then further explained to this customer that the decisions made by companies like speedtest.net to route traffic in ways that are not at all consistent with Internet traffic is not something I have control of. I also explained to this customer that if I wanted to I could do the same thing other Internet providers do and setup a speedtest server in my office so tests are done to my servers deceiving customers in my opinion instead of other Internet locations but explained that I think that practice is not actually helpful in resolving this particular problem with Internet speeds and how traffic is handled and often illegally prioritized by other companies than mine. I recommended repeatedly that they quit doing multiple speedtests one right after the other as I have clearly seen historical patterns where when multiple speedtests are run the later tests are not prioritized. I further explained that once traffic leaves my network I have absolutely no control over the fact that companies like AT&T prioritize their own traffic over mine which is illegal. I explained that I pay for a 1gbps circuit from AT&T and that it never delivers the 1gbps and AT&T seems to be clearly prioritizing their traffic. I further explained that this really is a political problem and if the customer continues I would like to put in equipment that I own that could be put at their house to create data that could actually gather data regarding where the bottlenecks are coming from.However, after all these things took place in my office the customer still insisted that it was my legal duty to provide always X mbps even though I clearly only have ever advertised "up to" X mbps for different service levels. I explained that if this customer is not happy with the fact that during peak hours they may be getting speeds that are only as fast as customers paying less per month they would need to decide if they want to go with a slower service because most of the time they do have faster speeds available. Because this customer was clearly trying to setup a legal scenario where they could claim that I had a duty to legally provide always X mbps even though again, I clearly have only ever advertised "up to" X mbps we were clearly at a impasse and even the suggestion I made such as letting me put equipment at their house to actually document the problem were being ignored this customer chose to threaten me that the were going to contact the Revdex.com. Because I have had clear conflict in the past with the Revdex.com and the fact that they illegally report information about my business that isn't even factual and I said to the customer, "Good luck." It was and is an absolute lie that I told this customer that I do not care about the problem. It is also and still is against my agreement to allow this customer to use their service with two different houses and two different families and unless I am notified in writing that this has stopped their service will be terminated because that is not fair to other customers.This is a problem that goes far beyond the Revdex.com ability to dispute because they do not have the authority to regulate the Internet. I even have letters in my office when dealing with illegal actions of AT&T from the California CPUC they they do not regulate the Internet which is a clear lie because they have tried to regulate any providers of Internet services and in fact tried mandating Wireless ISP's to get approvals from the CPUC during the early years of the Obama administration.I have no doubt that if this customer had service from AT&T in the past for X mbps they may have always received X mbps. This kind of illegal prioritizing of some customers traffic over others is normal illegal immoral actions that companies like AT&T do. I know for a fact though from several other people and companies that AT&T does not offer always X mbps when they advertise X mbps.Furthermore, if the Revdex.com chooses to take on this issue with Root Automation when they clearly haven't with companies like AT&T I will sue the Revdex.com not only for working to target my business but for the information they have had posted on their web site about my business that was and is false and their tactics of only correcting their falsified data if a business is willing to acknowledge that they have any value at all in helping customers dispute things with business owners other than showing that they do not have the integrity nor power to handle issues where there are both federally and states regulated Telecommuncations companies who routinely steal from tax payers competing against companies like mine who have never ever taken even a dime of taxpayers money to build my network.Sincerely,[redacted] dba Root Automation