4 ms·

Verizon How is this even legal?

16 points by amwmedia 10y ago

56k 10y ago
Mmm... If they called it "third-party router penalty" you wouldn't be wasting all this time with this. Obviously they want to make extra money on top of what you pay for the internet. That comes in form of renting you a router or getting the money anyway with a fee. The naming is wrong. It shouldn't be called "maintenance fee", but it doesn't look like there's anything you can do.
amwmedia 10y ago
this just makes no logical sense!
johng 10y ago
Charge your for router if you have it, charge you for not having it... they win either way. It should not be legal. I'd contact the PUC/PRC for whatever state you are in.
- amwmedia 10y ago
  thanks for the tip. I may just do that
- amwmedia 10y ago
  would this fall under the PUC? I didn't think internet was considered a "utility"
mikestew 10y ago
What's funny is how long Bob goes on with the logical arguments when it has nothing to do with logic, and the CR told Bob that ("that option is not available to me"). The dropdown the CR has in front of her does not include "remove charge for router maintenance". No amount of arguing is going to change that. Bob is arguing with the wrong person. Bob asks for a supervisor. Supervisor says that it's not on his dropdown, either. Maybe they're lying, but it doesn't matter if they're keeping their stories straight and Bob's not threatening to leave Verizon. johng has the right idea: go argue with someone that is empowered to do something about it.
- amwmedia 10y ago
  yeah, looking into filing an informal PUC complaint now. I did later in the conversation mention that I was going to be exploring other internet options. Of course that didn't make a difference in the conversation.
pitaa 10y ago
Clearly the maintenance fee allows them to maintain the income they would be receiving if you were renting a router from them!
- amwmedia 10y ago
  true! I didn't ask them what the maintenance fee is designed to "maintain"
1812Overture 10y ago
99% of people are going to call Verizon support if they have a problem with their non-Verizon router and can't get on the internet and it will take longer for customer service to fix the problem because the router options etc will be different. This makes perfect sense to me.
- amwmedia 10y ago
  I understand that but a customer shouldn't be force to buy hardware from the vendor, or be charged a fine for not doing so. Either work the cost of the hardware into the price of the service, or offer a way to have the service with limited support if the customer wants to take care of it themselves. Verizon should be able to know if their service works all the way to THEIR box, after that it's my responsibility if I choose not to pay for the additional service.

16 points by amwmedia 10y ago

56k 10y ago

Mmm... If they called it "third-party router penalty" you wouldn't be wasting all this time with this. Obviously they want to make extra money on top of what you pay for the internet. That comes in form of renting you a router or getting the money anyway with a fee. The naming is wrong. It shouldn't be called "maintenance fee", but it doesn't look like there's anything you can do.

amwmedia 10y ago

this just makes no logical sense!

johng 10y ago

Charge your for router if you have it, charge you for not having it... they win either way. It should not be legal. I'd contact the PUC/PRC for whatever state you are in.

amwmedia 10y ago
thanks for the tip. I may just do that
amwmedia 10y ago
would this fall under the PUC? I didn't think internet was considered a "utility"

mikestew 10y ago

What's funny is how long Bob goes on with the logical arguments when it has nothing to do with logic, and the CR told Bob that ("that option is not available to me"). The dropdown the CR has in front of her does not include "remove charge for router maintenance". No amount of arguing is going to change that. Bob is arguing with the wrong person. Bob asks for a supervisor. Supervisor says that it's not on his dropdown, either. Maybe they're lying, but it doesn't matter if they're keeping their stories straight and Bob's not threatening to leave Verizon. johng has the right idea: go argue with someone that is empowered to do something about it.

amwmedia 10y ago
yeah, looking into filing an informal PUC complaint now. I did later in the conversation mention that I was going to be exploring other internet options. Of course that didn't make a difference in the conversation.

pitaa 10y ago

Clearly the maintenance fee allows them to maintain the income they would be receiving if you were renting a router from them!

amwmedia 10y ago
true! I didn't ask them what the maintenance fee is designed to "maintain"

1812Overture 10y ago

99% of people are going to call Verizon support if they have a problem with their non-Verizon router and can't get on the internet and it will take longer for customer service to fix the problem because the router options etc will be different. This makes perfect sense to me.

amwmedia 10y ago
I understand that but a customer shouldn't be force to buy hardware from the vendor, or be charged a fine for not doing so. Either work the cost of the hardware into the price of the service, or offer a way to have the service with limited support if the customer wants to take care of it themselves. Verizon should be able to know if their service works all the way to THEIR box, after that it's my responsibility if I choose not to pay for the additional service.