Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 15, 2014/04/11) */ The complaint filed by NTTi is not accurate with respect to the facts as follows: WiLine did not damage two buildings managed by Columbia PropertyWiLine did an installation at one of the buildings on that campus in late December, and was asked to reinstall the equipment at that buildingThis work was completed on 3/21/The building in question is not the building that NTTi was moving into, although it is in the same campus of buildings We do agree that the building ownership asked us to not install any new equipment until the problem referenced above was resolvedHowever, the building has not given us notice "you cannot do future business within their facility" as reported in the complaintAnd in fact our installation for the customer was done without installing any new equipment It's untrue that WiLine did not provide IP configurations until NTTi requested to cancelPer the attached email to the complainant dated 1/27/14, WiLine provided IP information and notice the circuit was deliveredThe complainant did not request cancellation until 2/18/14, approximately three weeks laterOn 2/21/we sent the complainant a copy of the email addressed to her, that contained the attached welcome letter WiLine's Response: On January 15, WiLine dispatched a service technician to [redacted] , which is NTTi's new premises, to complete installation of a circuit that the NTTi orderedOn site, the technician met with the foreman working for NTTi doing construction for their new offices, and he instructed the WiLine tech that once he was through provisioning the circuit, he was to leave the cable that provides the Ethernet handoff labeled and coiled in NTTI's server room available for the NTTi's use, which the WiLine technician didAfter completion of the installation, WiLine sent the attached email on January to NTTi notifying them of circuit deliveryHowever, the circuit was available for the NTTi's use on January 15, and could have been put to productive use at that time Subsequent to that, there has been an issue between WiLine and the property management company that manages University, related to an installation at a different building than the one being occupied by NTTi, which caused some confusion related to the NTTi's service WiLine Networks Proposed Resolution: In the interest of customer relations, WiLine is willing to make the following offer: WiLine will accept cancellation by NTTi of the circuit installed at University without liability for early termination fee, and will waive all installation and monthly charges which may have accrued to date WiLine will leave the circuit in place through June 30, fully provisionedNTTi is free to use this circuit or not, at their sole discretion, and whether or not NTTI uses the circuit NTTi will not be liable for any monthly usage or other recurring charges If NTTi does not notify WiLine prior to June 30, then WiLine will deprovision the circuitIf NTTi wishes to use the circuit after that date, they may ask in writing to rescind the cancellation, and they will be responsible for the recurring monthly fees per the existing contract, starting on July 1, but will still not be liable for any of the installation or recurring monthly charges prior to July 1, [redacted] Vice President, Operations WiLine Networks, Inc [redacted] (San Francisco)
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:There are several inaccurate details included in WiLine's response.The monthly recurring charge for the 30Mbps service is $1,per month, not $1,200.WiLine DID NOT waive the $1,installation feeTheir invoice clearly states "INSTALLATION INCLUDED IN MONTHLY COST" - they have broken the $1,down over the life of the contractDuring the first month of service, we had two service outages.The service was in use until early JanuaryOn January 11, 2018, WiLine sent their Network Planning Specialist, [redacted] to our building to speak with myself and our contractor's superintendent, [redacted] [redacted] was the one who identifited the broken weatherhead and reported it to meThere are photos attached with [redacted] commentsMr [redacted] asked if there was anything he could do to keep our accountMy reply was very clear that becasue their installer broke the weatherhead during the install back in October and did not report it which could have cause major water damage, I did not feel comfortable with a company who is not honestIn addition to the broken weatherhead, their installer laid the conduit on the roof which was preventing our building from passing final inspection from the City of Menlo ParkIt is not just the broken weather head we are dealing with but also the conduit they laid across the roof (photos attached)After our discussion, Mr [redacted] told me I can remove the equipment that was in our server room and set it aside for someone from WiLine to pick upIt is still sitting on the floor in our server room.I contacted WiLine multiple times via email trying to resolve this matter, not only on 1/10/and 1/11/as they mentionThe following are dates for all the emails that were sent to WiLine and I have records of them all:1/10/181/12/181/17/- I did receive a reply to this on 1/25/from [redacted] which said "We are reviewing the terms of your customer service agreement and will get back to you upon completion of our review." 1/26/1/31/182/7/182/14/182/27/184/11/18On January 26, [redacted] of WiLine sent an email that stated "We want to help address the roof so you can get your inspections finalizedLet me know when we can arrange a dispatch truck to have these items resolved in a timely manner."I replied to [redacted] that same day which said "Please send someone next week to remove the equipment so we can get the repair doneYour equipment is also removed from our server room and is ready to be picked up."Because the building was brand new construction, we were trying to pass a building inspection and our contractor was familiar with the City's inspection requirements, we informed WiLine that our contractor would preform the work, not their installers who originally broker the weatherhead and did not report itAfter the 1/26/18, I never received a reply of call from anyone at WiLineWe needed to schedule our final building inspection with the City so we were being held hostage by their lack of responseThe final inspection was required for us to receive reimbursement from the builindg ownerIn reponse to their points of opinions:WiLine is correct that no damage to our newly constructed building becasue of the broken weatherhead BUT that is becuase our contractor, [redacted] wrapped the weatherhead in heavy plastic so no water could pentrate the ceilings belowWiLine's installer should have told someone that he broke the weatherheadIf [redacted] didn't wrap up the opening with plastic, there would have been damage [redacted] did not tell Wiline that they would not be allowed to fix the weatherhead - [redacted] ***, our contractor who was present during their visit told Mr [redacted] that they would take care of the repair and Mr [redacted] agreedThere were two of us present who witnessed thisOur contract and [redacted] was not comfortable with WiLine trying to fix anything since they were dishonest about breaking it back in OctoberWiLine's assessment is off base [redacted] made an concerted effort to resolve this matter without cooperation or responsesTheir installer was dishonest and their lack of response to send someone out to remove the equipment so the repairs to the weatherhead could be made delayed [redacted] final building inspection with the CityThese are poor business practices and we feel that being held hostage in silence for months and delaying our business and final building inpections should relieve us of the remaining term of our contract [redacted] is current in payments on the contract except for April's payment so the cure period does not apply [redacted] did not "wait" to notify WiLine - we contact them when our contractor, [redacted] notified us the weatherhead was broken and they wrapped it in plastic to protect the buildingWe did not switch providers in December becasue of installation issuesWiLine's service had outages and was very poorAnd for the record, we have several providers for various services required by the building's equipment (alarm system, fire protection, elevator phone, etc.)This statement is falseIt was a good thing we had another provider in place because to repair the weatherhead, all WiLine's cabling had to be removed so a new weatherhead could be installed - thus causing additional disruption to our business.In repsonse to WiLine's questions, which are just being presented now instead of several months ago when we tried to work this out: [redacted] controls the building and subleases to a business on the first floorThe building owner gave [redacted] permission to tear the building down to it's shell and rebuild it using our own contractors, engineers, architects and designersAnd again, their installation of conduit laying across the roof was preventing us from passing our final building inspection, as notified by our contractor [redacted] ***The installation delivery notice was signed by [redacted] contract IT consultant who simply tested the service was working.THE SERVICE INSTALLER SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN THAT HE BROKE THE WEATHERHEAD ON THE DELIVERY NOTICE BUT HE LIEDOur IT person has no construction knowledge and does not know that laying conduit across the roof is not acceptable to the City.In light of all the information above, we are clearly not asking to terminate our agreement due to convenience [redacted] has been severly inconvenienced and has spent countless unnecessary time trying to resolve this.I am glad WiLine is willing to address this now and work towards resolutionWe ask that WiLine agrees to accept our termination request effective April 1, 2018.Thank you, [redacted] Sincerely, [redacted]
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 9, 2014/06/24) */ Contact Name and Title: [redacted] , VP of Sales Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: [redacted] @wiline.com Upon seeing this complaint, I immediately contacted [redacted] and have both e-mailed and spoken to him a couple of times to resolve this to his satisfactionI have apologized for the confusion and delay in getting his check to him for the referralWe agreed that I would replace the $check that was lost in the mail with one for $I obtained that replacement check from Finance and personally took the check to the Post office yesterdayI have attached a copy Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 11, 2014/06/25) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Case Resolved
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 15, 2014/04/11) */ The complaint filed by NTTi is not accurate with respect to the facts as follows: WiLine did not damage two buildings managed by Columbia PropertyWiLine did an installation at one of the buildings on that campus in late December, and was asked to reinstall the equipment at that buildingThis work was completed on 3/21/The building in question is not the building that NTTi was moving into, although it is in the same campus of buildings We do agree that the building ownership asked us to not install any new equipment until the problem referenced above was resolvedHowever, the building has not given us notice "you cannot do future business within their facility" as reported in the complaintAnd in fact our installation for the customer was done without installing any new equipment It's untrue that WiLine did not provide IP configurations until NTTi requested to cancelPer the attached email to the complainant dated 1/27/14, WiLine provided IP information and notice the circuit was deliveredThe complainant did not request cancellation until 2/18/14, approximately three weeks laterOn 2/21/we sent the complainant a copy of the email addressed to her, that contained the attached welcome letter WiLine's Response: On January 15, WiLine dispatched a service technician to [redacted] , which is NTTi's new premises, to complete installation of a circuit that the NTTi orderedOn site, the technician met with the foreman working for NTTi doing construction for their new offices, and he instructed the WiLine tech that once he was through provisioning the circuit, he was to leave the cable that provides the Ethernet handoff labeled and coiled in NTTI's server room available for the NTTi's use, which the WiLine technician didAfter completion of the installation, WiLine sent the attached email on January to NTTi notifying them of circuit deliveryHowever, the circuit was available for the NTTi's use on January 15, and could have been put to productive use at that time Subsequent to that, there has been an issue between WiLine and the property management company that manages University, related to an installation at a different building than the one being occupied by NTTi, which caused some confusion related to the NTTi's service WiLine Networks Proposed Resolution: In the interest of customer relations, WiLine is willing to make the following offer: WiLine will accept cancellation by NTTi of the circuit installed at University without liability for early termination fee, and will waive all installation and monthly charges which may have accrued to date WiLine will leave the circuit in place through June 30, fully provisionedNTTi is free to use this circuit or not, at their sole discretion, and whether or not NTTI uses the circuit NTTi will not be liable for any monthly usage or other recurring charges If NTTi does not notify WiLine prior to June 30, then WiLine will deprovision the circuitIf NTTi wishes to use the circuit after that date, they may ask in writing to rescind the cancellation, and they will be responsible for the recurring monthly fees per the existing contract, starting on July 1, but will still not be liable for any of the installation or recurring monthly charges prior to July 1, [redacted] Vice President, Operations WiLine Networks, Inc [redacted] (San Francisco)
Complaint: [redacted] I am rejecting this response because:There are several inaccurate details included in WiLine's response.The monthly recurring charge for the 30Mbps service is $1,per month, not $1,200.WiLine DID NOT waive the $1,installation feeTheir invoice clearly states "INSTALLATION INCLUDED IN MONTHLY COST" - they have broken the $1,down over the life of the contractDuring the first month of service, we had two service outages.The service was in use until early JanuaryOn January 11, 2018, WiLine sent their Network Planning Specialist, [redacted] to our building to speak with myself and our contractor's superintendent, [redacted] [redacted] was the one who identifited the broken weatherhead and reported it to meThere are photos attached with [redacted] commentsMr [redacted] asked if there was anything he could do to keep our accountMy reply was very clear that becasue their installer broke the weatherhead during the install back in October and did not report it which could have cause major water damage, I did not feel comfortable with a company who is not honestIn addition to the broken weatherhead, their installer laid the conduit on the roof which was preventing our building from passing final inspection from the City of Menlo ParkIt is not just the broken weather head we are dealing with but also the conduit they laid across the roof (photos attached)After our discussion, Mr [redacted] told me I can remove the equipment that was in our server room and set it aside for someone from WiLine to pick upIt is still sitting on the floor in our server room.I contacted WiLine multiple times via email trying to resolve this matter, not only on 1/10/and 1/11/as they mentionThe following are dates for all the emails that were sent to WiLine and I have records of them all:1/10/181/12/181/17/- I did receive a reply to this on 1/25/from [redacted] which said "We are reviewing the terms of your customer service agreement and will get back to you upon completion of our review." 1/26/1/31/182/7/182/14/182/27/184/11/18On January 26, [redacted] of WiLine sent an email that stated "We want to help address the roof so you can get your inspections finalizedLet me know when we can arrange a dispatch truck to have these items resolved in a timely manner."I replied to [redacted] that same day which said "Please send someone next week to remove the equipment so we can get the repair doneYour equipment is also removed from our server room and is ready to be picked up."Because the building was brand new construction, we were trying to pass a building inspection and our contractor was familiar with the City's inspection requirements, we informed WiLine that our contractor would preform the work, not their installers who originally broker the weatherhead and did not report itAfter the 1/26/18, I never received a reply of call from anyone at WiLineWe needed to schedule our final building inspection with the City so we were being held hostage by their lack of responseThe final inspection was required for us to receive reimbursement from the builindg ownerIn reponse to their points of opinions:WiLine is correct that no damage to our newly constructed building becasue of the broken weatherhead BUT that is becuase our contractor, [redacted] wrapped the weatherhead in heavy plastic so no water could pentrate the ceilings belowWiLine's installer should have told someone that he broke the weatherheadIf [redacted] didn't wrap up the opening with plastic, there would have been damage [redacted] did not tell Wiline that they would not be allowed to fix the weatherhead - [redacted] ***, our contractor who was present during their visit told Mr [redacted] that they would take care of the repair and Mr [redacted] agreedThere were two of us present who witnessed thisOur contract and [redacted] was not comfortable with WiLine trying to fix anything since they were dishonest about breaking it back in OctoberWiLine's assessment is off base [redacted] made an concerted effort to resolve this matter without cooperation or responsesTheir installer was dishonest and their lack of response to send someone out to remove the equipment so the repairs to the weatherhead could be made delayed [redacted] final building inspection with the CityThese are poor business practices and we feel that being held hostage in silence for months and delaying our business and final building inpections should relieve us of the remaining term of our contract [redacted] is current in payments on the contract except for April's payment so the cure period does not apply [redacted] did not "wait" to notify WiLine - we contact them when our contractor, [redacted] notified us the weatherhead was broken and they wrapped it in plastic to protect the buildingWe did not switch providers in December becasue of installation issuesWiLine's service had outages and was very poorAnd for the record, we have several providers for various services required by the building's equipment (alarm system, fire protection, elevator phone, etc.)This statement is falseIt was a good thing we had another provider in place because to repair the weatherhead, all WiLine's cabling had to be removed so a new weatherhead could be installed - thus causing additional disruption to our business.In repsonse to WiLine's questions, which are just being presented now instead of several months ago when we tried to work this out: [redacted] controls the building and subleases to a business on the first floorThe building owner gave [redacted] permission to tear the building down to it's shell and rebuild it using our own contractors, engineers, architects and designersAnd again, their installation of conduit laying across the roof was preventing us from passing our final building inspection, as notified by our contractor [redacted] ***The installation delivery notice was signed by [redacted] contract IT consultant who simply tested the service was working.THE SERVICE INSTALLER SHOULD HAVE WRITTEN THAT HE BROKE THE WEATHERHEAD ON THE DELIVERY NOTICE BUT HE LIEDOur IT person has no construction knowledge and does not know that laying conduit across the roof is not acceptable to the City.In light of all the information above, we are clearly not asking to terminate our agreement due to convenience [redacted] has been severly inconvenienced and has spent countless unnecessary time trying to resolve this.I am glad WiLine is willing to address this now and work towards resolutionWe ask that WiLine agrees to accept our termination request effective April 1, 2018.Thank you, [redacted] Sincerely, [redacted]
Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 9, 2014/06/24) */ Contact Name and Title: [redacted] , VP of Sales Contact Phone: XXX-XXX-XXXX Contact Email: [redacted] @wiline.com Upon seeing this complaint, I immediately contacted [redacted] and have both e-mailed and spoken to him a couple of times to resolve this to his satisfactionI have apologized for the confusion and delay in getting his check to him for the referralWe agreed that I would replace the $check that was lost in the mail with one for $I obtained that replacement check from Finance and personally took the check to the Post office yesterdayI have attached a copy Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 11, 2014/06/25) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) Case Resolved