Slashdot Mirror


Broadband ISP Betrayal Forces Homeowner To Sell New House

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.

22 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 DigiShaman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Home Owner: But but but, thats price is outrageous!!! How can I run my business if you guys are stomping my entire profit margin?

      Comcast: Because...we can :)

      Home Owner: But I have a business to run!

      Comcast: Look into my eyes; you don't work for yourself, you work for Comcast!!! *evil laughter*.

      Home Owner: What's your name!?

      Comcast: Skeletor!

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Easy Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    4. 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.

    5. 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.'"
    6. Re:Easy Solution by TWX · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually I think that a corporate death penalty would go a long way toward making things better. Corporations are already willing to close-up shop in a given area and dump thousands of people into unemployment to save 20% by moving operations to foreign countries. Revoking a corporate charter would now affect shareholders too, so that those who own the company would know that if they allow their compny to go too far then they risk losing essentially everything.

      I think that the fine in this scenario should be the cost to implement the service.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    7. 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. Same problem here in South Carolina by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    When I bought my home, I was assured by AT&T that they provided Uverse up to 18mbit at my address, and the employee on the phone actually directed me to the National Broadband Map.

    After I moved in, I ordered service, and what do you know? I can only get legacy DSL at 768k. I filed complaints with FCC and FTC over the false claims and false representation on the broadband map, only to receive "thanks but we don't care" letters from both agencies, along with a courtesy call from AT&T confirming that 768k was the highest speed I could get.

    The county fiber network runs right past my house, but since AT&T was able to get a municipal network ban passed as state law in SC (fuck you very much for signing it, Nikki Haley, you steaming piece of shit), I can't connect to it (only people who have NO Internet options from a major ISP can connect to it, and since I can get 768k DSL, I can't connect to the county network).

    Fuck you AT&T
    Fuck you FCC
    Fuck you FTC
    Fuck you Nikki Haley
    Fuck you South Carolina

    1. Re:Same problem here in South Carolina by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Check the law again. Broadband is now classified as 25/3. If the language in the contracts specify 'broadband' you might be able to say ' while i do have internet acces, i dont have access to broadband as defined by the FCC.'

      --
      Good-bye
  3. Yes again by Crashmarik · · Score: 4, Informative

    Didn't we see this yesterday?

    Yes we did

  4. Dupe by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 4, Informative

    This is a repost.

    --
    They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
    1. Re:Dupe by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 4, Funny

      Maybe the homeowner had to sell his house twice.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    2. Re:Dupe by Slashdot+Parent · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe the homeowner had to sell his house twice.

      Damn you, Comcast!!!!!

      --
      They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
  5. BB ISP Betrayal Forces Slashdot To Dupe Article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    That should have been the headline.

  6. It works in reverse too by WoodburyMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    We live in a somewhat rural area. Fiber isn't even close, and DSL service (6mbit max) only became available a year or two ago. Cable internet through Charter has been available for over a decade though, and we've had Cable TV since the early 1990's. About 5 years ago, relatives next door finally caved and wanted cable. They are literally one house before us, and equal distance from the road. (100ft or so). Every time we called they said it was not available for their address. It took 6mo of fighting, and a call/complaint to the local cable/communication oversight committee, to get them to send a survey crew (A single guy), who immediately got out of the car, looked, said "The f**k, there's no problem here you can get it" who then went on about a rant about how their database is so messed up and inaccurate.

  7. 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.

  8. Re:4G by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Informative

    In Europe we have this thing called 3G and 4G which both brings you reliable wireless broadband without wires. Approx $30/month.

    ... and capped data allowances - often at very low limits

  9. Re:Is it just me... by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's not just you. It does not read like an Onion article to me, either.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  10. Re:He should live in by TWX · · Score: 4, Funny

    only if you polish the ends too much. Then you cut off the connectors and reterminate, and hopefully polish it right this time.

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  11. Happened to me in a rich area of LA by netsavior · · Score: 4, Informative

    I moved into nice apartments in Westlake Village, California. Called Verizon, had them hook up DSL. It was fast and worked well... for 12 hours.
    My service was shut off.

    I called and they said "Service is not available in your area.

    I told them I had service yesterday, and they confirmed that I did, but that it was a mistake, and service was not available.

    We went around and around, I finally gave up after 2 hours on the phone, vowing to sign up with someone else. No other service available, and since I was at the bottom of a valley, EVEN SATELLITE was not available.

    After a few more days of phone calls and escalations, I finally straight up asked them "Is the CO/RT full and you didn't realize it until you hooked me up?" they admitted that yes it was.

    I made a deal with my neighbor, bought her network equipment and paid her phone bill every month just for letting me use her wifi.

    THEN to add insult to injury, I got a contract cancellation fee bill from Verizon in the mail, because I terminated my contract for DSL before a year was up.