Whats Going On Now? Terrible Service For The Past Month

When I call tech support I am hold forever.

You mean they answer the phone now?

Matt Smith

2005-10-13 17:58:02 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
You mean they answer the phone now?

Maybe you need to be more patient. I stayed on hold while I was doing work
in my home office and got a tech support person on the line after 55
minutes! They were very polite and confirmed what I already knew; that the
signal to my modem was very good and there were no problems with my modem.
Beyond that they were not much help but said they would mention that there
are ongoing issues in my service area during their team meeting.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-13 20:48:17 UTC

Post by Matt Smith
Maybe you need to be more patient.

I'm not sure you understand. To be on "hold" means the phone needs to be
answered first. A little over a month ago, it wasn't even possible to be
put on hold regardless of being patient.

Jim Parsons

2005-10-14 01:16:14 UTC

"A little over a month ago" - how about last Sunday night when I
discovered my cable modem was fried? I couldn't get on "Hold" - just a
busy signal, so I just put the call on my landline phone auto-dial with
speakerphone on, which continuously dials, and watched TV until TW
answered half-hour later. Then I believe it took another half-hour to
actually get a human voice. TV show was interesting so I really didn't
care that much...

In article <lKz3f.468$***@tornado.socal.rr.com>, ***@noemail.com
says...

Post by Matt Smith
Maybe you need to be more patient.

I'm not sure you understand. To be on "hold" means the phone needs to be
answered first. A little over a month ago, it wasn't even possible to be
put on hold regardless of being patient.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-14 01:21:05 UTC

Post by Jim Parsons
"A little over a month ago" - how about last Sunday night when I
discovered my cable modem was fried? I couldn't get on "Hold" - just a
busy signal, so I just put the call on my landline phone auto-dial with
speakerphone on, which continuously dials, and watched TV until TW
answered half-hour later. Then I believe it took another half-hour to
actually get a human voice. TV show was interesting so I really didn't
care that much...

That was a really good idea! I don't have such an option that I could have
used even if I had thought of it. Thanks for sharing it with everyone.

I tried for a couple of weeks and every time I called I got the busy signal.
Just like you did. Seems like they still need to up their staff on the
phone lines. At least buy a system that manages it and gives you an
automated estimated time of service. How expensive is such a thing?

Darren New

2005-10-14 15:59:02 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
That was a really good idea! I don't have such an option that I could have
used even if I had thought of it. Thanks for sharing it with everyone.

I have a phone that keeps redialing until it hears something other than
a busy signal. Very convenient.

Post by Scott Lindner
automated estimated time of service. How expensive is such a thing?

If your wait times are high, it's expensive because you're tying up the
phone line. If you're getting a busy signal when nobody is available for
half an hour, and so are 15 other people, that's 15 phone lines they
don't have to pay for while you wait on hold. :-)

--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Neither rocks nor slush nor salted rims
shall keep us from our appointed rounds.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-14 16:08:12 UTC

Post by Darren New
If your wait times are high, it's expensive because you're tying up the
phone line. If you're getting a busy signal when nobody is available for
half an hour, and so are 15 other people, that's 15 phone lines they
don't have to pay for while you wait on hold. :-)

Phone lines are insignificantly cheap in comparison to the people behind
them. Only $39.99 a month, right? :)

Scott

Darren New

2005-10-14 16:20:39 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
Phone lines are insignificantly cheap in comparison to the people behind
them. Only $39.99 a month, right? :)

For residential lines, yes.

Nevertheless, unless the wait averages only a couple minutes, I'd rather
get a busy signal than be put on hold tying up *my* phone line for 2 hours.

--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Neither rocks nor slush nor salted rims
shall keep us from our appointed rounds.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-14 16:23:26 UTC

Post by Darren New
For residential lines, yes.

I think you missed my joke.

Post by Darren New
Nevertheless, unless the wait averages only a couple minutes, I'd rather
get a busy signal than be put on hold tying up *my* phone line for 2 hours.

I'd rather know that the corporation still exists and how long I'll be on
hold when I call. I don't want to to be a slave to my phone and dial every
five minutes to see if someone's still alive at TWC.

Darren New

2005-10-14 16:35:18 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
I'd rather know that the corporation still exists and how long I'll be on
hold when I call. I don't want to to be a slave to my phone and dial every
five minutes to see if someone's still alive at TWC.

Of course, the best is "leave a message and we'll call you back when
we're available." Of course, that never actually happens for some reason.

--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Neither rocks nor slush nor salted rims
shall keep us from our appointed rounds.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-14 17:34:15 UTC

Post by Darren New
Of course, the best is "leave a message and we'll call you back when
we're available." Of course, that never actually happens for some reason.

You're right. That really would be the best way to do it. Heck, maybe if
they had an email system or online means of requesting a tech support
communication that is tracked. You can check the status and scheduled time
of service. Etc. Would be much less frustrating and would help them load
balance too.

rlsusenet@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org

2005-10-14 23:21:02 UTC

Post by Darren New

Of course, the best is "leave a message and we'll call you back when
we're available." Of course, that never actually happens for some reason.

...because they're recording to /dev/null, the write-only device 8-)

relic

2005-10-14 16:04:42 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
Seems like they still need to up their
staff on the phone lines.

Or improve their product?

--
A headache that lasts for 17 months is a problem. See a doctor.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-14 16:07:18 UTC

Post by relic
Or improve their product?

LOL! Good point. Don't *need* the extra lines.

Matt Smith

2005-10-15 01:01:12 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
I'm not sure you understand. To be on "hold" means the phone needs to be
answered first. A little over a month ago, it wasn't even possible to be
put on hold regardless of being patient.

I was greeted by a pleasant recorded voice that told me someone would be
with me shortly then I was dumped into the queue. I left my phone on speaker
out of curiosity just to see how long it would take for someone to pick up.
The sad joke was when another recorded voice chimed in with, "Many of your
issues can be resolved on our web site." What's next? Something like, "If
you are experiencing trouble with you email, send a complaint to
***@san.rr.com." Seriously, in my place of business the help desk has to
meet strict SLAs to satisfy their contractual agreement. So far this month
the wait time has been 45 seconds to talk with a human.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-17 14:00:30 UTC

Post by Matt Smith
I was greeted by a pleasant recorded voice that told me someone would be
with me shortly then I was dumped into the queue. I left my phone on speaker
out of curiosity just to see how long it would take for someone to pick up.
The sad joke was when another recorded voice chimed in with, "Many of your
issues can be resolved on our web site." What's next? Something like, "If
you are experiencing trouble with you email, send a complaint to
meet strict SLAs to satisfy their contractual agreement. So far this month
the wait time has been 45 seconds to talk with a human.

No joke. And TWC's recent mailing to *comfort* us that they are on top of
things is completely offensive. "Just give us a call at...." Yeah right.

Kathy

2005-10-18 15:24:19 UTC

When I call tech support I am hold forever.

Those who manage to get put on hold are the lucky ones. With a little
prayer and a ton of patience, you may not get disconnected before they
decide to answer.

Given my experiences over the last month, I keep looking for Alan Funt to
walk in and tell me it's all a bad joke.

Let's say your internet goes down. So you pick up the phone at and try
repeatedly to get through for the next 2 hours, but all you can get is a
busy signal.

Finally the phone rings. The recordings start. A mechanical voice comes on
and describes the services that aren't working for you today, after all,
that's the only reason you'd put up with sitting on hold for that long, but
it always seems like an insult to have to listen to someone tell you to go
to the website when your internet isn't working. And all I'm thinking is no
way, why would I want to add services from a company that completely lost
touch with the definition of customer support?

Once you get through, it is determined that someone needs to come to your
house and it will be 2 weeks before someone can get around to it, is that
OK?

I called early Saturday morning and got in touch with someone in a record 22
minutes, with no busy signal. The man who answered the phone suggested that
it is less likely to get a busy signal from RR if you dial the "1-858"
before dialing 695-3220. Old wives tale or truth, I haven't had time to
figure out.

I see there are web forms here:
http://sandiego.twcsd.com/ContactUs/sdgContactUs.asp
http://help.rr.com/HMSLogic/rrmail.aspx

and live chat here:
http://help.rr.com/HMSLogic/rrchat.aspx?poolname=TW-SanDiego

I haven't used them so I have no idea how long it takes to get a response,
but I suppose at least you wouldn't have to listen to that stupid recording
for 45 minutes, which seems to be my average wait time.

- Kathy

Scott Lindner

2005-10-18 15:28:00 UTC

Post by Kathy
http://sandiego.twcsd.com/ContactUs/sdgContactUs.asp
http://help.rr.com/HMSLogic/rrmail.aspx
http://help.rr.com/HMSLogic/rrchat.aspx?poolname=TW-SanDiego
I haven't used them so I have no idea how long it takes to get a response,
but I suppose at least you wouldn't have to listen to that stupid recording
for 45 minutes, which seems to be my average wait time.

Assuming your ISP works long enough to find those forms. Or the DNS is
functioning enough to resolve those domain names to IP addresses for you.

stevech

2005-10-25 00:40:24 UTC

I can only say again - vent your wrath with the city/county supervisors who
control the franchises and the monopolies.
Gripes here are useless.

Without Competition There Is No Excellence.

recording

Post by Kathy
for 45 minutes, which seems to be my average wait time.

Assuming your ISP works long enough to find those forms. Or the DNS is
functioning enough to resolve those domain names to IP addresses for you.

Scott Lindner

2005-10-25 01:39:51 UTC

Post by stevech
I can only say again - vent your wrath with the city/county supervisors who
control the franchises and the monopolies.

I can only say again.... many have learned. I will take my gripe and write
my politician. I already started the letter. But I will also continue to
educate here as well.

Post by stevech
Gripes here are useless.

Really? I don't see it that way. Maybe you do, but you can certainly look
the other way. How many people have learned things here that wouldn't
otherwise? What's your purpose in trying to cover up the truth?

stevech

2005-10-29 05:38:22 UTC

re the below... I'm merely saying that complaining about TWC/RR service in
this forum is not going to improve the situation.
Since the cable companies have a monopoly per area, the only motivation they
can have to improve will come if/when they fear increased competition.
Satellite TV is slight competition. DSL is real competition but for some
reason, it hasn't inspired TWC to reduce their prices for RR. Apparently TWC
is satisified with its market share and customer retention.

If you want to gripe about TWC, take it to the County Supervisors who
control the franchises - if you can get those bozos to listen and care.

Post by stevech
I can only say again - vent your wrath with the city/county supervisors who
control the franchises and the monopolies.

I can only say again.... many have learned. I will take my gripe and write
my politician. I already started the letter. But I will also continue to
educate here as well.

Post by stevech
Gripes here are useless.

Mike

2005-10-30 01:58:16 UTC

I've had enough, I'm dumping Time Warner forever.
Good riddance. As you can tell, they dont give a fuck about their customers

Post by stevech
re the below... I'm merely saying that complaining about TWC/RR service in
this forum is not going to improve the situation.
Since the cable companies have a monopoly per area, the only motivation they
can have to improve will come if/when they fear increased competition.
Satellite TV is slight competition. DSL is real competition but for some
reason, it hasn't inspired TWC to reduce their prices for RR. Apparently TWC
is satisified with its market share and customer retention.
If you want to gripe about TWC, take it to the County Supervisors who
control the franchises - if you can get those bozos to listen and care.

Post by stevech
I can only say again - vent your wrath with the city/county supervisors

who

Post by stevech
control the franchises and the monopolies.

I can only say again.... many have learned. I will take my gripe and

write

Post by Scott Lindner
my politician. I already started the letter. But I will also continue to
educate here as well.

Post by stevech
Gripes here are useless.

Really? I don't see it that way. Maybe you do, but you can certainly

look

Post by Scott Lindner
the other way. How many people have learned things here that wouldn't
otherwise? What's your purpose in trying to cover up the truth?

Scott Lindner

2005-10-30 19:33:05 UTC

Post by Mike
I've had enough, I'm dumping Time Warner forever.
Good riddance. As you can tell, they dont give a fuck about their customers

Why should they care when they don't have to try to get customers? They
government guarantees them a monopoly.

rlsusenet@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org

2005-10-31 06:05:11 UTC

Post by Mike
I've had enough, I'm dumping Time Warner forever.
Good riddance. As you can tell, they dont give a fuck about their customers

Why should they care when they don't have to try to get customers? They
government guarantees them a monopoly.

I'm trying to recall -- does TW have control over satellite subscriptions?

Damian

2005-10-31 16:36:52 UTC

Post by Mike
I've had enough, I'm dumping Time Warner forever.
Good riddance. As you can tell, they dont give a fuck about their customers

Why should they care when they don't have to try to get customers? They
government guarantees them a monopoly.

I'm trying to recall -- does TW have control over satellite
subscriptions?

"Satellite" has nothing viable to compete with Cable internet connections.
If they did, we'd all be over there.

Scott Lindner

2005-11-01 03:33:46 UTC

Post by Scott Lindner
Why should they care when they don't have to try to get customers? They
government guarantees them a monopoly.

I'm trying to recall -- does TW have control over satellite subscriptions?

I think you may have a fundamental understanding of what the government is
enabling TWC to do. IN LAW they are guaranteed from competition. I'm not
sure how much clearer I can make that. It is in LAW, guaranteed from any
form of competition. You can nit pick any prance around the topic however
you want, but the countless numbers of legal research papers that have been
written up and brought before Congress and the FCC over the past 5-6 years
would seriously suggest that I'm not making something up here.

Let me repeat... IN LAW. Not in my dreams... but IN LAW.

One more time.. say it with me to make sure you get the phonics right. IN
LAW.

If you still have troubles understanding the meaning of this I will do the
Google search for you so you can read the countless extremely detailed
papers on this very topic for yourself. You can even feel free to argue
with the authors of these detailed legal analysis of law and how TWC is
abusing its legal protection from competition.

stevech

2005-11-03 06:49:17 UTC

I lived in Ventura county, CA for many years. There, we had TWO cable
TV/ISPs: GTE and a no-name legacy company.
They each ran their lines to each home in the County. GTE's was 20 years
newer and so they stole-away customers. They were a bit cheaper.
Now Adelphia has the GTE cable system since our SEC/FCC POLICIES (not LAWS)
said that this had to be divested as a condition of our GOVERNMENT wanting
GTE to be acquired by BellAtlantic who was later acquired by Verizon.
As of this day, there are still two cable companies there.

And our wonderful government just permitted the legacy incumbent local
exchange carriers (ILECs) drop equal access to competitive DSL providers,
thereby giving the ILECs a monopoly on DSL.

Crap, it's enough to make me switch to the dumbocratic party.

Post by Scott Lindner
Why should they care when they don't have to try to get customers?

They

Post by Scott Lindner
government guarantees them a monopoly.

I'm trying to recall -- does TW have control over satellite

subscriptions?

Post by Scott Lindner
I think you may have a fundamental understanding of what the government is
enabling TWC to do. IN LAW they are guaranteed from competition. I'm not
sure how much clearer I can make that. It is in LAW, guaranteed from any
form of competition. You can nit pick any prance around the topic however
you want, but the countless numbers of legal research papers that have been
written up and brought before Congress and the FCC over the past 5-6 years
would seriously suggest that I'm not making something up here.
Let me repeat... IN LAW. Not in my dreams... but IN LAW.
One more time.. say it with me to make sure you get the phonics right. IN
LAW.
If you still have troubles understanding the meaning of this I will do the
Google search for you so you can read the countless extremely detailed
papers on this very topic for yourself. You can even feel free to argue
with the authors of these detailed legal analysis of law and how TWC is
abusing its legal protection from competition.

Daniel Damouth

2005-11-26 21:26:49 UTC

Post by ***@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org
I'm trying to recall -- does TW have control over satellite
subscriptions?

"Any form of competition"? What about DSL and power line connectivity?

My apartment complex is offering power line internet broadband
connections for $30/month and I know for a fact that's drawing
customers would otherwise be roadrunner customers.

-Dan Damouth

--
Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all
other countries because you were born in it. -- George Bernard Shaw

Scott Lindner

2005-10-30 13:09:22 UTC

Post by stevech
If you want to gripe about TWC, take it to the County Supervisors who
control the franchises - if you can get those bozos to listen and care.

It's better that more people know the truths than only one. I already said
it's about letting other people know, you keep saying it's about griping.
Why don't you listen?

stevech

2005-11-03 06:50:03 UTC

Geeze man, there is what, 50 people that read this list?
Come on, who are you kidding?

Post by stevech
If you want to gripe about TWC, take it to the County Supervisors who
control the franchises - if you can get those bozos to listen and care.

It's better that more people know the truths than only one. I already said
it's about letting other people know, you keep saying it's about griping.
Why don't you listen?

Scott Lindner

2005-11-03 14:04:07 UTC

Post by stevech
Geeze man, there is what, 50 people that read this list?
Come on, who are you kidding?

If it's such a small list you should already know that some people have
already learned. Why do you care so much to stiffle the truth? Are you a
stock holder or just like being stupid?

Damian

2005-11-03 16:55:36 UTC