A bad experience dealing with AT&T Wireless
Joe
George Grapman
> http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/attwireless.html
I have a simple way of disputing bills:
Always use a credit card. This puts more power in your hands.
Waste little time with the front line people. Politely request a
supervisor. If the supervisor refuses to help tell them that you plan to
dispute the charge. Remind them that it takes a lot more work on their
end than on yours. Tell them that when the company replies you will tell
them you disputed it because ________was unwilling to help.
Never accept "I can not do that". Tell them you believe they will not
do it but you know that they can. If they disagree ask what they would
do if their boss told them to do that.
If all else fails get the companies main number, not the toll free
customer service but corporate headquarters (yahoo finance usually has
that under "profile"). Ask for the executive offices or the legal
department. You will not get a CEO or senior v-p but you usually will
get someone whose job includes keeping problems away from upper management.
George Grapman
P.S. Two things that often get their attention:
Consumer fraud.
Small Claims Court.
Frank
"Joe" <useful...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ec44be4c-c79d-4ef8...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/attwireless.html
Never had any problems with AT&T until Cingular took over. Big difference
when AT&T was just AT&T with billing issues resolved quickly over the phone.
My experience with Cingular is you just go around and around and nothing
would be resolved even after they agree to it verbally. I just don't do
business with Cingular or Sprint. Wish the old AT&T were back though.
beadsbyirene
" Frank" <nore...@nothome.net> wrote in message
news:YPqdne9LVusJ1LnV...@comcast.com...
Where have you been the past year? There is no Cingular anymore. ATT bought
them out. If you're getting lousy service you're getting it from ATT which
normally doesn't give 'lousy' service. Their service is usually
'abominable'.
George
original AT&T (not the AT&T previous to cingular) is back. Here is a
helpful video:
Todd Allcock
"Joe" <useful...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ec44be4c-c79d-4ef8...@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> http://home.comcast.net/~plutarch/attwireless.html
A brandy new webpage devoted to a "wrong" committed four year before?
No offense, but while I don't put huge billing errors past companies like
this, I do think they have better ways of making money than outright fraud,
particularly when I've never seen anyone ELSE complain about "redated calls"
either on Usenet or HowardForums.
Unless this is a particular fraud they only committed on the web page
author?
Sorry- this story smells way too fishy- billing systems are all automated-
no one is "sneaking" extra calls to any one person's account, and it
concerns a company, frankly, that's no longer in business- the "AT&T
Wireless" complained about in the article (that had no relationship with
"AT&T" other than licensing the name) was bought by Cingular years ago. The
fact that Southwestern Bell (the owner of Cingular,) years later, also
bought AT&T (the long distance phone company) and renamed itself and it's
wireless company "AT&T" is essentially coincidence, and not the same company
our author is whining about.
Ironically, BTW, is there a reason you didn't add the AT&T or Cingular
newsgroups in your scattershot list? It would seem they have better need
for this "warning" than Sprint or Verizon customers. (Of course, there it'd
only generate a bunch of "funny, that's never happed to me" responses...)
Todd Allcock
>
> Where have you been the past year? There is no Cingular anymore.
> ATT bought
> them out. If you're getting lousy service you're getting it from ATT
which
> normally doesn't give 'lousy' service. Their service is usually
> 'abominable'.
*Sigh* AT&T did NOT "buy out" Cingular. Cingular's parent company, SBC
(Southwestern Bell) bought (what was left of) AT&T,and renamed themselves
and their "Cingular" wireless divison, to "AT&T" for the name-brand
recognition.
Pangloss
news:utaVj.37861$gB5....@fe105.usenetserver.com...
Actually they bought BellSouth which owned Cingular...
Todd Allcock
> > *Sigh* AT&T did NOT "buy out" Cingular. Cingular's parent company, SBC
> > (Southwestern Bell) bought (what was left of) AT&T,and renamed
themselves
> > and their "Cingular" wireless divison, to "AT&T" for the name-brand
> > recognition.
>
> Actually they bought BellSouth which owned Cingular...
Almost- SBC (now AT&T) bought BellSouth who owned 40% of Cingular (SBC
owned the other 60%.)
I skipped that part for simplicity (and irrelevance.) Cingular was always
a joint-venture between SBC and BS. After absorbing both AT&T and BS, SBC
was free to rename Cingular to AT&T.
LDC
wrote:
>>
>> *Sigh* AT&T did NOT "buy out" Cingular. Cingular's parent company, SBC
>> (Southwestern Bell) bought (what was left of) AT&T,and renamed themselves
>> and their "Cingular" wireless divison, to "AT&T" for the name-brand
>> recognition.
>
>Actually they bought BellSouth which owned Cingular...
That is partially correct but misleading. SBC was an owner of
Cingular since its inception. It was a joint venture between SBC
and Bell South. When SBC bought Bell South they became the sole
owner of Cingular.
Jeff Jonas
>>> Cingular's parent company, SBC (Southwestern Bell)
>>> bought (what was left of) AT&T,
>>> and renamed themselves and their "Cingular" wireless divison,
>>> to "AT&T" for the name-brand recognition.
And things then come full circle.
I started with AT&T Wireless,
which then became Cingular
and is now AT&T Mobility.
It's all to keep the sign-makers in business
to keep making new signs for the (remaining) stores :-)
George Grapman
Cingular was originally AT&T wireless. The name changed when it was
sold to SBC and Bell South and we have now come full circle except for
the fact that AT&T is AT&T in name only.
Pangloss
news:njjVj.81$hJ5...@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
Yup, in 20 years we've gone from "ATT" through seven baby bells right on
back to "att"....Karma I suppose....
I wonder how much the logo design firm was paid who told them go from all
CAPS to lower case?
Larry
> I skipped that part for simplicity (and irrelevance.) Cingular was
> always a joint-venture between SBC and BS. After absorbing both AT&T
> and BS, SBC was free to rename Cingular to AT&T.
>
>
A tangled web we weave.....(c;
BTW, the correct reference achronym for BS is actually B$, at least in
South Carolina....
Bell$outh....
,,,,sorta like Micro$oft.
Todd Allcock
> > That is partially correct but misleading. SBC was an owner of
> > Cingular since its inception. It was a joint venture between SBC
> > and Bell South. When SBC bought Bell South they became the sole
> > owner of Cingular.
>
>
> Cingular was originally AT&T wireless.
No, it wasn't. "Cingular" was created by the consolidation of regional
wireless carriers SBMS (Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems), BellSouth
Mobility and PacTel. AT&T Wireless was a separate wireless company that
existed contemporaneously with those regional carriers and was once owned by,
then spun off of AT&T (the long distance company leftover from the Ma Bell
breakup) long before Cingular acquired it.
> The name changed when it
> was sold to SBC and Bell South and we have now come full circle
> except for the fact that AT&T is AT&T in name only.
Kinda sorta- Cingular was created as a seperate company owned by SBC (60%)
and BellSouth (40%.) Cingular bought AT&T Wireless (which was no longer
part of AT&T, but had a license to use the AT&T name, which expired when
Cingular bought them.)
When SBC later bought AT&T (the long distance company) they renamed
themselves AT&T, but didn't rename Cingular, due to BellSouth's objection.
When SBC (now calling themselves AT&T) bought BellSouth a year later, that
eliminated the objection to rename Cingular "AT&T Mobility."
Ironically, the old AT&T Wireless (which Cingular bought) was only months
away from having to rename themselves- their two-year license to use the
name AT&T was about to expire, and AT&T (the LD company) was about to
launch their own new wireless service as a Sprint MVNO (Mobile Virtual
Network Operator.) SBC's purchase of AT&T scuttled that deal.
Beachcomber
>Ironically, BTW, is there a reason you didn't add the AT&T or Cingular
>newsgroups in your scattershot list? It would seem they have better need
>for this "warning" than Sprint or Verizon customers. (Of course, there it'd
>only generate a bunch of "funny, that's never happed to me" responses...)
>
For younger readers who might not perhaps be aware of the history, the
name AT&T is an attempt to invoke the feelings of quality,
reliability, and high standards of telephone service that existed
since before 1900 and lasted well into the 1970's before the big
break-up. The AT&T Corporation provided something like 80 to 90% of
the local telephone service in this USA and near 100% of the long
distance service.
Everyone from the operators to the local installers were long-term
experienced employees rigidly drilled in providing good customer
service. It was a bureaucracy to be sure, but the people sure did
know their stuff.
These new AT&T companies exist as AT&T in name only. I've found that
many of the service people at AT&T Wireless don't even know how to
work the features on their own cell phones.
CellGuy
> For younger readers who might not perhaps be aware of the history, the
> name AT&T is an attempt to invoke the feelings of quality,
> reliability, and high standards of telephone service that existed
> since before 1900 and lasted well into the 1970's before the big
> break-up. The AT&T Corporation provided something like 80 to 90% of
> the local telephone service in this USA and near 100% of the long
> distance service.
>
> Everyone from the operators to the local installers were long-term
> experienced employees rigidly drilled in providing good customer
> service. It was a bureaucracy to be sure, but the people sure did
> know their stuff.
>
> These new AT&T companies exist as AT&T in name only. I've found that
> many of the service people at AT&T Wireless don't even know how to
> work the features on their own cell phones.
I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right out of
college and can support this statement. All equiment we designed and built
was to meet an operating life of 20 years minimum. The Bell telephones
used at home and in phone booths also met this standard. They were built
like a brick. Service was great, and call clarity was excellant.
Then our government broke up AT&T, and the downhill slide began. Cheap
imported phones were allowed on your home lines, introducing service quality
degradation. Competition spurned cost cutting on both the hardware and
customer support side. We all know the state of the landline telephone
service today. No wonder most young people don't even get a landline
phone, what with the costs of owning one. Nuiscence charges, stupid taxes,
and charges for options like voicemail that cellular carriers offer for
free.
FWIW, the only landline phone I have is for my business. The main house
phone is VOIP, and my family uses cell phones for other calls.
George Grapman
> On Sun, 11 May 2008 18:27:54 GMT, Beachcomber wrote:
>
>> For younger readers who might not perhaps be aware of the history, the
>> name AT&T is an attempt to invoke the feelings of quality,
>> reliability, and high standards of telephone service that existed
>> since before 1900 and lasted well into the 1970's before the big
>> break-up. The AT&T Corporation provided something like 80 to 90% of
>> the local telephone service in this USA and near 100% of the long
>> distance service.
>>
>> Everyone from the operators to the local installers were long-term
>> experienced employees rigidly drilled in providing good customer
>> service. It was a bureaucracy to be sure, but the people sure did
>> know their stuff.
>>
>> These new AT&T companies exist as AT&T in name only. I've found that
>> many of the service people at AT&T Wireless don't even know how to
>> work the features on their own cell phones.
>
> I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right out of
> college and can support this statement. All equiment we designed and built
> was to meet an operating life of 20 years minimum. The Bell telephones
> used at home and in phone booths also met this standard. They were built
> like a brick. Service was great, and call clarity was excellant.
They were built to last because in most cases the phone company owned
them and had to replace/repair them.
>
> Then our government broke up AT&T, and the downhill slide began. Cheap
> imported phones were allowed on your home lines, introducing service quality
> degradation. Competition spurned cost cutting on both the hardware and
> customer support side. We all know the state of the landline telephone
> service today. No wonder most young people don't even get a landline
> phone, what with the costs of owning one. Nuiscence charges, stupid taxes,
> and charges for options like voicemail that cellular carriers offer for
> free.
What many people do not understand is how that anti-trust case
changed. Originally,under Carter, the plan was to separate the
manufacturing and the dial tones. AT&T controlled most of the local
telcos and overcharged them and the telcos simply passed those costs on
to the customers.
The Reagan Justice Department altered the case to have AT&T spin off
the local carriers.
There have been some advantages. When I first moved west I would look
at my clock before making a long distance call as rates dropped at 5
p.m. and again at 11.I made most of my non-business calls on weekends.
I used to be in the phone card business ands,of course, at one time
the only cards were AT&T.
What has not changed is on the local end business customers subsidize
residential users.
Larry
news:17cmnlmmahub8.1...@40tude.net:
> I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right out
> of college and can support this statement. All equiment we designed
> and built was to meet an operating life of 20 years minimum. The
> Bell telephones used at home and in phone booths also met this
> standard. They were built like a brick. Service was great, and call
> clarity was excellant.
>
> Then our government broke up AT&T, and the downhill slide began.
> Cheap imported phones were allowed on your home lines, introducing
> service quality degradation. Competition spurned cost cutting on
> both the hardware and customer support side. We all know the state
> of the landline telephone service today. No wonder most young people
> don't even get a landline phone, what with the costs of owning one.
> Nuiscence charges, stupid taxes, and charges for options like
> voicemail that cellular carriers offer for free.
>
How'd you get an engineering degree without learning how to spell?
What university was that, anyways?
Didn't anyone at Bell Labs notice??
Rod Speed
> CellGuy <cel...@seemessagebody.com> wrote
>> I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right
>> out of college and can support this statement. All equiment we
>> designed and built was to meet an operating life of 20 years
>> minimum. The Bell telephones used at home and in phone booths also
>> met this standard. They were built like a brick. Service was
>> great, and call clarity was excellant.
>> Then our government broke up AT&T, and the downhill slide began.
>> Cheap imported phones were allowed on your home lines, introducing
>> service quality degradation. Competition spurned cost cutting on
>> both the hardware and customer support side. We all know the state
>> of the landline telephone service today. No wonder most young
>> people don't even get a landline phone, what with the costs of
>> owning one. Nuiscence charges, stupid taxes, and charges for options
>> like voicemail that cellular carriers offer for free.
> How'd you get an engineering degree without learning how to spell?
Plenty of engineers cant spell for nuts. Me included.
> What university was that, anyways?
> Didn't anyone at Bell Labs notice??
Anyone with a clue has always noticed that with engineers.
Larry
@mid.individual.net:
> Anyone with a clue has always noticed that with engineers.
>
>
Someone musta proofread Bill Shockley's papers.....(c;
Richard B. Gilbert
It wouldn't surprise me. Using a preefrooder is the smart thing to do;
particularly if you are an engineer!
Of course Word checks both spelling and grammar. Go Engineers!!!!
CellGuy
"Equiment" was a typo and I have been known to misspell "excellent"
University of South Carolina? <G>.
> Didn't anyone at Bell Labs notice??
No, we were all too busy figuring out ways to screw our customers.
Larry
$.mzi912ct...@40tude.net:
> University of South Carolina
Ahh.....NOW I understand....(c;
Gamecocks in the ENGLISH department can't spell!
Michael N. Paris
>
> I worked as an engineer with Bell Labs (the R&D arm of AT&T) right out of
> college and can support this statement. All equiment we designed and
> built
> was to meet an operating life of 20 years minimum. The Bell telephones
> used at home and in phone booths also met this standard. They were built
> like a brick. Service was great, and call clarity was excellant.
>
And right now, I use a VOIP provider which more or less is accross the
street from Bell Labs and its Vonage. I grew up a 20-30 min bicycle ride
from Bell Labs Holmdel.
William Souden
Isn't there a discussion and what to use the Holmdel facility for?
One nice thing about those days was when you had a phone problem you
called 611 and regardless of whether it was the phone,inside wiring or
outside they fixed it.
jgro...@hotmail.com
> "George Grapman" <sfgeo...@paccbell.net> wrote in message
Except now the HQ is in Texas, and we all know how well Texans can
manage large organizations...hint $4 gas...JG
Todd Allcock
> One nice thing about those days was when you had a phone problem
> you called 611 and regardless of whether it was the phone,inside wiring
> or outside they fixed it.
True. But then again, with what we used to pay, we should've each had our
own personal repairman on standby.
William Souden
company. They also charged monthly fees for things like an extension
phone on the same line. Now that I think of it the cable people used to
charge for a second tv getting basic cable. When they were forced to
stop the practice they warned people about imaginary hazards of hooking
up a second tv on your own (they are allowed to charge for doing the
cabling).
Steve Sobol
On 2008-05-14, William Souden <sou...@nospam.com> wrote:
> Agreed. At one time you had to rent everything from the phone
> company. They also charged monthly fees for things like an extension
> phone on the same line. Now that I think of it the cable people used to
> charge for a second tv getting basic cable. When they were forced to
> stop the practice they warned people about imaginary hazards of hooking
> up a second tv on your own (they are allowed to charge for doing the
> cabling).
And for rental of extra converter boxes and remotes (I think our extra box is
$5/month and the extra remote is $2).
--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED www.SteveSobol.com
Geek-for-hire. Details: http://www.linkedin.com/in/stevesobol
Todd Allcock
> Agreed. At one time you had to rent everything from the phone
> company. They also charged monthly fees for things like an extension
> phone on the same line.
Yeah, I remember as a kid we had one phone that rang and two extensions
that didn't (that we weren't paying for.) My Dad worked for the local gas
company and he and his co-workers would pinch any phones left behind when
they were sent to shut off the gas at abandoned apartments (if they beat
the phone company guys there, of course.) Then they'd disconnect the
ringers so the phone company wouldn't detect the extra load from the
extension phones.
I remember having a heck of a time convincing my folks when I was a
teenager in the 80's that you were allowed to own phones and it was okay to
let me reconnect the ringers! (And an ever bigger sell-job to get them to
turn in the stupid banana-yellow wallphone they'd been renting since the
Nixon administration!)
> Now that I think of it the cable people used to charge for a second
> tv getting basic cable.
My cable co was even worse. In addition to the $6/month extra outlet, we
signed up for "cable radio" for $2/month extra when the cable company first
came to town back when I was 12 or 13 years old. (They rebroadcast local
FM stations, as well as MTV's and HBO's audio in stereo, on unused radio
frequencies for people in bad reception areas.) The installer put a $2
cable splitter on the line and was about to run a wire to the stereo's FM
antenna terminals. I told my parents to tell the installer they changed
their minds and didn't want the radio service, and we ran to Radio Shack
later and bought the necessary parts to "roll our own." (We did get a
knock on the door several months later when they detected a "leak" caused
by my jury-rigged extra-outlet cable run to my brother's bedroom. As a
precocious teen, no one had told me I wasn't supposed to use a leftover
piece of 300-Ohm antenna twin-lead wire with coax adapters on the ends as a
cable line! ;-)
> When they were forced to stop the practice they warned people about
> imaginary hazards of hooking up a second tv on your own (they are
> allowed to charge for doing the cabling).
And for box rental, of course- back in the good old days, cable-ready TVs
were still a rarity. I remember trolling garage sales and flea markets
for old converters because my folks didn't want to rent any additional
boxes at $6/month. For a buck each out of a flea market junk box I scored
an old cable-to-UHF converter (upconverted the cable band to UHF channels)
and a very old 36-channel converter with a "remote"- a 12-button panel
(with a three-position switch to select which group of 12 channels you
wanted to select from) on a 20' cord that connected to the actual converter
hooked to the TV!
Ah, the good old days... ;-)
Steve Sobol
> And for box rental, of course- back in the good old days, cable-ready TVs
> were still a rarity.
We still rent two boxes for our two cable-ready TV's because we get premium
channels and occasionally watch pay-per-view. However, I don't rent a cable
modem (I own one that is DOCSIS compliant), and I'm eventually going to get
a couple universal remotes and give the other ones back to the cable company
and stop paying monthly for them.
Cheapo Groovo
@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>, jgro...@hotmail.com says...
AT&T gives your info to the US govt
Why don't you wake up?