Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Broadband ISP Betrayal Forces Homeowner To Sell New House

Posted by Soulskill on from the let-me-transfer-you-to-our-customer-disservice-center dept.

New submitter knightsirius writes: A Washington homeowner is having to sell his new house after being refused internet service from Comcast and CenturyLink despite receiving confirmation from both that the location was able to receive broadband service. The whole process took months and involved false assurances and bureaucratic convolutions. The national broadband map database frequently cited by Comcast as proof of sufficient competition lists 10 options at his location, including a gigabit municipal fiber network, but he cannot subscribe to it due to Washington state direct sale restrictions.

8 of 222 comments (clear)

  1. Easy Solution by TheReaperD · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quick and effective solution to this problem. Pass a law that if a service provider says that they offer service to an address they must do so by law. No fines, they have to install service. If that means $30,000 in new cable to be laid, then so be it. The service providers will get their service maps in order really quickly and we'd have accurate coverage numbers for the country.

    --
    "Be particularly skeptical when presented with evidence confirming what you already believe." -
    1. Re:Easy Solution by YrWrstNtmr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He specifically said no fines, that they have to provide the service as the fine.

      And if they don't?

    2. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Fines don't work.
      Just revoke the companies existence if they refuse.

    3. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He specifically said no fines, that they have to provide the service as the fine.

      And if they don't?

      Service is supplied by municipal agency at their expense.

    4. Re:Easy Solution by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He specifically said no fines, that they have to provide the service as the fine.

      And if they don't?

      Fine them enough to bring in that line from the telco, installation and service. If that means they're paying for a fiber pull so you can get a fractional T3, so be it. It makes it a simple cost decision. I'm tired of blatantly fraudulent coverage maps, too.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:Easy Solution by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Pass a law that if a service provider says that they offer service to an address they must do so by law. No fines, they have to install service. If that means $30,000 in new cable to be laid, then so be it. The service providers will get their service maps in order really quickly and we'd have accurate coverage numbers for the country. .The service providers will get their service maps in order really quickly and we'd have accurate coverage numbers for the country.

      This is the problem with people who typically see regulation as the solution to everything - they assume the best possible outcome for themselves. When in fact the best possible outcome for the company targeted by the regulations is what will really happen.

      If your proposal were implemented, the best possible outcome for the company is that they simply discontinue providing coverage maps for the country, and require you to call in. You will verbally be given a quote with a disclaimer that quoting a price does not constitute a guarantee that your address is within their service area. And if you need that guarantee, you will need to subscribe for a year and put down a deposit so they can send someone out there to survey the location. If it turns out they can't provide service, they'll refund your deposit. But if they can service you, you're committed to the year's subscription (thus neatly preventing you from finding if another ISP also covers you).

      How do I know? Because I just went through this trying to get Time-Warner cable internet at the commercial building I manage.

  2. welcome to home buying 101 by alen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Always verify everything yourself and don't trust anyone.

    Pay for the previous owner's internet for a month or two just to make sure you can have it in the home. Ask for utility bills

    A lot of sellers will try to hide major problems like mold and previous flooding which is why you need a good inspector. And don't trust the realtor

    1. Re:welcome to home buying 101 by ledow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      More - don't buy an entire house on the expectation of a company delivering a product.

      Because selling an entire house just because you couldn't get Internet you were promised some dumbness of inordinate magnitude.

      Did they not bother to ask neighbours first? If those neighbours have Internet, can't they piggyback on the wifi or put a microwave connection across at worse?

      All I take from the article (twice now!) is "tech guy still trusts in suppliers' promises".

      If it's that important you'd sell the house, you didn't do your homework beforehand. If it's REALLY that important, you'd probably consider leased lines, satellite and other more expensive methods.

      Hell, just as a bog-standard geek the first thing I did in my house was check the phone lines, check 3G connectivity (now 4G but that wasn't around at the time), and look out in the street for the CATV manholes that UK cable operators dig lines to your house from. The only thing I didn't bother to do was properly check wifi signal propagation because I could already see half-a-dozen of the neighbour's wifi networks from upstairs. And that's in the suburbs. Stick me out somewhere in the sticks and you bet I'd be checking stuff on anything other than supplier's promises.