# DIRECTV Gets 'F' From Better Business Bureau



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

Yikes!

http://www.tvpredictions.com/dbbb011210.htm


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

BBB, Swanni are a perfect match...both are overblown.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

Not surprising. Even the knowledgeable people on these sat boards have been screwed by contract renewals and such. 

They need to do some work.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Please stop reading TVPredictions. It's like the National Enquirer of the blogosphere... and that's bad since the blogosphere is generally national-enquirer-y anyway. :lol:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

If my company was financially successful as Directv, I'd not care if BBB gave me a F.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

I do not care for Swanni, but he does get some things right.

As far as them being successful, it catches up with you after awhile, regardless. Dish went through a rough patch with service, but they now have English speaking csr's and a very handy chat program. Like I said, Directv needs to do some work.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> Please stop reading TVPredictions.


Why? Is that report wrong? I've been hit with bogus contract extensions several times in the short time I've had DirecTV. It's standard operating procedure for them, and it needs to stop. They deserve the bad press from BBB complaints.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

mdavej said:


> Why? Is that report wrong? I've been hit with bogus contract extensions several times in the short time I've had DirecTV. It's standard operating procedure for them, and it needs to stop. They deserve the bad press from BBB complaints.


Didn't say anything about the BBB complaints, just asked people to stop reading Swanni since he's an incompetent boob.


----------



## trekologer (Jun 30, 2007)

The BBB is nothing more than a shakedown racket. You can read into this as DirecTV didn't pay annual dues. If they pay up, the rating will suddenly turn into an A.


----------



## vilos (Nov 8, 2009)

tcusta00 said:


> Please stop reading TVPredictions. It's like the National Enquirer of the blogosphere... and that's bad since the blogosphere is generally national-enquirer-y anyway. :lol:


Please keep your biased requests to yourself. The article stated facts and had nothing that resembled National Enquirer hype.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

I see. So anyone who dares criticize DirecTV is an idiot.


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

What's truly amazing is that Comcast got a B+.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

mdavej said:


> I see. So anyone who dares criticize DirecTV is an idiot.


Swanni is...plain & simple. His "article" was not simply a cut & paste of info from BBB.


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

The BBB calls me all of the time to try to get me to advertise my company with them. They've been calling me every few months for many years and each time I say 'no thank you'.


----------



## aramus8 (Nov 21, 2006)

elwaylite said:


> I do not care for Swanni, but he does get some things right.
> 
> As far as them being successful, it catches up with you after awhile, regardless. Dish went through a rough patch with service, but they now have English speaking csr's and a very handy chat program. Like I said, Directv needs to do some work.


Wait a minute, actual Dish service calls are handled in the United States now instead of India? Can anyone verify that this is on service calls and not just initial installs? If I could be sure of this I'd run back to Dish. The India call centers were the final straw as to why I left. Since Malone and company can't negotiate any better than Charlie to keep channels on anymore and Dish has the HBO's that we were told we would have almost two years ago, Dish is looking a whole lot better if they've really fixed their customer service. The past six months has been more right on about DirecTv than I wanted to admit.


----------



## ajc68 (Jan 23, 2008)

If you read the article you will see these are regional grades, not overall grades. The Directv grade is for the Los Angeles market only.


----------



## SPECIES11703 (Oct 10, 2004)

WOW SWanni! You sure are trying to smear The DirecTV name as much as possible! You must be on Charlie's payroll ! Poor Bastard



Barcthespark said:


> Yikes!
> 
> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dbbb011210.htm


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

BBB only grades with the complants they receive......not surprised D* gets a F


----------



## Coca Cola Kid (Jul 19, 2009)

tcusta00 said:


> Didn't say anything about the BBB complaints, just asked people to *stop reading Swanni since he's an incompetent boob*.


+1,000000000000000 to that.


----------



## captain_video (Nov 22, 2005)

rkr0923 said:


> BBB only grades with the complants they receive......not surprised D* gets a F


+1


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

How dare anyone criticize the DBS choice you've made? What you need right now is validation.


----------



## Ed Campbell (Feb 17, 2006)

"I do not care for Swanni, but he does get some things right"

And publishes them 2 weeks after he reads them somewhere else. Like here.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

vilos said:


> Please keep your biased requests to yourself. The article stated facts and had nothing that resembled National Enquirer hype.


Sorry, but you have not been around here long enough to know that as a general rule, Swanni's "breaking news" is usually based on information he read here first.:nono2:


----------



## Sim-X (Sep 24, 2009)

What sucks about the BBB is that DirecTV lays out there terms and conditions when you sign up. So when someone cancels and DTV nails them with all these fees, they cry to the BBB even though they agreed to it. Not saying every complaint is like that but the BBB isn't fair in my opinion. If DTV tells you what they are going to do and you agree to it, you shouldn't be allowed to whine about something they said they were going to do. I work in the service industry and most of the BBB complaints our company gets are complete BS. For example we will do a job for a customer, tell them exactly how much it will be up front before we start any work, they agree and we fix the problem. People then call up and complain about the price later on. If we don't give them an adjustment they go straight to the BBB. We never lied, we did exactly what we said we were going to do and people still cry to the BBB. I can tell you this, the customer is NOT always right. Some of the people we deal with are simply unreasonable. No matter what you do for what price they are going to complain.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

As with anything, truth often underlies the hyperbole. Yes, Swanni is less than credible, however, also yes the BBB is a bit of a racket, I know, my wife and I run 3 businesses in two different towns down here. Lastly, we can all agree DirecTV's customer service can be the absolute pits more often than not, despite there also being some gems in the mud.


----------



## william8004 (Oct 6, 2006)

Why isn't there a comparison between D* and cable in the same market? I know this is a rhetorical question, but it needs to be asked.


----------



## Jason Whiddon (Aug 17, 2006)

aramus8 said:


> Wait a minute, actual Dish service calls are handled in the United States now instead of India? Can anyone verify that this is on service calls and not just initial installs? If I could be sure of this I'd run back to Dish. The India call centers were the final straw as to why I left. Since Malone and company can't negotiate any better than Charlie to keep channels on anymore and Dish has the HBO's that we were told we would have almost two years ago, Dish is looking a whole lot better if they've really fixed their customer service. The past six months has been more right on about DirecTv than I wanted to admit.


When I have called in, as a customer, to get something handled, I have not spoken to an non-english speaking person in awhile. Also, you can use chat for just about anything too(programming changes), and its way better than getting on the phone.


----------



## MIMOTech (Sep 11, 2006)

The problem with this report is that it is based on one sample city and that the comparison is not based on the same location data. Also there is no data on how that compares with the total number of customers in the LA area. DTV is a national provider and needs to be judged on that merit. 36K customers sounds like a large number, but in comparison to the total may be a low percentage. You also do not know the circumstances for each of these customers. Some may have defaulted on their agreements and try to get back at DTV by issuing a complaint. In any case this is a bad report based on bad data.


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

MIMOTech said:


> The problem with this report is that it is based on one sample city and that the comparison is not based on the same location data. Also there is no data on how that compares with the total number of customers in the LA area. DTV is a national provider and needs to be judged on that merit. 36K customers sounds like a large number, but in comparison to the total may be a low percentage. You also do not know the circumstances for each of these customers. Some may have defaulted on their agreements and try to get back at DTV by issuing a complaint. In any case this is a bad report based on bad data.


You must work for DIRECTV? :lol:

It is never a good thing to get an "F" from the BBB. :nono:


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

If the story entices more people to _carefully_ read the terms and conditions and otherwise do their due diligence, it is a good thing.

There is considerable evidence that customers aren't comprehending the rules.


----------



## TANK (Feb 16, 2003)

D* gets an F, but Comcast gets a B+ :lol: I'm not going to worry about any rating system that thinks Comcast is almost perfect .


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

harsh said:


> ...There is considerable evidence that customers aren't comprehending the rules.


Ya think?


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

MIMOTech said:


> The problem with this report is that it is based on one sample city and that the comparison is not based on the same location data. Also there is no data on how that compares with the total number of customers in the LA area. DTV is a national provider and needs to be judged on that merit. 36K customers sounds like a large number, but in comparison to the total may be a low percentage. You also do not know the circumstances for each of these customers. Some may have defaulted on their agreements and try to get back at DTV by issuing a complaint. In any case this is a bad report based on bad data.


DIRECTV gets an F nationally.

http://www.la.bbb.org/Business-Report/DirecTV-Inc-81000357


----------



## Hutchinshouse (Sep 28, 2006)

hilmar2k said:


> DIRECTV gets an F nationally.
> 
> http://www.la.bbb.org/Business-Report/DirecTV-Inc-81000357


My favorite statement from the link you provided: "their advertising is grossly misleading" :lol:


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

DirecTV is not a member of the BBB and does not use the BBB to resolve issues. Therefor they get an F because per the BBB rating policy they don't respond to complaints.


----------



## bscott (Jun 4, 2004)

Shades228 said:


> DirecTV is not a member of the BBB and does not use the BBB to resolve issues. Therefor they get an F because per the BBB rating policy they don't respond to complaints.


Funny how the nations leader in customer satisfaction ratings among satellite and cable providers is at the bottom of the BBB list. Somehow those 2 statements seem in conflict with one another. But Shades is right in his explanation of how the BBB handles their ratings so take it for what it is.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> DirecTV is not a member of the BBB and does not use the BBB to resolve issues. Therefor they get an F because per the BBB rating policy they don't respond to complaints.


They don't respond to BBB shaking them down, so they get an 'F', so this is a non-news news then.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Shades228 said:


> DirecTV is not a member of the BBB and does not use the BBB to resolve issues. Therefor they get an F because per the BBB rating policy they don't respond to complaints.


 If you look at the "statistics" chart on the BBB site you will see they respond to all complaints.

No. of Cmpl Type of Response 
5134 Making a full refund, as the consumer requested 
1294 Making a partial refund 
15011 Agreeing to perform according to their contract 
1073 Refusing to make an adjustment 
13832 Refuse to adjust, relying on terms of agreement 
1 Unanswered 
44 Unassigned 
36389 Total

If you read a bunch of the complaints you will most of them are ridiculous anyway.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Yup, nearly 14,000 of those 36,000 complaints were not adjusted because the customer was attempting to do something outside of the terms of service (refusing to pay an ETF is one example of that). Additionally for 15,000 people, DIRECTV "fixed" whatever the problem was .. perhaps by giving credits or making changes in the billing/setup to make the customer happy.

Just looking at the numbers alone, it seems DIRECTV responded to everything .. That alone should put it above an F. :shrug:

Oh well, seems more an exaggeration than real life .. But don't get me wrong, There have been mistakes and I can certainly understand folks being angry in those situations.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> Please stop reading TVPredictions. It's like the National Enquirer of the blogosphere... and that's bad since the blogosphere is generally national-enquirer-y anyway. :lol:


Please don't rank the National Enquirer with him, they have a track record of being 100 percent more accurate then Swanni''s diatribe:lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

TBlazer07 said:


> If you look at the "statistics" chart on the BBB site you will see they respond to all complaints.
> 
> No. of Cmpl Type of Response
> 5134 Making a full refund, as the consumer requested
> ...


Thank you, TBlazer07. Solid data, minimal hyperbole.

Based on this data, I'm very surprised at the F rating. As Doug points out, 45 of 36,389 (.12%) have not been answered so far. That can't be no "F". 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

As for Swanni...

We probably can lay off some of the vitriol toward him. Now that TBlazer07 and others have started real analysis, let's stick to the news and the data rather than the initial source. 

Fair 'nuff? 

Thanks,
Tom


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Read some of the reviews on the BBB site. They are, if nothing else, entertaining:

http://www.trustlink.org/BusinessProfile.aspx?ID=205983954

This was clipped from the very first one and is typical of most of what I have read:

After completion of a 2 year service commitment I switched to Verizon FIOS and canceled my service with DirecTV. DirecTV continues to call and harass me with claims of an early termination fee for adding 1 receiver to the 7 I already had in March of 2009. They claim I renewed my 24 month commitment when I activated this new receiver in March of 2009 which I paid $100 for at BestBuy. I refuse to pay them the $320 (16 months times $20). This company is used to getting away with what amounts to consumer fraud and they need to be sued by someone willing to start a class action lawsuit. If you are an attorney and would like to consider this as the launching point for a class action lawsuit feel free to contact me at [email protected]<cut>.us


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

To me its less about the solution as it is the path to the solution. That path includes multiple denials, delays, obfuscations, maddening level 1 merry-go-rounds, and often as not requires escalation. They need to train and empower their front line reps. Until that happens, it remains a very frustrating thing to have to call into DirecTV customer support. I've said it before - if customer service was the only criteria, I'd have left DirecTV long ago. Nobody else in my area offers the TV service I want, and certainly nobody else is "better" than DirecTV in customer service. At best, you can lump all TV providers customer service in one place - mediocre at best.



Doug Brott said:


> Yup, nearly 14,000 of those 36,000 complaints were not adjusted because the customer was attempting to do something outside of the terms of service (refusing to pay an ETF is one example of that). Additionally for 15,000 people, DIRECTV "fixed" whatever the problem was .. perhaps by giving credits or making changes in the billing/setup to make the customer happy.
> 
> Just looking at the numbers alone, it seems DIRECTV responded to everything .. That alone should put it above an F. :shrug:
> 
> Oh well, seems more an exaggeration than real life .. But don't get me wrong, There have been mistakes and I can certainly understand folks being angry in those situations.


----------



## mdavej (Jan 31, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> Read some of the reviews on the BBB site. They are, if nothing else, entertaining


I admit that incident is clearly the customer's fault. But my problem is that they extend your contract every time you sneeze by default, and you have to jump through hoops to get their "mistake" corrected (quotes are because it was really intentional, not a mistake). Just because they rectify it eventually, if you're lucky, does not excuse them from swindling everyone else who happened not to notice before until it's too late. That's like someone stealing $500 from my wallet, me chasing them down and forcing them to give my money back, and them saying "you got your money back, what's your problem?"


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

mdavej said:


> I admit that incident is clearly the customer's fault. But my problem is that they extend your contract every time you sneeze by default, and you have to jump through hoops to get their "mistake" corrected (quotes are because it was really intentional, not a mistake). Just because they rectify it eventually, if you're lucky, does not excuse them from swindling everyone else who happened not to notice before until it's too late. That's like someone stealing $500 from my wallet, me chasing them down and forcing them to give my money back, and them saying "you got your money back, what's your problem?"


Exactly. I'm guessing everyone in this thread who is ripping the BBB and supporting DirecTV has never tried to add an owned receiver to their account or do a "no commitment" receiver upgrade. DirecTV incorrectly extended my contract three different times in the past 18 months, each time when I added a owned receiver. This despite the fact that I clearly explained it to the CSR each time that it was owned and should show up that way on my account. It took a minimum of two more phone calls each time to get it cleared up. Of course, each of those three times the words "contract extension" never came out of the CSR's mouth either. DirecTV clearly wants their customers to unwittingly "sign on" for extended commitments without ever informing said customers until they attempt to cancel their service.


----------



## oldfantom (Mar 13, 2006)

i do believe that D* needs to do a better job communicating and clarifying the contracts and extensions. I think everyone on this board with a post count > 2 knows about it. But we are the geeks and the know it alls. Average customers don't know and I really don't think they are told clearly. Also, I just looked at my account online, it does not say anyplace that I can find what my commitment level or time might be. I know I could find that info on my Sprint cell phone account. Never actually looked on AT&T. F may be harsh, but a C seems fair.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> Read some of the reviews on the BBB site. They are, if nothing else, entertaining:
> 
> http://www.trustlink.org/BusinessProfile.aspx?ID=205983954


I find it interesting and a bit humorous at what some of these people are saying. It's like DirecTV is first and foremost a scam, that also has a TV service on the side.

I have no love lost for the BBB. There was a time when I was desperately job hunting and got an interview with a company called Linuxgruven. Didn't smell right until it started reeking when they got to how much it'd cost me to be hired, to the tune of $2500-$3000, reimbursed after a year or so. The BBB and Ohio AG both weren't interested as they didn't deal in "employment" issues. Oddly enough the BBB and AG in Missouri saw it differently.


----------



## Xsabresx (Oct 8, 2007)

I would love to hear more information from all of those people on that site that said DTV withdrew hundreds of dollars from their account. I have never heard anything like that before. Horror stories are nothing new as people usually wont comment unless something has gone wrong, but those big money things are crazy.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> I find it interesting and a bit humorous at what some of these people are saying. It's like DirecTV is first and foremost a scam, that also has a TV service on the side.
> 
> I have no love lost for the BBB. There was a time when I was desperately job hunting and got an interview with a company called Linuxgruven. Didn't smell right until it started reeking when they got to how much it'd cost me to be hired, to the tune of $2500-$3000, reimbursed after a year or so. The BBB and Ohio AG both weren't interested as they didn't deal in "employment" issues. Oddly enough the BBB and AG in Missouri saw it differently.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linuxgruven


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Xsabresx said:


> I would love to hear more information from all of those people on that site that said DTV withdrew hundreds of dollars from their account. I have never heard anything like that before. Horror stories are nothing new as people usually wont comment unless something has gone wrong, but those big money things are crazy.


One possibility of a large debit is the way they do receiver returns. If they don't get a shipping box back, you can get charged for the receiver, even though they got it. I had to be very careful when I shipped a receiver back and never got the first return kit.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

I have been unhappy with D* for a few years now. We have been with them since 1999 and back in the day they were pioneers and really fun to work with and be part of, unfortunately the last few years they have slipped bad. 

Sure we have more HD (3yrs late BTW) but the audio drops out, makes funny noises and the lips don't match the picture all the time. Their lonely 6 HD MPG2 channels we used to have never had these issues and that was years ago. 

Someday the sound will be figured out... someday we will be able to use D in our media centers... someday MRV won't be vaporware... someday D11 will be launched and we will get more HD, oh wait it was - I missed the moreHD although I have 82 pages of PPV available. someday D12 will come online and we MIGHT get another channel added that doesn't cost more money to watch........ someday.....

I guess for $2,000.00+/yr I expect things to get better not worse. I would not give D an F, but I would be hard pressed to give them above a C because in my mind they have become average. 

In our case we have no local choice available for competition. As soon as we have the option we will switch.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

whitepelican said:


> Exactly. I'm guessing everyone in this thread who is ripping the BBB and supporting DirecTV has never tried to add an owned receiver to their account or do a "no commitment" receiver upgrade. DirecTV incorrectly extended my contract three different times in the past 18 months, each time when I added a owned receiver. This despite the fact that I clearly explained it to the CSR each time that it was owned and should show up that way on my account. It took a minimum of two more phone calls each time to get it cleared up. Of course, each of those three times the words "contract extension" never came out of the CSR's mouth either. DirecTV clearly wants their customers to unwittingly "sign on" for extended commitments without ever informing said customers until they attempt to cancel their service.


Sorry you would be wrong had a owned HR10-250 replaced under the protection plan with a HR20-100, commitment was not extended and the HR20-100 is listed as owned on the account. Second time had a old Panasonic SD DVR replaced with a HR15 due to failure of the system, again, replaced owned with owned and no commitment extension. Expent the other two owned HR10's to be dieing soon and will have them replaced under the protection plan, given previous expierence and results, do not expect any issues with getting them flagged as owned by the resposible parties.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

vilos said:


> Please keep your biased requests to yourself.


No, but thanks for asking nicely.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> As for Swanni...
> 
> We probably can lay off some of the vitriol toward him. Now that TBlazer07 and others have started real analysis, let's stick to the news and the data rather than the initial source.
> 
> ...


You reap what you sow, Tom. Swanni deserves every bit of consternation and criticism he gets. I'll grant you that this probably isn't the thread to do it in, but we must consider the biased sources of our "news" that we discuss here, no? With that said I will withdraw my comment that "Swanni is an incompetent boob" because of this particular article since he just "reported" the link to the BBB article like a good little "journalist" and will save my "Swanni is an incompetent boob" comment for something more deserving in the future, which will surely present itself in due time. Fair nuff?


----------



## hilmar2k (Mar 18, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> No, but thanks for asking nicely.


:lol:


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> Sorry you would be wrong had a owned HR10-250 replaced under the protection plan with a HR20-100, commitment was not extended and the HR20-100 is listed as owned on the account. Second time had a old Panasonic SD DVR replaced with a HR15 due to failure of the system, again, replaced owned with owned and no commitment extension. Expent the other two owned HR10's to be dieing soon and will have them replaced under the protection plan, given previous expierence and results, do not expect any issues with getting them flagged as owned by the resposible parties.


Did you try canceling your service either time? Even when I had the receivers correctly listed as "owned" they still extended the commitment. I bet there an awful lot of people who have had their commitments extended and didn't realize it because they didn't attempt to cancel within the next two years.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

tcusta00 said:


> You reap what you sow, Tom. Swanni deserves every bit of consternation and criticism he gets. I'll grant you that this probably isn't the thread to do it in, but we must consider the biased sources of our "news" that we discuss here, no? With that said I will withdraw my comment that "Swanni is an incompetent boob" because of this particular article since he just "reported" the link to the BBB article like a good little "journalist" and will save my "Swanni is an incompetent boob" comment for something more deserving in the future, which will surely present itself in due time. Fair nuff?


As you corrently pointed out, reporting and commentary added in are not the same thing.

Swanni has clearly turned into an anti-DirecTV advocate, ever since his parents were "wronged" in his eyes last year.

Of course, he is fully entitled to his opinions like anyone else, but seems to actively seek out (and publish) negative DirecTV tidbits, and then twist or *embellish* many of those to basically "create news" bigger than what it really is. He's also done this on other topics for some time.

I totally agree that if there are cases where DirecTV has failed to operate in a fair and legitimate manner, they need to *step up to the plate *and correct that wrong. *Any* company should.

However, when there is a problem in one area, or one city, or one isolated place...making it sound like it's a national epidemic is pure yellow journalism and nothing less.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

JeffBowser said:


> To me its less about the solution as it is the path to the solution. That path includes multiple denials, delays, obfuscations, maddening level 1 merry-go-rounds, and often as not requires escalation. They need to train and empower their front line reps. Until that happens, it remains a very frustrating thing to have to call into DirecTV customer support. I've said it before - if customer service was the only criteria, I'd have left DirecTV long ago. Nobody else in my area offers the TV service I want, and certainly nobody else is "better" than DirecTV in customer service. At best, you can lump all TV providers customer service in one place - mediocre at best.


Well I didn't say they deserved an 'A' .. I really just said I don't understand the 'F' as pretty much every item has some sort of resolution (positive or negative) .. 'F' just seems silly.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

OK, so DIRECTV asked you to send them your overheating H20 and replaced it with a non-overheating H20 but since you owned the "used to be new" H20 that was overheating you decided to not send it back? Sounds like DIRECTV put you on a contract because you received a receiver (yes it was a refurb). Perhaps you could have simply sent the old one back like they asked when it first happened ..



transam98 said:


> I was about a year n a half ago SCAMMED by DTV...
> 
> I had a D20 (Infamous CRAP DTV Version that had HEAT Killing it problems (Bad design that it got way to hot)
> 
> ...


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> You reap what you sow, Tom. Swanni deserves every bit of consternation and criticism he gets. I'll grant you that this probably isn't the thread to do it in, but we must consider the biased sources of our "news" that we discuss here, no?


Your seriously going to criticize Swanni for being biased with all the pro-D* spin that is present in almost every negative D* thread on this site, including this one?


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

raott said:


> Your seriously going to criticize Swanni for being biased with all the pro-D* spin that is present in almost every negative D* thread on this site, including this one?


You're wrong. Check my posts, I criticize DirecTV quite a bit. I've started threads recently criticizing DirecTV. I just think this "article" (like most of Swan's drivel) is rife with his anti-DirecTV bias. I really wish the trolling around here would stop.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

transam98 said:


> Actually I HAD sent DTV my *OWNED* OVERHEATING D20 Receiver, they sent me a REFURB D20 that they PUT on a 2 YR Contract (and NEVER TOLD ME) and that REFURB D20 Also died (HEAT)(POORLY DESIGNED POS)....
> 
> When the replacement DIED that is when they said YOU ARE ON A 2 YR... I said NOPE... Long story short I was ATTEMPTED to be SCREWED so I FAX BOMBED THIER A$$ and they took it off ! Having a FAX Machine STILL PAYS !!!! and Id do it in a second again, This time I was RIGHT (after all why would I have to send them a OWNWED STB to get a "Leased" box, when If I wanted a leased unit I could have just called them, signed up for two years and gotten one and NOT had to send my OWNED IRD to them !!!


OK, that wasn't clear from your earlier post .. Great you got it corrected and yes, there are others that have had similar situations. Often a persistent phone call will get results as well. Even more often a well worded e-mail does good as well.

I think the whole contract situation is not happening all over the place to every person, but it does happen more than it should.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

What's a fax bomb? Annoyingly sending faxes repeatedly? If so, real classy.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

transam98 said:


> Actually I HAD sent DTV my *OWNED* OVERHEATING D20 Receiver, they sent me a REFURB D20 that they PUT on a 2 YR Contract (and NEVER TOLD ME) and that REFURB D20 Also died (HEAT)(POORLY DESIGNED POS)....
> 
> When the replacement DIED that is when they said YOU ARE ON A 2 YR... I said NOPE... Long story short I was ATTEMPTED to be SCREWED so I FAX BOMBED THIER A$$ and they took it off ! Having a FAX Machine STILL PAYS !!!! and Id do it in a second again, This time I was RIGHT (after all why would I have to send them a OWNWED STB to get a "Leased" box, when If I wanted a leased unit I could have just called them, signed up for two years and gotten one and NOT had to send my OWNED IRD to them !!!


It a *H*20, not a *D*20.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Xsabresx said:


> I would love to hear more information from all of those people on that site that said DTV withdrew hundreds of dollars from their account. I have never heard anything like that before. Horror stories are nothing new as people usually wont comment unless something has gone wrong, but those big money things are crazy.


When you have 18,000,000 customers bad sh1t happens to some, it can't be avoided. That being said the biggest issue is their lease model which causes probably 80% of their problems. Unfortunately that is how they work and I'm sure they have taken all the problems into consideration when they decided to go that route.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Wow, thats a real mature way to handle the situation.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Most large companies don't use fax machines anymore, they use electronic fax servers. You fax something, it sounds like it's going to a regular fax machine and it appears on their computers. Like magic almost. :sure:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

tcusta00 said:


> Most large companies don't use fax machines anymore, they use electronic fax servers. You fax something, it sounds like it's going to a regular fax machine and it appears on their computers. Like magic almost. :sure:


Maybe he gave them a BSOD. :lol:
Or used up all the pixels on the screen. :lol:
Or ...I'll stop.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

transam98 said:


> yea *Most* do have fax servers, but since they finally called me and told me I clogged thier machines I was going after up with tons of wasted paper, I got actual machines with paper and toner/ink  Remember DTV doesnt have just 1 FAX # ! they have TONS Some of thier smaller "offices" dont goto a central "fax Server"


Ok, you win. Feel good about yourself over that.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> I have been unhappy with D* for a few years now. We have been with them since 1999 and back in the day they were pioneers and really fun to work with and be part of, unfortunately the last few years they have slipped bad.
> 
> Sure we have more HD (3yrs late BTW) but the audio drops out, makes funny noises and the lips don't match the picture all the time. Their lonely 6 HD MPG2 channels we used to have never had these issues and that was years ago.
> 
> ...


I don't think it's quite fair to call MRV vaporware. We don't know when it will be released sure, but that's not the definition of vaporware. I'm confident we'll get more normal HD channels after D12 comes online. But there aren't a ton of them left to be honest. It's not like there are 30 SD non-premium cable channels we don't get the HD feed of.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Lying and receiving illegal locals. http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2321315#post2321315
Now, fax bombing the company.

So, the company gets an F...yet they have customers who are even more grimy & shady.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Lying and receiving illegal locals. http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2321315#post2321315
> Now, fax bombing the company.
> 
> So, the company gets an F...yet they have customers who are even more grimy & shady.


Maybe he deleted a post, but I am not seeing any of his in the above link.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

raoul5788 said:


> Maybe he deleted a post, but I am not seeing any of his in the above link.


Yeah, it seems to be deleted.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Yeah, it seems to be deleted.


Hmmm, funny about that, eh?


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

Anyone who has really dealt with the BBB knows that it believes in strong arming companies when it can.. 

I have dealt with them several times, they will listen to anyone.. without even reading the complaint... Every time I answered the complaint the only thing I ever heard back from the BBB was sorry we wasted your time... Yet they still show that a complaint was filed at some point, even though it obviously had no merit... And I believe that still affect s your score... Sorry, but its all about scare tactics, and Does anyone know how they make money, and if they are a private or public company and if they are for or not for profit company? Just saying...

And comcast is better? Seriously? BBB just keeps burring their reputation with me....

Diretcv is not an A company in my mind by any stretch, (I'd give them different grades in different areas.. ranging from f to a depending on the area...), but if they get an f, comcast should get a z-....


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

http://www.searchengineguide.com/david-wallace/has-the-better-business-bureau-outlived.php Interesting article from last year about the BBB. To those who asked how they make money they do it by memberships fees.

Now I haven't worked for a BBB company in over 10 years. However there used to be 2 methods of resolution. The members one was much more comprehensive and if the company provided the resolution to the BBB. This would allow the BBB to then determine if the complaint was still legitimate and remove the rating if needed for that complaint.

Non members the last I saw have basically the options listed that were quoted. So they track what the company did but not as to whether it was resolved satisfactorily to the company. Again my data is very old and may not be the same now.


----------



## Boston_bill (Jul 23, 2009)

hilmar2k said:


> What's truly amazing is that Comcast got a B+.


When I had Comcast, I never had issues with their customer service like Ive had with D* at least I could understand the Comcast CS rep and it wasnt outsourced to India.


----------



## vilos (Nov 8, 2009)

Boston_bill said:


> When I had Comcast, I never had issues with their customer service like Ive had with D* at least I could understand the Comcast CS rep and it wasnt outsourced to India.


Likewise. I'd give Comcast a B, Directv an F. I still have Directv, but that may be coming to an end with the loss of Versus and never getting Comcast Sports NW.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

whitepelican said:


> Did you try canceling your service either time? Even when I had the receivers correctly listed as "owned" they still extended the commitment. I bet there an awful lot of people who have had their commitments extended and didn't realize it because they didn't attempt to cancel within the next two years.


why would I try to cancel my service? Don't normally make threats to cancel to get something for nothing. When speaking with the access card department they verified that the account did not have a commitment on it. Verified twice - once when the HR10 was replaced and once when the panasonic was replaced.


----------



## HDTV_Duffus (May 25, 2008)

mdavej said:


> I see. So anyone who dares criticize DirecTV is an idiot.


That seems to be standard operating policy here for several years now. It is clear since the great TiVo vs DirecTV DVR debate began, either of two camps; TiVo troll or DirecTV troll.

What happened to fair evaluations and helpful information sharing?

Oh well, these are my observations, I could be wrong.......


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

mdavej said:


> I see. So anyone who dares criticize DirecTV is an idiot.


These kinds of blanket statements seem to be running rampant these days.

Perhaps you should read post #58.

While some folks are lightening quick to apply labels here such as "fanboy" to anyone posting anything less than "DirecTV is the evil empire"...that post reflects a more tempered and "balanced" view of things.

If they do something wrong, they should fix it.

There is typically more than one side to every coin - not all issues are as absolute or universal as some wish to portray them.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

It's all debate folks .. there are people on both sides of this argument .. So, let's get back to that topic and not the topic of each other ..


----------



## whitepelican (May 9, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> why would I try to cancel my service? Don't normally make threats to cancel to get something for nothing. When speaking with the access card department they verified that the account did not have a commitment on it. Verified twice - once when the HR10 was replaced and once when the panasonic was replaced.


My point was that even when I had received confirmation more than once from a front line CSR that I didn't have a commitment extension, it was verified that I actually had been incorrectly extended (several times) when I spoke to someone more knowledgeable (the access card department) or when I was canceling my service. I'm sure it happens a lot to people who don't realize it, though it never becomes an issue for many because they don't cancel their DirecTV service within the next 24 months.


----------



## Coca Cola Kid (Jul 19, 2009)

tcusta00 said:


> You reap what you sow, Tom. Swanni deserves every bit of consternation and criticism he gets. I'll grant you that this probably isn't the thread to do it in, but we must consider the biased sources of our "news" that we discuss here, no? With that said I will withdraw my comment that "Swanni is an incompetent boob" because of this particular article since he just "reported" the link to the BBB article like a good little "journalist" and will save my "Swanni is an incompetent boob" comment for something more deserving in the future, which will surely present itself in due time. Fair nuff?


I'm not retracting my statement. he's a biased jerk that only reports the negative when it comes to DirecTV but only the positives for everyone else. Same thing with his "predictions". If he hates them so much, why doesn't he go find a new provider and shut his trap?


----------



## concorde1 (May 26, 2007)

They get an "A" in my book


----------



## Coca Cola Kid (Jul 19, 2009)

Comcast got a B+? what is BBB smoking?

At least D*'s CSR's are American and native speakers of English, and not guys with thick Middle Eastern accents named Bob like C*'s. :lol:

Free HBO, Showtime and Starz, free DVR, free delivery and installation. D* offered me all of this, C* did not, their installation was 150 bucks, the guy showed up 2 hours late, the DVR rental was $15 a month, in home visits were 50 bucks a pop, and the worst part, they only had 36 HD channels!

End of rant.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Another reason possibly for bad marks on DirecTV, and one problem with their model compared to Cable (I believe) is installers.

I know they've actually purchased some, and we have plenty of good install techs that work for third party companies. I dealt with an excellent one in Crossville, TN hooking up my parents last year. The place they bought their TV sold DirecTV, had their own installers, set them up with a SWM, etc.

But we know that there are some bad techs or even generally bad install companies. If there is a problem with them, the customer doesn't complain to the BBB about that company. The tech drove up in a DirecTV van. As far as the customer is concerned, they are DirecTV.

I'm not saying that DirecTV is never a part of the problem here, they don't allow enough time for some installs among other problems and they do need to make sure the companies they use to install are doing right. But it's a bit more complicated.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

concorde1 said:


> They get an "A" in my book


You probably haven't been false committed.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Obviously, gfrang, people have different experiences. Each one is equally valid.


----------



## TANK (Feb 16, 2003)

My favorite complaint to the BBB was from the guy who had D* had his apartment , but when when he moved and was told he couldn't set up his dish. He was livid at D* for not letting him out of his contract.

Now why should the BBB accept that complaint at all ? What did D* do wrong ?

Should D* not accept any subs from rental properties ? Not accept any subs with apartment addresses ? Or just void every contract because the sub wasn't smart to find an apartment that allows sat service ?



> Signed up for service at my old apartment, during the moving process found out my new complex does not allow any dish services to be installed on their property. Called DirecTV and informed them of the situation, only to be rudely interrupted by rep indication I will need to continue paying for DirecTV despite the fact I can no longer use them.
> The alternative? Pay $300 cancellation fee.
> 
> Avoid DirecTV like the plague, read the full contract before you sign, they will bait and switch, take your money and leave the customer lying in a ditch. Failure as a company to provide any level of customer support. F rating in my book, and it appears others feel the same about this company.


http://www.trustlink.org/BusinessProfile.aspx?ID=205983954


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

1,000 new complaints per month? And these are only the complaints filed with the BBB! Wow, I didn't know it was that bad. 

I'm sorry, but how is there a good side to this? I normally am a "two sides to every story" person, but do people really think that all of these customers are trying to cheat D* out of money? After reading some of the BBB complaints (it's impossible to read them all), they seem to be broken down into two major categories:

1. D* doesn't provide correct service or pricing per the original agreement, or there is inadequate disclosure of fees and pricing. When customers call, D* simply waives the ETF in their face and refuses to address or correct the problem more than 40% of the time.

2. D* takes out large chunks of money for ETF or non-returned equipment fees without warning. Many times it happens even before the final bill arrives, so customers can't dispute anything about it or prepare for the amount that D* takes out. Several times it has happened from unauthorized bank accounts. 

None of these issues are news to anyone here. I did find it shocking that D* simply refuses to address the problem over 40% of the time. As a 14 year subscriber, I am hesitant to recommend D* to anyone anymore. They have nice TV service, but lousy customer service. Both are equally important.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

TANK said:


> My favorite complaint to the BBB was from the guy who had D* had his apartment , but when when he moved and was told he couldn't set up his dish. He was livid at D* for not letting him out of his contract.
> 
> Now why should the BBB accept that complaint at all ? What did D* do wrong ?


D* has stopped providing service, yet wants to charge an ETF anyway. Once D* is unable to continue providing service for whatever reason, they are not holding up their end of the contract. The contract has become void and no ETF can legally be charged. Even if it's not D*'s fault.

Imagine if a solar flare hit the satellites and knocked some of them out. They now can only carry half the SD stations and no HD stations. They will not be able to fix this for a year or two at the earliest. Wouldn't you want to cancel without an ETF charge?


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

bobcamp1 said:


> D* has stopped providing service, yet wants to charge an ETF anyway. Once D* is unable to continue providing service for whatever reason, they are not holding up their end of the contract. The contract has become void and no ETF can legally be charged. Even if it's not D*'s fault.
> 
> Imagine if a solar flare hit the satellites and knocked some of them out. They now can only carry half the SD stations and no HD stations. They will not be able to fix this for a year or two at the earliest. Wouldn't you want to cancel without an ETF charge?


Bob, the difference is that the OP moved to a location where the landlord (apparently) would not allow the dish .. perhaps there was no balcony/patio. It's not even clear that the OP made an effort and simply wanted to stop DIRECTV service without paying the ETF.

If a satellite got knocked out (for whatever reason), Hopefully DIRECTV has a spare to mitigate the problem or (worst case) DIRECTV shuffles programming around to satisfy the most customers possible and then takes a hit in monthly charges and/or ETFs until a new Sat can be acquired/launched.

It's really a bizarre comparison, IMHO.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Bob, the difference is that the OP moved to a location where the landlord (apparently) would not allow the dish .. perhaps there was no balcony/patio. It's not even clear that the OP made an effort and simply wanted to stop DIRECTV service without paying the ETF.
> 
> If a satellite got knocked out (for whatever reason), Hopefully DIRECTV has a spare to mitigate the problem or (worst case) DIRECTV shuffles programming around to satisfy the most customers possible and then takes a hit in monthly charges and/or ETFs until a new Sat can be acquired/launched.
> 
> It's really a bizarre comparison, IMHO.


What does DirecTV do in the case of a movers connection and there simply is no line of sight? It's not comparable to the apartment issue, but one area where there should be some room to not pay an ETF.


----------



## Cyber36 (Mar 20, 2008)

Interesting conversations. I was wondering, I had *TV upgrade A system I installed originally in 7/1995, November of 2008. Went from a single LNB to a triple with 2 D-12 receivers(one an addition). No HD, no preimiums, no locals, no TiVO, zilch. Should I have been locked into a 2 year agreement from this?? I sorta read conflicting stuff. Dying to know if I got screwed.....


----------



## trainman (Jan 9, 2008)

dpeters11 said:


> What does DirecTV do in the case of a movers connection and there simply is no line of sight? It's not comparable to the apartment issue, but one area where there should be some room to not pay an ETF.


As I understand it, they won't charge an ETF for "Mover's Connection installer couldn't get a line of sight" (that's something that requires technical knowledge to check), but they _may_ charge an ETF for "can't put up a dish" (which requires no technical knowledge, just a conversation with the landlord before signing the lease).


----------



## ffemtreed (Jan 30, 2008)

Cyber36 said:


> Interesting conversations. I was wondering, I had *TV upgrade A system I installed originally in 7/1995, November of 2008. Went from a single LNB to a triple with 2 D-12 receivers(one an addition). No HD, no preimiums, no locals, no TiVO, zilch. Should I have been locked into a 2 year agreement from this?? I sorta read conflicting stuff. Dying to know if I got screwed.....


almost anytime you add a receiver to your account you "qualify" for a contract extension. There are some exceptions under the protection plan and etc, but 99% of the time you will get an extension.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

bobcamp1 said:


> D* has stopped providing service, yet wants to charge an ETF anyway. Once D* is unable to continue providing service for whatever reason, they are not holding up their end of the contract. The contract has become void and no ETF can legally be charged. Even if it's not D*'s fault.
> 
> Imagine if a solar flare hit the satellites and knocked some of them out. They now can only carry half the SD stations and no HD stations. They will not be able to fix this for a year or two at the earliest. Wouldn't you want to cancel without an ETF charge?


Unfortunately the old honest D* with the "we're all in it together" attitude has been replaced. The new D* is a money making conglomerate that hardly knows what got it to where it is. It is becoming very comcast like in it's treatment of issues.

Hide it, lie about it, but don't come clean. It is unfortunate but it is what it is. This is why there are so many complaints.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

trainman said:


> As I understand it, they won't charge an ETF for "Mover's Connection installer couldn't get a line of sight" (that's something that requires technical knowledge to check), but they _may_ charge an ETF for "can't put up a dish" (which requires no technical knowledge, just a conversation with the landlord before signing the lease).


But how does "can't hang a dish" change anything? The guy had to move, D* can no longer provide the service to the customer. To me this is one area where rules need to be flexible.


----------



## gregjones (Sep 20, 2007)

BBB bases grades off of the number of complaints. DirecTV has a very large subscriber base. This will inflate the number of complaints filed. Generally, only more creditworthy and affluent (I'm speaking in very general terms here) clients are likely to file claims with the BBB. Since DirecTV specifically targets creditworthy customers, this will have a fairly significant impact on the number of complaints they get.

The most significant number for a company like DirecTV is net new subscribers. If their customer service were as universally reviled as some would suggest, we would see a significant dropoff in subscriber numbers. The big HD push in 2007 produced a lot of new subscribers with 2-year commitments. Those commitments have been expiring over the last few months and will continue for the next few months. If net subscribers takes a sharp decline, BBB is right. If, however, the net subscribers continue to grow, it shows that even with complaints that customers stayed with DirecTV past their initial commitment.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

All I can say is that I just checked the BBB report of a company I knew to be a Russian-based scam with a Florida frontman and the BBB gave it A+ based on zero complaints. That may tell you that their grading criteria are not completely sound.


----------



## gfrang (Aug 30, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Obviously, gfrang, people have different experiences. Each one is equally valid.


Yea i wasn't criticizing the post,i to have had very good experiences with D* in the past .It was on the issues of what the bbb has brought up and by my experience i can say it is real.


----------



## TANK (Feb 16, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> But how does "can't hang a dish" change anything? The guy had to move, D* can no longer provide the service to the customer. To me this is one area where rules need to be flexible.


If you are talking about the guy moving to new apartment complex. I wouldn't say he didn't had to move, but choose to move.

If they mend rules and let this guy out of his commitment, how soon before that excuse hits the Internet and anyone that wants out - just calls and says they moved and claims sat service isn't allowed ?

After reading those complaints, D* need to improve it's communications and work to make sure every sub understands the commitment that starts with the receiver being activated.A much of those complaints were when a receiver was replaced and the sub didn't know it carried a new one or two commitment upon activation.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

ajc68 said:


> If you read the article you will see these are regional grades, not overall grades. The Directv grade is for the Los Angeles market only.


Regional grades for DirecTV? Seems unlikely that LA grades would differ from the rest of the country, though.

I'm in the LA area and I wouldn't give DirecTV an F by any means. I've had a few problems with customer service over the past three years, but nothing lately. However I'm just a sample of one.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

TANK said:


> If you are talking about the guy moving to new apartment complex. I wouldn't say he didn't had to move, but choose to move.
> 
> If they mend rules and let this guy out of his commitment, how soon before that excuse hits the Internet and anyone that wants out - just calls and says they moved and claims sat service isn't allowed ?
> 
> After reading those complaints, D* need to improve it's communications and work to make sure every sub understands the commitment that starts with the receiver being activated.A much of those complaints were when a receiver was replaced and the sub didn't know it carried a new one or two commitment upon activation.


Or at least likely didn't have to move into a particular complex. At the very least he should have checked into that kind of thing before signing a lease.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> Unfortunately the old honest D* with the "we're all in it together" attitude has been replaced. The new D* is a money making conglomerate that hardly knows what got it to where it is. It is becoming very comcast like in it's treatment of issues.
> 
> Hide it, lie about it, but don't come clean. It is unfortunate but it is what it is. This is why there are so many complaints.


To be honest, I don't get the "We're in it together", or we're all one happy family from most companies. Particularly when they have to answer to Uncle Shareholder.


----------



## RCY (Nov 17, 2005)

Just so happened "that leading consumer magazine" has cable/satellite ratings in this month. For customer service, D* is middle of the pack. Above TWC, and Comcast, below WOW, Insight and U-verse and the same as Dish, Cox, and Verizon. Overall, D* is 4th out of 16 listed choices. (Based on value, reliability, channel selection, picture, sound, and support)

For me, I'd use a resource like CR to get advice on a service like satellite or cable already used by millions. I would use the BBB to research a small business I know nothing about as a data point. FWIW.


----------



## kevinwmsn (Aug 19, 2006)

If you move, you need to find out from landlord or some person in charge if its ok to have a dish pointing in general direction of where the satelllites are located.  You probably could be a contigency for line of sight before buying/renting home or apartment lease. Its also the same way for high speed internet, don't assume when you move, you'll get the service at the new location.


----------



## ziggy29 (Nov 18, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> All I can say is that I just checked the BBB report of a company I knew to be a Russian-based scam with a Florida frontman and the BBB gave it A+ based on zero complaints. That may tell you that their grading criteria are not completely sound.


All the potential complainants were fitted for cement boots and went for a swim before they could call the BBB.... :lol:


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> All I can say is that I just checked the BBB report of a company I knew to be a Russian-based scam with a Florida frontman and the BBB gave it A+ based on zero complaints. That may tell you that their grading criteria are not completely sound.


Unbelievable. I checked them for a company I've seen plenty of negative comments on, including sign the contract and pay us $5k now or never come back, Directbuy, and they get an A-. Interestingly, they are also BBB accredited.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Stuart Sweet said:


> All I can say is that I just checked the BBB report of a company I knew to be a Russian-based scam with a Florida frontman and the BBB gave it A+ based on zero complaints. That may tell you that their grading criteria are not completely sound.





dpeters11 said:


> Unbelievable. I checked them for a company I've seen plenty of negative comments on, including sign the contract and pay us $5k now or never come back, Directbuy, and they get an A-. Interestingly, they are also BBB accredited.


Hmmmm.....perhaps there's a message in all this....


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

dpeters11 said:


> Unbelievable. I checked them for a company I've seen plenty of negative comments on, including sign the contract and pay us $5k now or never come back, *Directbuy*, and they get an A-. Interestingly, they are also BBB accredited.


Once they get your number, they won't stop calling till you tell them. I had 8 voicemails in 2 days!


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Bob, the difference is that the OP moved to a location where the landlord (apparently) would not allow the dish .. perhaps there was no balcony/patio. It's not even clear that the OP made an effort and simply wanted to stop DIRECTV service without paying the ETF.


So you're suggesting that this person moved just so he could get out of the DirecTV ETF? Really? That's a bizarre way of saving a few hundred dollars. I bet the move cost more than that.

My comparison was to show that sometimes some things happen beyond either party's control that void a contract. Maybe the poster was forced to move for a new job. Maybe he couldn't afford his house anymore and this was one of the few places he could afford. Maybe he didn't find out about his landlord's objection until after he signed the apartment lease. Or maybe the landlord changed his mind. Or maybe this person was going to get a SW facing apt. but the landlord switched it at the last minute.

The bottom line is, D* can't provide him service anymore. The contract is void. The weird part is that it has been D*'s "policy" to dismiss the ETF in these cases after it has been verified. Usually an installer verifies the lack of LOS.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

bobcamp1 said:


> So you're suggesting that this person moved just so he could get out of the DirecTV ETF? Really? That's a bizarre way of saving a few hundred dollars. I bet the move cost more than that.
> 
> My comparison was to show that sometimes some things happen beyond either party's control that void a contract. Maybe the poster was forced to move for a new job. Maybe he couldn't afford his house anymore and this was one of the few places he could afford. Maybe he didn't find out about his landlord's objection until after he signed the apartment lease. Or maybe the landlord changed his mind. Or maybe this person was going to get a SW facing apt. but the landlord switched it at the last minute.
> 
> The bottom line is, D* can't provide him service anymore. The contract is void. The weird part is that it has been D*'s "policy" to dismiss the ETF in these cases after it has been verified. Usually an installer verifies the lack of LOS.


I think lack of a LOS is one of the reasons to get out .. I'm not suggesting that this person moved to avoid the ETF .. I'm suggesting that perhaps once he move it was opportunity to drop the service and a hope (or assumption) that he wouldn't have to pay the ETF. If the OP didn't even make an effort then it's not in good faith on his side and the penalty is the ETF. Did that really happen? :shrug: .. Just saying that it is one thing that could have happened. We don't know the entire story.

Either way, one person making a move isn't the same as one of DIRECTV's satellites failing in the sky. A failed satellite would be a very bad thing and would be grounds for adjustments (right to terminate with no ETF, reduced costs, etc.). But when moving, it's something that needs to be considered .. perhaps the cost of moving includes paying the ETF .. It was still a contract.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

gregjones said:


> BBB bases grades off of the number of complaints. DirecTV has a very large subscriber base. This will inflate the number of complaints filed. Generally, only more creditworthy and affluent (I'm speaking in very general terms here) clients are likely to file claims with the BBB. Since DirecTV specifically targets creditworthy customers, this will have a fairly significant impact on the number of complaints they get.


The BBB generally grades on how those complaints were answered. This is why D* has a poor grade -- over 40% of complaints were not resolved satisfactorily. In addition, there has been two government actions against D*. One for the telemarketing, one for the Washington AG lawsuit. The BBB is one tool of many that can be used to determine the quality of service. A good BBB rating doesn't mean much. But a poor BBB rating is a red flag.

The BBB rating is nationwide -- since the company is based near LA, that's the BBB division that keeps track of it. All other BBB divisions link back to the LA rating. Besides, you call a national phone number for support. I can't believe service is worse in LA, in fact, I'd think it's better. There's fewer rain fade and no snow or ice issues to resolve.

In the recent Consumer Reports magazine, D* was ranked fourth overall, but if I remember right its customer service was dragging it down. But I'll go back and check this weekend.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> I think lack of a LOS is one of the reasons to get out .. I'm not suggesting that this person moved to avoid the ETF .. I'm suggesting that perhaps once he move it was opportunity to drop the service and a hope (or assumption) that he wouldn't have to pay the ETF. If the OP didn't even make an effort then it's not in good faith on his side and the penalty is the ETF. Did that really happen? :shrug: .. Just saying that it is one thing that could have happened. We don't know the entire story.
> 
> Either way, one person making a move isn't the same as one of DIRECTV's satellites failing in the sky. A failed satellite would be a very bad thing and would be grounds for adjustments (right to terminate with no ETF, reduced costs, etc.). But when moving, it's something that needs to be considered .. perhaps the cost of moving includes paying the ETF .. It was still a contract.


How do you prove good faith on his side? That's trying to prove he did NOT intentionally do something. That's extremely difficult. But it's easy to prove good faith on D*'s side -- just don't force the issue.

The two parties cannot do business with each other anymore due to new unforeseen circumstances. If you can't get LOS because the new house doesn't have it, or because the satellites simply aren't there anymore, there is no longer any service being provided. D* can't prove he did it intentionally, anymore than the customer can prove D* reduced their programming intentionally (bait and switch). Just part ways without penalty and be done with it.

A contract is only as good as state and federal laws (and court rulings) allow. Legally speaking, if either situation happened, I don't know of a court that would allow the ETF. This contract does not oblige the person to only move to places that have LOS. Nor could it.

FYI, if a satellite get fried, D* isn't required to do anything except lower your bill a little bit. The amount is completely determined by them. The length of time they lower it is completely up to them. And there is no other remedy. And they still have every right to charge you the ETF if you leave. See the contract. This is basically trying to state that bait and switch is OK as long as a judge doesn't say otherwise.  It's in most service contracts. And doesn't hold up well in court.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

You should look up what bait and switch really is.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

bobcamp1 said:


> In the recent Consumer Reports magazine, D* was ranked fourth overall, but if I remember right its customer service was dragging it down. But I'll go back and check this weekend.


Uh oh, will this start the "Consumer Reports is a rag" episode?


----------



## TomCat (Aug 31, 2002)

If 36,000 people complain out of 18 million subs, that means that 99.8% have no complaint over that 3-year period. 36,000 is only a large number when compared to a small number. Compared to 18 mil, its peanuts.

This makes the BBB thing a non-story. We all know Swanni has a hard-on for DTV, and now it sounds like the BBB might have one as well, probably because DTV won't roll over for them.

BBB is trying to run a protection racket, and them dinging DTV is the equivalent of the small shop owner who won't pay protection getting his kneecaps broken. Except that DTV is big enough to brush it off as if it were a gnat buzzing around their head.

And CR _IS_ a rag. They appear to have credibility when they are "investigating" a subject that people generally know little about, but the minute they try to appear as experts regarding something the reader _might actually BE an expert in_, they are like the Wizard of Oz with Toto pulling back the curtain. Compare the credibility of a handful of grad student interns spending about 20 hours each "investigating" a consumer issue (which is likely about as extensive as a CR report gets) to any one person who has made a living in that field for more than 6 months. It takes 10,000 hours to be an expert at anything (about 5 years at 40 hours a week), meaning they are far from expert at anything, and have no right to pose as if they have an expert opinion.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

TomCat said:


> If 36,000 people complain out of 18 million subs, that means that 99.8% have no complaint over that 3-year period. 36,000 is only a large number when compared to a small number. Compared to 18 mil, its peanuts.
> 
> This makes the BBB thing a non-story. We all know Swanni has a hard-on for DTV, and now it sounds like the BBB might have one as well, probably because DTV won't roll over for them.
> 
> ...


*WOW*...what a post. :eek2:

_(you are likely right on all counts by the way)_


----------



## ziggy29 (Nov 18, 2004)

TomCat said:


> If 36,000 people complain out of 18 million subs, that means that 99.8% have no complaint over that 3-year period. 36,000 is only a large number when compared to a small number. Compared to 18 mil, its peanuts.


Yep. And in reality, even if it were just 98% instead of 99.8%, just about the only place where a 98% satisfaction rating isn't good is eBay.

Any business outside of eBay would be thrilled with 98%, let alone 99.8% customer satisfaction.


----------



## BKC (Dec 12, 2007)

TomCat said:


> And CR _IS_ a rag.


Thanks, I feel better now.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

TomCat said:


> If 36,000 people complain out of 18 million subs, that means that 99.8% have no complaint over that 3-year period. 36,000 is only a large number when compared to a small number. Compared to 18 mil, its peanuts.


 Wasn't the 36,000 for the LOS ANGELES area BBB only, not nationwide because D* is HQ there? Other local BBB's have separate lists.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

TBlazer07 said:


> Wasn't the 36,000 for the LOS ANGELES area BBB only, not nationwide because D* is HQ there? Other local BBB's have separate lists.


No, that's not quite how the BBB works. The local chapter covers the business in its HQ location, yes, but it also tracks ALL complaints for the company nationally. If you check the other local chapters sites for DirecTV around the country you'll see that their complaints section refers you back to that chapter since that's where all the complaints are referred. I assume they do it that way for the benefit of the company since they can deal with the local chapter of the BBB.

Make no mistake, the BBB is a for profit business. They may be a "non-profit" organization but that's become quite the misnomer today. Check out page 5 if you don't believe me.

http://www.bbb.org/us/storage/16/documents/ForCharities/2006 IRS 990 - BBB Wise Giving Alliance.pdf

That dude's salary as a percentage of the money donated (from page 1) is 30. 30% of their donations go to pay that guy.

Oh yeah, they're out to serve the public interest. This tax return is for their CHARITY arm, too. !rolling

What a joke.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

*Bottom line is that D* creates LOTS of complaints by producing unhappy customers . They deserve that F!*


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

dubber deux said:


> *Bottom line is that D* creates LOTS of complaints by producing unhappy customers . They deserve that F!*


Oh yes, let's take quantitative facts that other people post and turn them into rhetorical statements *in bold*.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dubber deux said:


> *Bottom line is that D* creates LOTS of complaints by producing unhappy customers . They deserve that F!*


You know what the best part is? By paying your bill you perpetuate the problem! I blame you for this situation.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

Shades228 said:


> You know what the best part is? By paying your bill you perpetuate the problem! I blame you for this situation.


*I bet that D* charging a hefty ETF fee even when a customer is not satisfied also contributes to this F!*


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

Please stop typing in *bold*. It's the text-equivalent of yelling.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dubber deux said:


> *I bet that D* charging a hefty ETF fee even when a customer is not satisfied also contributes to this F!*


Is that ETF more expensive than the cost of the programming you'll pay for?


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

Shades228 said:


> Is that ETF more expensive than the cost of the programming you'll pay for?


Shades...

you are quite the D* corporate flunky....You PR much ?


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> *I bet that D* charging a hefty ETF fee even when a customer is not satisfied also contributes to this F!*


I also bet people having to pay an ETF because they don't want to contributes to the F ..

Virutally all complaints were answered .. Just because someone calls up the BBB and tells them that DIRECTV is a POS, does not mean that what they are saying is truthful. Sure, there are valid reasons to call and it's likely many of them fell into that category, but some are irate customers that either don't understand the contract or simply ignore the contract.

I would argue that it just doesn't make sense to give anyone an F if virtually all complaints are answered. What if there were 36,000 complaints with zero answered? Is there worse than an F?


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

dubber deux said:


> Shades...
> 
> you are quite the D* corporate flunky....You PR much ?


If that's what you want to think go ahead. I'm simply stating that every time you post it's because you're unhappy, except for the first post about being installed and then you were happy, so why should you continue to deal with something you're not happy with. You keep saying you're unsatisfied so do something about it. Life is too short to get upset over something as simple as a tv provider.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

What was funny in my investigations of the BBB the other day is that virtually all "BBB Accredited" companies were rated an "A" or above while those not accredited were not necessarily that way.

Take, in the financial services industry for example, two large companies, Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley. Both get very poor ratings by JD Power and Smart Money, coming in close to last or last place:

http://www.jdpower.com/Finance/ratings/full-service-investment-firm-ratings
http://www.smartmoney.com/Investing/Stocks/Ranking-the-Full-Service-Brokers/?page=2

But while Merrill Lynch gets a D- from BBB Morgan Stanley gets an A+. Morgan Stanley is "Accredited." AKA, they pay a fee every year to the BBB.

Sure, there's different survey criteria, but the BBB specializes in ranking "trust" for customers. Take a look at the Smart Money "Low Marks" category... "trust" for both. BBB is doing something wrong here. :sure:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

tcusta00 said:


> What was funny in my investigations of the BBB the other day is that virtually all "BBB Accredited" companies were rated an "A" or above while those not accredited were not necessarily that way.
> 
> Take, in the financial services industry for example, two large companies, Merrill Lynch and Morgan Stanley. Both get very poor ratings by JD Power and Smart Money, coming in close to last or last place:
> 
> ...


Shhhh, Swanni might see this. The reality may scare him.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

TomCat said:


> If 36,000 people complain out of 18 million subs, that means that 99.8% have no complaint over that 3-year period. 36,000 is only a large number when compared to a small number. Compared to 18 mil, its peanuts.
> 
> And CR _IS_ a rag. They appear to have credibility when they are "investigating" a subject that people generally know little about, but the minute they try to appear as experts regarding something the reader _might actually BE an expert in_, they are like the Wizard of Oz with Toto pulling back the curtain. Compare the credibility of a handful of grad student interns spending about 20 hours each "investigating" a consumer issue (which is likely about as extensive as a CR report gets) to any one person who has made a living in that field for more than 6 months. It takes 10,000 hours to be an expert at anything (about 5 years at 40 hours a week), meaning they are far from expert at anything, and have no right to pose as if they have an expert opinion.


If it takes 10,000 hours to be an expert on anything, then how can any of us be commenting on how the BBB or CR works? :grin:

One thing for sure is that you aren't an expert in statistics. Not everyone who has a complaint files it with the BBB. Not even remotely close. So you can't just take that number and divide it by the total number of subscribers.

Plus, if CR is a rag, then maybe they should have ranked D* LOWER than they did. After all, if they can screw it up one way, they can just as easily screw it up the other way. FYI, CR also uses comments they get about the service through their customer surveys. That's especially important when dealing with the customer service aspect of any company.

People turn to the BBB and Consumer Reports because they want to know if there are any problems associated with any of the products or services, and what they are. Since companies don't advertise what their deficiencies are, and these services have high ETFs, they (and some Internet sites like this one) are the only places that gather this information. They have problems, but a non-profit organization that's not directly influenced by a handful of sponsors is as good as your going to get.

They are just data points to use in making your decision. People don't take them as gospel, because others do buy the products or services that ranked lower. However, the BBB's summary of complaints with D* is consistent with the problems reported in other sites.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

bobcamp1 said:


> They are just data points to use in making your decision. People don't take them as gospel, because others do buy the products or services that ranked lower. However, the BBB's summary of complaints with D* is consistent with the problems reported in other sites.


I think many people do take the BBB's word as gospel ..


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Doug Brott said:


> I think many people do take the BBB's word as gospel ..


Sadly.....I believe you are correct....which as we know....is a mistake.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

I wonder if a lot of these issues could be avoided if there was a longer time to cancel with no ETF. I know some states require a 3 day period, but I don't know how difficult it is to get DirecTV to let you out without the ETF. I know there's money involved in setting everything up, but if you could basically try it out for a few weeks, it would be nice.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

dpeters11 said:


> I wonder if a lot of these issues could be avoided if there was a longer time to cancel with no ETF. I know some states require a 3 day period, but I don't know how difficult it is to get DirecTV to let you out without the ETF. I know there's money involved in setting everything up, but if you could basically try it out for a few weeks, it would be nice.


If they can get the install costs down to a lower level in the future, which may indeed happen through the introduction of new methods and technology, then perhaps a new approach might happen...otherwise, I suspect it won't.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> I also bet people having to pay an ETF because they don't want to contributes to the F ..
> 
> Virutally all complaints were answered .. Just because someone calls up the BBB and tells them that DIRECTV is a POS, does not mean that what they are saying is truthful. Sure, there are valid reasons to call and it's likely many of them fell into that category, but some are irate customers that either don't understand the contract or simply ignore the contract.
> 
> I would argue that it just doesn't make sense to give anyone an F if virtually all complaints are answered. What if there were 36,000 complaints with zero answered? Is there worse than an F?


Well, if the answer to a specific complaint was to not fix anything and withdraw $500 from an account without warning, I guess that's an answer. Just not a good one. This happened repeatedly. I think that's one of the reasons for the grade. That and the action taken against it by the FCC. Oh wait, did I mention the Washington AG's lawsuit? When you make a list of signs that you might be dealing with a shady company, I think these three items are on the list. Some people will explain away all of these things individually. But other people will see a pattern.

I'm sure some of these complaints are not legitimate, but D* believes almost half are that way. That number just seems too high to me. It's too bad. Their service (with the exception of the DVR and the brrriippps) is very good. They shouldn't have to resort to shady tactics to make a profit.

I believe they can fix this by changing just a few things:

1. Give new customers 60 days to cancel the service without an ETF. This allows the techs to visit the house a few times to fix any issues, and also allows the first bill to arrive so that the customer can compare it to the promised rates. This is what cable TV does.

2. Warn customers when the ETF or non-returned equipment fee is about to be charged. This gives customers time to put money in the account or call in to dispute the charge. Will some cancel the account? Sure. Then it goes to collections. It's part of doing business.

3. Explain the important parts of the contract, especially the 2-year commitment, the fact the equipment is leased, and the presence of a pro-rated ETF. And the fact that D* can withdraw the ETF from your regular account.

4. Have the bank account holder be the one who signs the contract.

5. Fix the "system" so that it is difficult/impossible to renew the commitment for the replacement of defective equipment, or at least make it very easy to correct the problem later on.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

bobcamp1 said:


> Well, if the answer to a specific complaint was to not fix anything and withdraw $500 from an account without warning, I guess that's an answer. Just not a good one. This happened repeatedly. I think that's one of the reasons for the grade. That and the action taken against it by the FCC. Oh wait, did I mention the Washington AG's lawsuit? When you make a list of signs that you might be dealing with a shady company, I think these three items are on the list. Some people will explain away all of these things individually. But other people will see a pattern.
> 
> I'm sure some of these complaints are not legitimate, but D* believes almost half are that way. That number just seems too high to me. It's too bad. Their service (with the exception of the DVR and the brrriippps) is very good. They shouldn't have to resort to shady tactics to make a profit.
> 
> ...


I think that would be too much upfront risk on DirecTvs part. A good chunk of the SAC is the install. If you allow the customer to bail up to 60 days later, thats a lot of money lost. The only way I see this coming about is if the customer pays for some or all of the install.



bobcamp1 said:


> 2. Warn customers when the ETF or non-returned equipment fee is about to be charged. This gives customers time to put money in the account or call in to dispute the charge. Will some cancel the account? Sure. Then it goes to collections. It's part of doing business.


No warning is needed. If one bothers to read the lease addendum, it clearly states the consequences of early termination.



bobcamp1 said:


> 3. Explain the important parts of the contract, especially the 2-year commitment, the fact the equipment is leased, and the presence of a pro-rated ETF. And the fact that D* can withdraw the ETF from your regular account.


Is the fact that it says "LEASE ADDENDUM" not clear enough? The shipping boxes all have verbage stating that the receiver is a lease and must be returned upon cancellation (exception are refurb packaging).



bobcamp1 said:


> 4. Have the bank account holder be the one who signs the contract.


Good luck with that. It's hard enough to co-ordinate someone over 18 and the tech showing up at the same time. Now you want the bank account holder to be there as well? :nono2:



bobcamp1 said:


> 5. Fix the "system" so that it is difficult/impossible to renew the commitment for the replacement of defective equipment, or at least make it very easy to correct the problem later on.


This does need to be addressed. I have a hunch as to why things get messed up on replacements. I think in many cases, the CSRs activate the replacement box as an additional box, then deactivates the bad box, so the system sees it as an upgrade not a swap.

I know for techs, when they do a service swap, the handheld device is setup in such a way that before it activates the replacement, it asks for the card number of the box it's replacing.

I really think that a lot of this could be solved by a few minor changes.

The lease addendum needs to be dumbed down to a 6th grade level. Sorry to say, but Joe Six pack has had too many six packs. Plain language.

People need to actually read the agreement they are signing. In my experience, less that 1 in 100 read the thing. They sign and go.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

RobertE said:


> The lease addendum needs to be dumbed down to a 6th grade level. Sorry to say, but Joe Six pack has had too many six packs. Plain language.
> 
> People need to actually read the agreement they are signing. In my experience, less that 1 in 100 read the thing. They sign and go.


Sadly, you may be right here. I know even I would rather just read a few bullet points in larger font that pretty much says all of the legal mumbo-jumbo (my technical term :lol This could perhaps be more informative to the normal subscriber.


----------



## avmaster (May 30, 2008)

Dish > DirectTV

Working for a and dealing with DTV's right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing method of doing business for years, i can say that i have a LOT more happy customers when it comes to Dish vs. Direct.

No matter who or what company you deal with, there is always going to be some bad apples and people that have a bad experience, but what matters is percentages.

Dish and Direct both employ oversea call centers for various reasons, for the most part tech support for dish is handled in the states unless you call in during a time of overflow. With direct its about 50/50, or maybe 30/70.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

avmaster said:


> Dish > DirectTV
> 
> Working for a and dealing with DTV's right hand has no idea what the left hand is doing method of doing business for years, i can say that i have a LOT more happy customers when it comes to Dish vs. Direct.
> 
> ...


Are you sure? I thought most Directv centers were here.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> Are you sure? I thought most Directv centers were here.


They are. The only off shore ones that I'm aware of are in Purto Rico & the Philippines. The only time anyone should end up at either of these if they have any of the Mas programming, or call at some funky hour of the night.

Just more FUD being spread about. :nono2:


----------



## weathernlu (Jan 21, 2010)

An F is too high, a F- or a Z is closer.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

ziggy29 said:


> Yep. And in reality, even if it were just 98% instead of 99.8%, just about the only place where a 98% satisfaction rating isn't good is eBay.
> 
> Any business outside of eBay would be thrilled with 98%, let alone 99.8% customer satisfaction.


I've been pissed with D's service for the last couple years, but I have no need in telling the BBB about it. I would venture to guess that there are a lot of subs out there that are displeased with the service but do not bother to contact the BBB.

And D's customer service is pretty pathetic. When the policy is to lie to the customer to get them off the subject/phone they need a lot of improvement.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> When the policy is to lie to the customer to get them off the subject/phone they need a lot of improvement.


I don't think that's fair. The fact that it happens doesn't mean that it is policy. That being said, other policies (or products) may drive them to drink otherwise.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

harsh said:


> I don't think that's fair. The fact that it happens doesn't mean that it is policy. That being said, other policies (or products) may drive them to drink otherwise.


Well I don't think being lied to is "fair". Paying full price for partial service isn't "fair". A lot in life isn't fair.

Fair or not, it doesn't change a thing. I have spoken to dozens of D* reps about it, two "customer managers" and sent several emails. I as well as hundreds and possibly thousands of others have complained about. NOT ONE TIME YET HAS D* ADMITTED IT OR EVEN ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE HEARD ABOUT IT. If it isn't D*'s policy to lie about this I am absolutely amazed at the universal response.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

wavemaster said:


> Well I don't think being lied to is "fair". Paying full price for partial service isn't "fair". A lot in life isn't fair.


What did DIRECTV lie to you about?


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> What did DIRECTV lie to you about?


That there are no audio drop issues.
That there is no Brrrpppp issue.
That replacing a damaged DVR would not extend my contract.
Those are the biggies. I won't nit-pick on the small ones.

Going back a while I was lied to several times about changes/repairs and their related contract effects.

The not losing any HD channels after D10 was launched as a long time previous HD subscriber.

Pretty sure I'm not the only one as evidenced here and elsewhere.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Do those count?


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> That there are no audio drop issues.
> That there is no Brrrpppp issue.


So they outright denied you're having an issue with BRRIIPPs and audio drop outs?



wavemaster said:


> That replacing a damaged DVR would not extend my contract.


 It shouldn't unless the DVR is owned and you don't have the protection plan. If they extended your contract on a replaced leased receiver and/or you had the protection plan then you should get it corrected.


wavemaster said:


> Going back a while I was lied to several times about changes/repairs and their related contract effects.


See above. If you can elaborate on the specifics maybe we can help.



wavemaster said:


> The not losing any HD channels after D10 was launched as a long time previous HD subscriber.


I'm pretty sure the new satellites added HD. Can you explain?


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> It shouldn't unless the DVR is owned and you don't have the protection plan. If they extended your contract on a replaced leased receiver and/or you had the protection plan then you should get it corrected.


If it is leased, if is irrelevant if he had the protection plan or not. And we all know, time and time again, they are erroneously extending contracts replacing receivers. His recourse will be "notes on the account" which won't help him until after the ETF has been removed from his account and he tries to fight to get his money back.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

raott said:


> If it is leased, if is irrelevant if he had the protection plan or not.


Yes, I said that, but the other way around, thanks.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

tcusta00 said:


> Yes, I said that, but the other way around, thanks.


you're welcome 
I don't even get into lease/contract discussions anymore due them often turning sour


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> So they outright denied you're having an issue with BRRIIPPs and audio drop outs?
> 
> It shouldn't unless the DVR is owned and you don't have the protection plan. If they extended your contract on a replaced leased receiver and/or you had the protection plan then you should get it corrected.
> See above. If you can elaborate on the specifics maybe we can help.
> ...


The lying is the issue. Being told "this will not extend you contract" with a resulting extension of contract is a lie is it not?

We had 6 channels of HD for the longest time (They were actually the ONLY HD channels) we were told with the new launch we would not lose any channels. We lost most of the original 6 channels. During the excitement of the launch there was a new "HD extra" pack fee added which I guess was the "HD ONLY" pack previously. We called several times and were told WE WOULD NOT LOSE ANY CHANNELS by several D* representatives - end result we lost channels.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> The lying is the issue. Being told "this will not extend you contract" with a resulting extension of contract is a lie is it not?


It's not a lie, it's a mistake. The person who told you it doesn't extend was correct but their system is screwed up so it accidentally extended you. Call and get it fixed. I'm not saying it's right, but it's not exactly a lie.



wavemaster said:


> We had 6 channels of HD for the longest time (They were actually the ONLY HD channels) we were told with the new launch we would not lose any channels. We lost most of the original 6 channels. During the excitement of the launch there was a new "HD extra" pack fee added which I guess was the "HD ONLY" pack previously. We called several times and were told WE WOULD NOT LOSE ANY CHANNELS by several D* representatives - end result we lost channels.


I don't remember this, but what were the 6 channels that you lost?


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> It's not a lie, it's a mistake. The person who told you it doesn't extend was correct but their system is screwed up so it accidentally extended you. Call and get it fixed. I'm not saying it's right, but it's not exactly a lie.
> 
> I don't remember this, but what were the 6 channels that you lost?


If it was the first time it ever happened - I could agree. The D* reps LIE about extensions all the time. It has happened more than once on our account. I guess using your semantics - I DON"T LIKE BEING MISTAKED TO.

I didn't say we lost 6 channels, they were the only ones we had back in the day. I'm not sure which ones are gone now, it was a while ago. Are you saying there were no channels taken away?


----------



## raott (Nov 23, 2005)

tcusta00 said:


> It's not a lie, it's a mistake. The person who told you it doesn't extend was correct but their system is screwed up so it accidentally extended you. Call and get it fixed. I'm not saying it's right, but it's not exactly a lie.


It's only a "mistake" if you do not mean to do something. I'm sure D* knows quite well they have a system issue that adds a two year contract onto an account when it is not suppose to. It's been an issue forever and they have done nothing to correct it.

It's very convenient the only recourse is "notes on the account". Those notes will not stop an ETF.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

You just have to love the folks on here that make ENDLESS appologies for D* no matter what the issues are...makes me wonder.....are they the "stealth marketing" element who disguise themselves are regular "joes" on the forums? 

D* customer NO service is just that ......customer NO service.


----------



## CJTE (Sep 18, 2007)

dubber deux said:


> You just have to love the folks on here that make ENDLESS appologies for D* no matter what the issues are...makes me wonder.....are they the "stealth marketing" element who disguise themselves are regular "joes" on the forums?
> 
> D* customer NO service is just that ......customer NO service.


oooh you are SO good with words. I wanna grow up to be JUST LIKE YOU double tap!
:lol:
The people on this forum enjoy the services offered to them, and are going to defend their choices just as you've been given the right to defend your own.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

I just laugh that he pays for his customer NO service.


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> Unfortunately the old honest D* with the "we're all in it together" attitude has been replaced. The new D* is a money making conglomerate that hardly knows what got it to where it is. It is becoming very comcast like in it's treatment of issues.
> 
> Hide it, lie about it, but don't come clean. It is unfortunate but it is what it is. This is why there are so many complaints.


I also miss the old days.

Superior customer service, clearly superior picture quality, and a state of the art DVR.

"Back in the Day" my friends were pretty wowed with my TV set-up, even if it took me some extra work to set it up and make it work.

No more. Now I dread calling customer service, find the HD PQ slightly below the quality of OTA and really dislike my HR21 DVR.

I recently dealt with both D* and Comcast as part of my HD/ISP upgrade. I was disappointed with both D* customer service and the D* installer, and pleasantly surprised by Comcast.

I left Comcast over 10 years ago. They are now clearly intending to compete head to head with D* and the other TV providers. D* could take a page out of their book on how to turn around customer service.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

wavemaster said:


> If it was the first time it ever happened - I could agree. The D* reps LIE about extensions all the time. It has happened more than once on our account. I guess using your semantics - I DON"T LIKE BEING MISTAKED TO.
> 
> I didn't say we lost 6 channels, they were the only ones we had back in the day. I'm not sure which ones are gone now, it was a while ago. Are you saying there were no channels taken away?


Indeed, there are certain issues with the billing system and sometimes you (and I) as the customer have to help the CSRs walk through the system so that the end result is correct. This is not necessarily right, but knowing it will help you navigate to a solution that keeps you happy.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> If it was the first time it ever happened - I could agree. The D* reps LIE about extensions all the time. It has happened more than once on our account. I guess using your semantics - I DON"T LIKE BEING MISTAKED TO.
> 
> I didn't say we lost 6 channels, they were the only ones we had back in the day. I'm not sure which ones are gone now, it was a while ago. Are you saying there were no channels taken away?


The only thing I can think of is something like HDNet Movies. That was moved to the HD Extra Pack. Other than that, we've "lost" some channels (can't remember if they were HD or not) over time, like Discovery Health as they get replaced. But DirecTV had no control over that obviously.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

I have learned long ago that the BBB ratings are pretty worthless overall. Sadly some have a lot of faith in them 

The only thing the BBB is good for is strong arming _some_ companies when they truly do fail to give you any proper support or response.


----------



## RACJ2 (Aug 2, 2008)

Grentz said:


> I have learned long ago that the BBB ratings are pretty worthless overall. Sadly some have a lot of faith in them
> 
> The only thing the BBB is good for is strong arming _some_ companies when they truly do fail to give you any proper support or response.


I agree you can't take the BBB as gospel, but they definitly help. I Always check to see what BBB ratings and comments say and if the company participates in the BBB arbitration. So far they haven't failed me when I have checked and then purchased from that company. And if their are a lot of complaints I avoid ordering from that business. Although it probably doesn't work as well for cable or satellite providers, because you have so many variables.


----------



## chrisvandermerwe (Jun 12, 2007)

I went from being a huge DirecTV supporter to absolute disgust in two phone calls in the last month. We signed up for HD DVR in June 07 with 24 months commitment (before that we had 3 years on standard def). We recently moved and had no choice but to cancel. When I tried to called to cancel I got the "Well we will have to charge you and EFT". The guy couldn't say why but promised that we will not be charged. Well the final statement came today and guess what - $87 ETF. I called back and was informed that I haven't fulfilled my *36* month contract! There is no 36 month contract! Then I was put on hold and promptly disconnected.

I really like DirecTV and even actively participated in the CEs. I'm mad and sad that for being a customer for 6 years I get this kind of treatment. I was going to see if we can get DirecTV again when possible but I can't see myself supporting them again :-(

I'll post back if it gets resolved. However this should not have happened in the first place.


----------



## am7crew (Jun 6, 2009)

"Number 1 in Customer Service"


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

chrisvandermerwe said:


> We signed up for HD DVR in June 07 with 24 months commitment (before that we had 3 years on standard def). We recently moved and had no choice but to cancel. When I tried to called to cancel I got the "Well we will have to charge you and EFT". The guy couldn't say why but promised that we will not be charged. Well the final statement came today and guess what - $87 ETF. I called back and was informed that I haven't fulfilled my *36* month contract! There is no 36 month contract! Then I was put on hold and promptly disconnected.


Chris --

DirecTV is not very good at resolving incorrect contract extensions and correcting invalid early termination fees.

I recommend to everyone, every time you replace equipment or make a change that could result in a contract extension, to call DirecTV and confirm you contract expiration date. If you get the wrong date, send an email to Ellen Filipiak's office, and have them send you the correct date in writing.

Although you, Chris, cannot go back in time to do this, there are some things you can do now to make your battle easier:

* Make sure you do not owe an early termination fee. Make sure that you did not make any changes to your account or add any new equipment which may have legitimately extended your commitment. Note, replacing defective equipment does not legitimately extend your commitment.

* Do not pay the early termination fee. Once you pay them, you have to fight to get your money back. If DirecTV charges the fee to your credit card, dispute the charge with your credit card company. If DirecTV debits your checking account (if you made the mistake of giving DirecTV your debit card or authorizing direct withdrawals), notify the bank that the debit was fraudulent and unauthorized for a charge that you did not incur.

* All communications with DirecTV from this point forward need to be in writing so you have a paper trail of what they have said. If a representative calls you on the telephone to correct your ETF, tell them you need written confirmation of what they told you.

* Send an email to Ellen Filipak's office. Clearly and politely explain that you were erroneously charged and ETF, and request that they correct the error and send you written confirmation.

* If you do not receive a response within seven days, send a follow-up letter, more firmly worded, requesting that the error be corrected within seven days and you receive written confirmation of the correction.

* If you do not receive a response within another seven days, send a letter via U.S. Mail, return receipt requested, to DirecTV, demanding that they correct the error and give you written confirmation within 7 days. Tell them that if they do not comply, you will notify your state's attorney general's office.

* If you do not receive a response within 7 days of when DirecTV receive your last letter, notify your state's attorney general.

* If at any point, DirecTV contacts a collections agency, inform the collections agency that the ETF is a fraudulent charge and you have notified DirecTV of the error.

* If at any point, DirecTV reports you to a credit agency, notify the credit agency that the amount is a fraudulent charge. Immediately notify your state's attorney general at this point.


----------



## iceturkee (Apr 1, 2007)

SPECIES11703 said:


> WOW SWanni! You sure are trying to smear The DirecTV name as much as possible! You must be on Charlie's payroll ! Poor Bastard


ask one of the members here what swanni's response was when asked if he was on charlie's payroll. i believe the op stated swanni used the f word.


----------



## bjdotson (Feb 20, 2007)

trekologer said:


> The BBB is nothing more than a shakedown racket. You can read into this as DirecTV didn't pay annual dues. If they pay up, the rating will suddenly turn into an A.


This is very true and the problem is compounded by the head of local offices setting up their own little fiefdoms.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

There are lots and lots and lots of DirecTV subscribers who never signed a contract, never saw a box that said "leased" and have been customers for, say, 12 years and therefore reasonably assume they couldn't possibly be "under contract" for anything, only to find out they are. And getting even a bogus contract extension removed is near impossible, as I know for a fact when, after three different, debunked (by me, with faxed receipts) explanations of why I had a contract, since I didn't add any equipment post-2007 or even change my service, DirecTV's response was, "you have a contract and we won't talk to you about it anymore." Seriously. (I think their exact language was "we consider this matter closed" and "will not respond to further requests.")

And, at some point, ALL my boxes, including those purchased before the "lease" model, were changed to "leased" on my DirecTV bill one month, out of the blue ... By "accident" I'm sure, though I've never been able to have it corrected, despite multiple phone calls. (The fact that I'll have no use for any equipment--and previously just gave old equipment to Goodwill--is why I just gave up on that one.)

Look, as I've said many times, if this is the way that DirecTV chooses to do business that's their right, but it's also the consumer's right to complain about it and give others a heads up. I filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau regarding DirecTV on the issues above and, guess what, never heard a thing. The case was "closed without response" according to the BBB.

And if even I'd been installed in the last 12 months, and presented all paperwork, fulfilling, I'm certain, every legal requirement ... The hard cold fact is that no one on Earth could possibly read all the legalese "contracts" we "agree to" every day, for just about every transaction, service and paid (and sometimes even non-paid) interaction we have. We literally would not be able to function and live if we took the time to read every software agreement, dry-cleaning liability statement, amusement park release, bank privacy notice, 2,000 word return policy, etc., etc., ad nauseam. And companies are very well aware of this and work it to their advantage whenever possible. (e.g. Well, we printed the 1,500 word "simplified" lease policy in 2 pt. font on the back of your original receipt with a link to a website no one has ever visited for the full 20,000 word text and gave you a 90 minute window to return the product, and it clearly stated that once you opened the box you're on the hook for a $300 ETF.)

It's such a widespread problem there are Federal laws to protect consumers making major purchases. Anyone who has ever acquired a mortgage knows that, at closing, you may sign up to 50 pieces of paper, out of the 100s you are given, which can take 1-2 hours, even if you don't read anything, even with someone directing you and giving you a brief on every paper you sign/initial (as happens in a mortgage closing). It would take, no exaggeration, DAYS to read every piece of paper in full--and that's just one, albeit very large, transaction. That's why we have truth in lending, one-page, easy-to-read and understand disclosures. And even then many people will tell you they're still confused/unaware of how a mortgage really works (compound interest, points, etc.).

Look, I never even saw DirecTV's "contract", because it didn't exist when I became a customer, yet I am held to its terms (and even made up terms), with no recourse to the company other than, say, writing the BBB, which they will (and have) ignored.

If DirecTV did the ethical and 100 percent honest thing and printed in normal-sized type a few bullet points on every ad, their website and equipment display their terms, for instance ...

1) You will be obligated to a two-year service contract at no less than $60/month (prices subject to increase at any time, without notice).

2) This contract will be renewed for an additional two years, regardless of service time to date, anytime you change/add equipment, including if we require said upgrade to receive new services you're already paying for (i.e. HD, locals, etc.).

3) If you cancel at any time when you are under contract we will charge you an Early Termination Fee, which we determine and can change at any time, and will automatically withdraw that fee from your bank account or credit card without prior notice.

4) All equipment purchased by you is actually leased and must be returned within 30 days of service termination or an additional per receiver fee (which we determine) will be levied and automatically deducted, without prior notice, from any bank account and/or credit card number we have access to. 

5) Valid credit card and/or bank account information is required by DirecTV from every customer so that we may execute the actions listed above.

6) We have the right to move channels to different payment tiers or eliminate them altogether without prior notice, with no recourse or obligation to our customers (i.e. no matter what we do, you will still be under contract to us, while we have no obligation to you).

So, if it was laid out that plainly, how many people do you think would sign up for DirecTV? And that's without even talking about ... most people will need far more equipment than is available via free install (if you have more than two TVs, want more than one DVR, want HD at all TVs, etc.); that you pay a per box fee on top of programming costs, HD is an extra fee, and there are several a la carte channels not included in any package and therefore requiring more fees; oh and you have no say over what model of equipment you'll get when you're paying $199 (in the case of an HD DVR). Plus, you WILL lose the signal during rain and likely snow. Some installs will require additional charges for specialized equipment undetermined before arrival. You may have to pay to fix your equipment, or subscribe to a protection plan (additional fee). Non-working equipment replacement will almost certainly extend your contract, requiring great work, and a more than a bit of luck and insider knowledge, to get fixed. 

I could go on ... But, suffice to say, I think "F" is a generous score for the way DirecTV does business.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> I could go on ... But, suffice to say, I think "F" is a generous score for the way DirecTV does business.


...yet you're still a customer.  That alone negates your rant. It's all very simple. If you're that unhappy, leave. Problem solved.


----------



## Mikemok1981 (Jul 9, 2009)

susanandmark said:


> Look, I never even saw DirecTV's "contract", because it didn't exist when I became a customer, yet I am held to its terms (and even made up terms), with no recourse to the company other than, say, writing the BBB, which they will (and have) ignored.
> 
> If DirecTV did the ethical and 100 percent honest thing and printed in normal-sized type a few bullet points on every ad, their website and equipment display their terms, for instance ...
> 
> ...


Actually, without all the hyperbole, everthing you want is stated in the copy of the customer agreement you get every year from DIRECTV.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...yet you're still a customer.  That alone negates your rant. It's all very simple. If you're that unhappy, leave. Problem solved.


I CAN'T LEAVE, DIRECTV HAS ME LOCKED INTO A BOGUS CONTRACT, for either a non-existant receiver I activated in 2008 (I didn't, and they can't/won't tell me WHICH receiver or even show that the number of receivers I have changed; because it didn't since April 2007) or a $5 off for six-months promotion I did get, but didn't ask for, or a programming change in 2008 (which never occurred). They can't decide which of the three it might be, so they just cut off communications.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

Mikemok1981 said:


> Actually, without all the hyperbole, everthing you want is stated in the copy of the customer agreement you get every year from DIRECTV.


In clear, bullet point fashion with prominence given to the relevant aspects that could cost consumers money or in teeny, tiny 2-point fonts hidden in amongst 10,000 words of legalese? They call them "hidden fees" for a reason. THAT WAS MY POINT.

And I ask again, if the specific terms and conditions I mentioned (all true) were laid out that clearly and plainly how many people would sign up? Very few I think. Very few. The fact that they hide those policies tells you, with no ambiguity, that DirecTV knows good and well they're very bad deals for the consumer.

Look, a company that offers a strong product and good service at a fair price point doesn't need "contracts" to lock customers in for a set period of time. I was a relatively happy customer for the first decade I was with DirecTV and stayed with no obligation what-so-ever.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

susanandmark said:


> I CAN'T LEAVE, DIRECTV HAS ME LOCKED INTO A BOGUS CONTRACT, for either a non-existant receiver I activated in 2008 (I didn't, and they can't/won't tell me WHICH receiver or even show that the number of receivers I have changed; because it didn't since April 2007) or a $5 off for six-months promotion I did get, but didn't ask for, or a programming change in 2008 (which never occurred). They can't decide which of the three it might be, so they just cut off communications.


If it was 2008, then maybe it's almost done.


----------



## Mikemok1981 (Jul 9, 2009)

susanandmark said:


> In clear, bullet point fashion with prominence given or in teeny, tiny 2-point fonts hidden in amongst 10,000 words of legalese? Duh, THAT WAS MY POINT.
> 
> And I ask again, if the terms and conditions I mentioned (all true) were laid out that clearly and plainly how many people would sign up? Very few I think. Very few.


Have you ever read the customer agreement? Its not small or full of legalese. There's just a lot of it. The only thing that is missing are the bullet points.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Sorry I missed a lot - you have already gone the route through Ellen's office?



susanandmark said:


> I CAN'T LEAVE, DIRECTV HAS ME LOCKED INTO A BOGUS CONTRACT, for either a non-existant receiver I activated in 2008 (I didn't, and they can't/won't tell me WHICH receiver or even show that the number of receivers I have changed; because it didn't since April 2007) or a $5 off for six-months promotion I did get, but didn't ask for, or a programming change in 2008 (which never occurred). They can't decide which of the three it might be, so they just cut off communications.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> I CAN'T LEAVE, DIRECTV HAS ME LOCKED INTO A BOGUS CONTRACT, for either a non-existant receiver I activated in 2008 (I didn't, and they can't/won't tell me WHICH receiver or even show that the number of receivers I have changed; because it didn't since April 2007) or a $5 off for six-months promotion I did get, but didn't ask for, or a programming change in 2008 (which never occurred). They can't decide which of the three it might be, so they just cut off communications.


A solution to your problem is rather simple and could be resolved quickly. Either way, you don't have to be a customer if you don't want to be.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

Mikemok1981 said:


> Have you ever read the customer agreement? Its not small or full of legalese. There's just a lot of it. The only thing that is missing are the bullet points.


I don't see a single one of the main points I made, all having to do with DirecTV's contract and applicable to ALL customers (new or old), in DirecTV's print ads, commercials or even on the front page of their website.

Again, you refer to a rarely-if-ever-read "customer agreement" document. Something DirecTV is betting heavily (and correctly) that most of its customers will ignore ... Until it's too late, and they're financially obligated in a manner they never expected.

I'm sure all the potential side effects of drugs are detailed, quite clearly, in those two page 4-point type pages that follow their ads in magazines.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

susanandmark said:


> I don't see a single one of the main points I made, all having to do with DirecTV's contract and applicable to ALL customers (new or old), in DirecTV's print ads, commercials or even on the front page of their website.
> 
> Again, you refer to a rarely-if-ever-read "customer agreement" document. Something DirecTV is betting heavily (and correctly) that most of its customers will ignore ... Until it's too late, and they're financially obligated in a manner they never expected.
> 
> I'm sure all the potential side effects of drugs are detailed, quite clearly, in those two page 4-point type pages that follow their ads in magazines.


Bottom line if the customer ignores the legally binding contract they agree without reading it, no one's fault but their own.


----------



## Cyber36 (Mar 20, 2008)

I guess nobody will truly understand what he's saying until they try to leave themselves for whatever reason. Vaild points were definately made. One thing that wasn't mentioned that I disagree with is - their policy of automatically renewing a subscription service(aka:C.I.) I shouldn't have to call to cancel it the following season if I don't want it. I should have to call if I WANT TO WATCH IT. Just another way to make easy money if someone forgets to cancel, which I believe is quite common. The only things that should be automatic are death & taxes............


----------



## cnmurray8 (Jun 19, 2008)

I just received in the mail yesterday a copy of the updated customer agreement and privacy statement. I did not notice anything different in it so hopefully someone knows more than I do.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> Bottom line if the customer ignores the legally binding contract they agree without reading it, no one's fault but their own.


And, again, two points ... 1) I never "agreed" to any contract with DirecTV by doing anything other than being their customer. I never signed or even intialed anything, at any time. (I've been a customer for 12 years, long before "contracts.") "Contracts" that are entered into by the simple act of NOT doing something (i.e. opening a box, clicking on a website, entering a building, not canceling your service, etc.) are just highly questionable (and it's not only DirecTV that does this, obviously). Courts have backed this up when unreasonable assertions have been made.

The other laughable point with DirecTV is you can't even cancel your service because you don't agree with the contract, because, in their eyes, having service in the first place obligates you to their contract. It's a snake eating it's own tail. (The only way out of the contract is canceling, but you can't cancel, because you have a contract.)

2) If you, as an average American consumer, read every single agreement/contract/restriction/liability waiver etc. you were presented with on a daily basis you would literally do nothing else, including eat, sleep and go to the bathroom. Even then, with the legal butt-covering nation we've become, I question whether you could actually read each and every word. So the "no one to blame but yourself" argument doesn't really hold water.

And, in my specific case, DirecTV refuses to even prove why I have a "contract" in the first place, giving multiple explanations and then, when all prove disputable, just cutting off the conversation. I would find it extremely hard to believe that I am the only customer they have done this to. Basically, in my own experience, DirecTV will say you have a "contract" to try to prevent you from leaving or, at the very least, get a few extra dollars out of you (ETF) when you go.


----------



## joed32 (Jul 27, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> If it was 2008, then maybe it's almost done.


That's right, it's 2010 now. Why are they still here?


----------



## Ed Campbell (Feb 17, 2006)

You entered into a contract when you paid your bill. Your payment is your receipt.

As for blame and holding water discussions - meaningless in any court in the land even if that frustrates your ethical constructs. Facts that have been around for decades which - I guess - you've never confronted before.

BYW - I don't find it difficult to read any contract I'm about to agree/disagree with. For the same reason I read labels on the food I buy. I owe it to myself and my family to take that responsibility.

Add: Been a subscriber to D* since their 3rd month in business. Every question I've confronted has been resolved to my satisfaction/understanding - excepting the period when they leased out responsibility for our service to Pegasus Coop. Even that was solved over time.

Sixteen years.

Add #2: Oh yeah. The decades I worked in wholesale representation - I would never recommend that a retailer subscribe to the BBB. It's one of the most useless hustles in the world of commerce.


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

Ed Campbell said:


> BYW - I don't find it difficult to read any contract I'm about to agree/disagree with. For the same reason I read labels on the food I buy. I owe it to myself and my family to take that responsibility.


When my husband had surgery on his neck there were more than 30 pages of double-sided paperwork we had to sign and initial just to get into the hospital, that doesn't include the insurance forms and paperwork or the individual surgical consent (also multiple pages) that they bring to you about five minutes before they wheel you to the operating room. That would not, nor could not, have prevented me from suing the hospital should the doctor have done something incorrectly, even though I'm sure those documents attempt to alleviate the doctor and hospital of whatever liability they can.

Are you telling me you would have had the surgeons wait while you read the entire document? If so, let me know how that works out for you.

The same as when I was on labor with our child and had to sign a consent for an epidural. It was multiple pages and I was in a large amount of pain, with contractions coming less than a minute apart, but I'm sure you say I should have throughly read the 3-4 pages of documents before allowing the doctor to give me the infusion.

On a less dramatic front ... We just a few minutes ago had 13 packages delivered via UPS. I signed for them. Now, by signing I've stated that I have opened and inspected each and every package and found them to be without fault (do you read the UPS customer agreement, oh and every single store's full and complete liability policies and procedures before making a purchase/receiving a delivery/sending a package?). Of course, were I actually to make UPS wait while I did that--open and inspect the contents of 13 packages--no one else on the route would get any deliveries, as even the most cursory inspection would take 30-40 minutes total. In many cases it's not so much about "personal responsibility," as you contend, but common courtesy and societal necessity.

To say that I agreed to a contract by paying my bill is not only insulting (since, if I hadn't paid my bill, I still would have been under contract ... and also delinquent!), but the very attitude that has led to the corporate culture we have now which is so very customer unfriendly. It's also more than a stretch to equate not reading every single privacy policy that comes in my mailbox to not caring for my family's well being. And, by the way, I actually HAVE read DirecTV's customer agreement, which is why I know I shouldn't even HAVE a contract, yet they claim I do and leave me without recourse to fight them.

Look, it is your absolute right to disagree with me (and I think I've belabored my point enough, so I'll stop here), and I'm glad you've had a good DirecTV experience (if you recall, so had I, until I didn't), but the way that DirecTV-and plenty of other companies-do business is just shameful and wrong. DirecTV even more so because it has been my personal experience, and others posting in these forums (bogus contract extensions are a major complaint), that the policies are arbitrarily applied and even unlawfully imposed on their customers, myself included.

Oh and, for those of you have math and seasonal issues, my supposed contract was implemented in October 2008. Does anyone know if May comes before October?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> And, again, two points ... 1) I never "agreed" to any contract with DirecTV


Yes you did.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> When my husband had surgery on his neck there were more than 30 pages of double-sided paperwork we had to sign and initial just to get into the hospital, that doesn't include the insurance forms and paperwork or the individual surgical consent (also multiple pages) that they bring to you about five minutes before they wheel you to the operating room. That would not, nor could not, have prevented me from suing the hospital should the doctor have done something incorrectly, even though I'm sure those documents attempt to alleviate the doctor and hospital of whatever liability they can.
> 
> Are you telling me you would have had the surgeons wait while you read the entire document? If so, let me know how that works out for you.
> 
> ...


Are you leaving in October? Have you decided that?


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

I still don't get why you continue service with a company you feel wronged you on a few levels. If I was so bent out of shape & "allegedly" dismissed from resolving the issues, then I'd pay the ETF and be done.


----------



## aa9vi (Sep 4, 2007)

It all started to really go downhill with Malone. Now that he is all but out of the picture I can't imagine it getting worse. 

things to work on:
1) Increasing rates every year regardless of increase in channels. To make matters worse airing hypocritical radio commercials calling Comcast unfair for increasing prices during these rough economic times and increasing prices on D* 3 months later. WOW. That is outrageous.

2) SLOOOOOOWWW hardware. How about getting a competent software team to make the code less bloated and speed up the reaction time of the boxes? I have an HR23-700 and attached AM21 and I am not exaggerating when I say it takes 2.5 seconds for the channel digit to appear on the screen when i am changing channels. Very poor. 

3) Poorly trained CSRs with no people skills to calm agitated callers. My favorite was the "I'm only a girl and I don't get why you guys are all upset about VS no longer being offered. Don't you guys have a life?" comment. I hope she was fired. 

4) Broken promises about channel additions and falling behind Dish/U-Verse/FIOS in HD offerings. I get the flyers from the competition and I wonder where are
a) the other HBO channels on Dish we don't get
b) the many other Cinemax channels
c) the other HD channels many of you have listed before.


There's a start. I hope the new leadership changes the rotton Malone culture that had invaded a basically decent company.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

aa9vi said:


> It all started to really go downhill with Malone. Now that he is all but out of the picture I can't imagine it getting worse.
> 
> things to work on:
> 1) Increasing rates every year regardless of increase in channels. To make matters worse airing hypocritical radio commercials calling Comcast unfair for increasing prices during these rough economic times and increasing prices on D* 3 months later. WOW. That is outrageous.


...the same thing happens with every other provider. Rates go up. Plans for new products and services are always subject to change and not tied directly to rate increases.



aa9vi said:


> 2) SLOOOOOOWWW hardware. How about getting a competent software team to make the code less bloated and speed up the reaction time of the boxes? I have an HR23-700 and attached AM21 and I am not exaggerating when I say it takes 2.5 seconds for the channel digit to appear on the screen when i am changing channels. Very poor.


...HR24's take care of that problem.



aa9vi said:


> 3) Poorly trained CSRs with no people skills to calm agitated callers. My favorite was the "I'm only a girl and I don't get why you guys are all upset about VS no longer being offered. Don't you guys have a life?" comment. I hope she was fired.


I sincerely doubt that this conversation ever took place.



aa9vi said:


> 4) Broken promises about channel additions and falling behind Dish/U-Verse/FIOS in HD offerings. I get the flyers from the competition and I wonder where are
> a) the other HBO channels on Dish we don't get
> b) the many other Cinemax channels
> c) the other HD channels many of you have listed before.
> ...


There were no broken promises. Any and all plans/announcements regarding new services, products, or channels are subject to change. That's the way it has always been and will always be. Check with any other provider in the country since the first cable company appeared...par for the course.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

susanandmark said:


> And, again, two points ... 1) I never "agreed" to any contract with DirecTV by doing anything other than being their customer. I never signed or even intialed anything, at any time. (I've been a customer for 12 years, long before "contracts.") "Contracts" that are entered into by the simple act of NOT doing something (i.e. opening a box, clicking on a website, entering a building, not canceling your service, etc.) are just highly questionable (and it's not only DirecTV that does this, obviously). Courts have backed this up when unreasonable assertions have been made.
> 
> The other laughable point with DirecTV is you can't even cancel your service because you don't agree with the contract, because, in their eyes, having service in the first place obligates you to their contract. It's a snake eating it's own tail. (The only way out of the contract is canceling, but you can't cancel, because you have a contract.)
> 
> ...


1. Yes you do have a contract and I started in 1996, there was a contract at that time also
2. If the contract in any way shape or form is financially binding, I read each and every line and ask questions about what I do not understand. If the contract is large enough I have my lawyer review it. The arguement of no one but yourself to blame does hold water for the simple reason you agreed to something and you had no idea what you where agreeing to.


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> 1. Yes you do have a contract and I started in 1996, there was a contract at that time also
> 2. If the contract in any way shape or form is financially binding, I read each and every line and ask questions about what I do not understand. If the contract is large enough I have my lawyer review it. The arguement of no one but yourself to blame does hold water for the simple reason you agreed to something and you had no idea what you where agreeing to.


Dude:

I sounds like you have never rented a car or gotten medical treatment in modern America.

Maybe you should research "contracts of adhesion" before you give out free legal advice on the internet.


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

aa9vi said:


> It all started to really go downhill with Malone. Now that he is all but out of the picture I can't imagine it getting worse.
> 
> things to work on:
> 1) Increasing rates every year regardless of increase in channels. To make matters worse airing hypocritical radio commercials calling Comcast unfair for increasing prices during these rough economic times and increasing prices on D* 3 months later. WOW. That is outrageous.
> ...


As a long time customer (10+ years) I feel your pain. I also do not doubt your CSR story. I have a had at least one very unpleasant experience as well.

I just got a brand new Tivo HD for $150. I will see what the grass looks like on the other side of the fence pretty shortly. May be worse, may be better, but It's time for me to take a look around.

Comcast in SF has both AMC and IFC in HD!


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

Nicholsen said:


> Comcast in SF has both AMC and IFC in HD!


...via the Comcast compression scheme. Good luck with that.


----------



## bobcamp1 (Nov 8, 2007)

Ed Campbell said:


> You entered into a contract when you paid your bill. Your payment is your receipt.
> 
> BYW - I don't find it difficult to read any contract I'm about to agree/disagree with. For the same reason I read labels on the food I buy. I owe it to myself and my family to take that responsibility.


Ed,

Did you know that you owe me $500? By entering that grocery store and buying food, you clearly entered into a contract with me. Everyone who enters the store must buy $2000 in groceries before they leave or I'll charge a fee. You didn't know you were entering a contract with me? Prove it. Like D*, I don't actually have to produce a copy of an actual signed contract. And like D*, I tell all grocery stores and clerks that they are required to display or show you my contract. So it can't possibly be their fault.

Besides, it's clearly your fault! You didn't search the store for such a contract or ask the manager about it. If you had, you would have known about it. Everyone else does. Just ask "susanandmark".

By the way, you can't return the food now and void the contract. Even if the food was spoiled. It says so right in the contract you didn't bother to read.

If you don't pay me $500, I'll be sending bill collectors after you. Oh wait, you once paid by credit card, I'll just charge that someday without telling you first.

Don't bother looking for the contract the next time you go grocery shopping. I'll be changing it next month anyway.


----------



## JeffBowser (Dec 21, 2006)

Well, my question was ignored, fair enough. It was probably covered pages ago.

It's a fool's errand to argue pro-DirecTV business practices and contracts. It's also a fool's errand to try to make a case that you don't know about lease models and 2 year extensions. Both sides of this have gotten beyond logic and are waaay off into emotions now.

DirecTV needs to shape up their customer service. In reality, it's not likely to change, unless one of these pending lawsuits gains real traction.
Also, reality is, there will continue to be people who get unhinged over this, and over any suggestion that they had any personal responsibility in the situation at all. That also is something that is not likely to change, given current cultural mores.


----------



## ehilbert1 (Jan 23, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...the same thing happens with every other provider. Rates go up. Plans for new products and services are always subject to change and not tied directly to rate increases.


Thats true. If you would have read the whole thing you would see what he really ment. He states that DirecTV puts down a company for rasing rates "during these hard economic times" and does the same thing 3 monthes later. Thats pretty lame.



Hoosier205 said:


> ....HR24's take care of that problem.


Ok tell us all where we can get HR24's right now? They won't be widely avalible for monthes.This problem has been around for a while and its really annoying.



Hoosier205 said:


> ....I sincerely doubt that this conversation ever took place.


What gives you the right to call him a lier? You don't know him. You have no idea what some of these idiot reps have said. I've only had one problem with them, but let me tell you it was pretty bad.



Hoosier205 said:


> ....There were no broken promises. Any and all plans/announcements regarding new services, products, or channels are subject to change. That's the way it has always been and will always be. Check with any other provider in the country since the first cable company appeared...par for the course.


This I agree with you, but come on it's been a little while since we've seen some real channels added. Plus the fact that they want to charge us $3 for MRV. Talk about nicke and diming people. I get it that your a DirecTV fan. I am too, but don't sit there and act like they don't have faults. I understand they have faults and I deal with it. For you to call the poster a lier is total crap and you know it. Grow up man!


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

bobcamp1 said:


> Ed,
> 
> Did you know that you owe me $500? By entering that grocery store and buying food, you clearly entered into a contract with me. Everyone who enters the store must buy $2000 in groceries before they leave or I'll charge a fee. You didn't know you were entering a contract with me? Prove it. Like D*, I don't actually have to produce a copy of an actual signed contract. And like D*, I tell all grocery stores and clerks that they are required to display or show you my contract. So it can't possibly be their fault.
> 
> ...


Epic FAIL with that analogy.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

ehilbert1 said:


> Thats true. If you would have read the whole thing you would see what he really ment. He states that DirecTV puts down a company for rasing rates "during these hard economic times" and does the same thing 3 monthes later. Thats pretty lame.
> 
> Ok tell us all where we can get HR24's right now? They won't be widely avalible for monthes.This problem has been around for a while and its really annoying.
> 
> ...


I never used the word liar.


----------



## ehilbert1 (Jan 23, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> I never used the word liar.


You said you doubted the conversation ever happened. What else could you be calling him then? Again..... Grow up!


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Nicholsen said:


> Dude:
> 
> I sounds like you have never rented a car or gotten medical treatment in modern America.
> 
> Maybe you should research "contracts of adhesion" before you give out free legal advice on the internet.


have never done anything but lease a car, better ROI for me since I ditch then ever 10 months. Rent 10 or 20 times a month depending on how my travel schedule goes, sometimes it is smarter (and a lot safer in europe/middle east) to take cabs then deal with rented cars.

What "free legal advice" sorry but don't make invalid assumptions from your own suppositions. It is not "free legal advice" to state it is the end users repsonsiblity to review and legally binding financial contract, just common sense.

Would be extremely interested to see how you claim this fits the Directv contract fits in to what you are claiming, care to document and prove how it does?


----------



## Nicholsen (Aug 18, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> ...via the Comcast compression scheme. Good luck with that.


I suspect that, even with compression, it will still look a lot better than the SD picture I am getting get now. Just a wild guess on my part. 

Is AMC or IFC going to be in HD when the new HD channels light up on D*. :nono2: Why not?


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

ehilbert1 said:


> You said you doubted the conversation ever happened. What else could you be calling him then? Again..... Grow up!


He could also be delusional, confused, mistaken, concussed, and on, and on, and on.

I never said he was lying. I simply doubt that particular conversation ever occurred or unfolded in that manner.


----------



## ehilbert1 (Jan 23, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> He could also be delusional, confused, mistaken, concussed, and on, and on, and on.
> 
> I never said he was lying. I simply doubt that particular conversation ever occurred or unfolded in that manner.


I see below your avatar that it says DirecTV apologist. There are two things I hate on this board. People that bash DirecTV just because and people that think DirecTV can do know wrong(Like yourself). By the way the same could be said for you. You could also be delusional, confused, mistaken, concussed, and on, and on, and on. It's just sad you can't admit that you did call him a liar without saying the words. Things like the one he mentioned does happen. Not very much, but it does happen. You might want to take off your DirecTV blinders. Also remember it's just a service man. It's not life or death. You don't have to fight for DirecTV's honor. You don't have to call a person a liar either. Thats what you did, your just no man enough to admit it.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

OK .. Let's get back to talking about the crappy DIRECTV service and stop talking about each other .. Please play nice.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

susanandmark said:


> ....
> And, at some point, ALL my boxes, including those purchased before the "lease" model, were changed to "leased" on my DirecTV bill one month, out of the blue ... By "accident" I'm sure, though I've never been able to have it corrected, despite multiple phone calls. (The fact that I'll have no use for any equipment--and previously just gave old equipment to Goodwill--is why I just gave up on that one.)
> ....





susanandmark said:


> I CAN'T LEAVE, DIRECTV HAS ME LOCKED INTO A BOGUS CONTRACT, for either a non-existant receiver I activated in 2008 (I didn't, and they can't/won't tell me WHICH receiver or even show that the number of receivers I have changed; because it didn't since April 2007) or a $5 off for six-months promotion I did get, but didn't ask for, or a programming change in 2008 (which never occurred). They can't decide which of the three it might be, so they just cut off communications.


These two excerpts intrigue me. Neither is how DIRECTV "wants" to do business as far as I can tell from all my dealings with them. You have not been treated as a good customer should be.

So I completely understand your anger. I would be too. Owned flipped to leased and a "new" box suddenly committing you to an extension.

Did you have a box fail and get replaced? That could cause things to happen; some correctly or some incorrectly.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

True. Since they came out with Mpeg4 receivers and DVRs, they charge you for the box up front, and then $5 a month, and no matter how long you use it, or how good you take care of it, its never yours. Everything else I am aware of, like cars and cell phones, have an option to either pay to own after the lease, or just plain own it. You really have to dig deep to find a DirecTv mpeg4 box you can own, or pay $450 for a HR21PRO, which is the only box they DONT lease.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Davenlr said:


> True. Since they came out with Mpeg4 receivers and DVRs, they charge you for the box up front, and then $5 a month, and no matter how long you use it, or how good you take care of it, its never yours. Everything else I am aware of, like cars and cell phones, have an option to either pay to own after the lease, or just plain own it. You really have to dig deep to find a DirecTv mpeg4 box you can own, or pay $450 for a HR21PRO, which is the only box they DONT lease.


It's a very common misconception that the $5 a month is for the box itself. It is not. It is for the programming to be mirrored to that box. I will admit they way they label it on the bill is about as piss poor as it can get though.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Thats true, its $5 for each extra box regardless if its a lease or own, but the fact that they dont depreciate it to the point where you own it, is a little unfair.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Davenlr said:


> Thats true, its $5 for each extra box regardless if its a lease or own, but the fact that they dont depreciate it to the point where you own it, is a little unfair.


Only if they depreciated it enough to where they would never cover it for fault either though. Right now even a leased receiver that they no install are still covered even if they don't want them back.

Still not sure why this thread is still going unless it gets renamed somehow to be relevant. It's already been established that DirecTV is a national company and only has 1 BBB entry from CA based on where it's HQ is. It's been established that companies like Comcast get an A even though they get rated the worst customer service. The BBB's system is a profit generating model and not something that is done for consumer benefit. With over 18.7 million customers a 36k complaint is actually good. BBB rates them because them an F because they don't conform to the BBB system and pay to be a member.

Love, like, or hate DirecTV, or any company for that matter, the BBB rating system is a pile of garbage for seeing how a company really operates when they're this large. Checking out your local guys sure it might help as well as a call to your local chamber of commerce to check complaints. Other than that it's a waste of time.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Hoosier205 said:


> There were no broken promises. Any and all plans/announcements regarding new services, products, or channels are subject to change. That's the way it has always been and will always be. Check with any other provider in the country since the first cable company appeared...par for the course.


We were told many times we would not loose any HD channels with the new roll out a couple years ago. As soon as they were done, they created a "new service" HDExtraPack to get the same channels we LOST back.

There has been many times I can remember in our years with D where what they said and what they did were two very different things.


----------



## BillyT2002 (Oct 19, 2002)

I don't get it. I haven't had bad customer service from DirecTV in several years.

It's really quite simple. When you call the DirecTV number at 800-DIR-ECTV and the automated attendant asks you why you are calling, all you need to do is say "I want to cancel my service." She will say back "Do you want to cancel your service?" Then, all you need to do is just say "Yes."

I have been doing just this, every time I call DirecTV, for years now and I have never got anyone who didn't speak English and wasn't at least semi-knowledgeable about the DirecTV service and the question I was asking at the time.

Since using this technique, I have never been dissatisfied with a call to DirecTV.

People might say "Well your lying to DirecTV about why you are calling in." My answer to this is why does it matter? Each persons morality about these sorts of things is subjective and mine is on the side of ensuring I get a good experience every time I call them. I really don't care about the morality of what I'm doing here. If you were to push the issue, the bottom line for me is "I'm not lying to DirecTV. I'm fully intending at that moment in time to cancel my service. I'm just changing my mind about it right before the retention group - more knowledgeable and English speaking - CSR answers the phone. Then, I'm asking a different question so as not to appear stupid." If you care enough to push the issue even further then the onus is on you to prove that I'm lying to you (which might not be too difficult for you as the mere fact that I have written this last paragraph and admitted that I have no problem with telling a "little, white lie" to accomplish my own objectives, should be enough for you to prove it. The next problem for a person who wants to push me further would be to find some way to make me care).


----------



## oldfantom (Mar 13, 2006)

This thread should marry this thread in the Tivo forum....

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=217784&highlight=Leah+rimini

The threads that never die!


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

RobertE said:


> It's a very common misconception that the $5 a month is for the box itself. It is not. It is for the programming to be mirrored to that box. I will admit they way they label it on the bill is about as piss poor as it can get though.


It is a very common misperception that the $5 lease fee is the same as the $5 mirroring fee. They are different fees for different purposes. The $5 lease fee is for the box and the $5 mirroring fee is for programming. DirecTV has set up their policies so that the fees are the same amount and you are only charged one fee or the other, but that does not make them the same fee. DirecTV's customer agreements clearly identify them as different fees for different purposes.


----------



## Spike (Jul 4, 2007)

BillyT2002 said:


> The next problem for a person who wants to push me further would be to find some way to make me care).


ROFLOL

Hilarious!
:lol:


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

Upstream said:


> It is a very common misperception that the $5 lease fee is the same as the $5 mirroring fee. They are different fees for different purposes. The $5 lease fee is for the box and the $5 mirroring fee is for programming. DirecTV has set up their policies so that the fees are the same amount and you are only charged one fee or the other, but that does not make them the same fee. DirecTV's customer agreements clearly identify them as different fees for different purposes.


by your statement they should be charging the lease users an extra 5 for mirroring then. Seem to remember that lease fee is subject to tax and a mirror fee is not


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> by your statement they should be charging the lease users an extra 5 for mirroring then. Seem to remember that lease fee is subject to tax and a mirror fee is not


DirecTV's customer agreement says that you are not subject to the extra programming mirroring fee ("Additional Receiver Authorization Fee") if you have leased equipment, and instead pay the lease fee:

Up to $5.00 Additional TV Authorization Fee in connection with obtaining Service on each additional TV connected to Receiving Equipment you own, provided you meet the qualifications specified in Section 1(f) and the Receiving Equipment is located at your residence. Customers with leased Receiving Equipment do not pay this fee, but pay the Lease Fee specified in the Equipment Lease Addendum.​
And in some states, the lease fee is subject to sales tax because it is for a taxable product, while the mirroring fee is not subject to sales tax because it is for a nontaxable service.


----------



## raoul5788 (May 14, 2006)

wingrider01 said:


> by your statement they should be charging the lease users an extra 5 for mirroring then. Seem to remember that lease fee is subject to tax and a mirror fee is not


It isn't a lease fee, it's a mirroring fee for a leased receiver/dvr.
IIRC, a mirroring fee on a leased receiver/dvr is taxed, but on an owned one it's not, or something like that.


----------



## Upstream (Jul 4, 2006)

raoul5788 said:


> It isn't a lease fee, it's a mirroring fee for a leased receiver/dvr.
> IIRC, a mirroring fee on a leased receiver/dvr is taxed, but on an owned one it's not, or something like that.


See posts #221 and #224


----------



## susanandmark (Feb 15, 2007)

Shades228 said:


> It's already been established [sic] that DirecTV is a national company and only has 1 BBB entry from CA based on where it's HQ is. It's been established that companies like Comcast get an A even though they get rated the worst customer service. The BBB's system is a profit generating model and not something that is done for consumer benefit. With over 18.7 million customers a 36k complaint is actually good. BBB rates them because them an F because they don't conform to the BBB system and pay to be a member.
> 
> Love, like, or hate DirecTV, or any company for that matter, the BBB rating system is a pile of garbage for seeing how a company really operates when they're this large.


Funny how when DirecTV gets an "F" from the Better Business Bureau, which by the way is a non profit entity that, love them or hate them, have done a lot of good for the American consumer over the last 50 years, it's because the BBB is bad. But, when they get a high customer service rating from, say, J.D. Powers (a for-profit survey company), that's highly touted by DirecTV and proof of their superior business model.

It's fairly typical for people to think those reviews that reflect their own opinions are accurate and those that disagree are flawed in some way or other.

National companies SHOULD have only one BBB entry, as their business/service is the same, nationally (versus, say, a chain store with different outlets in every city). That in no way makes any comments/rating less valid. (DirecTV service is the same, nationwide, with the exact same offerings, equipment, picture and service centers.) And, as for the conspiracy theory that only BBB member companies are highly rated, well, sorry, but that's patently false and a quick scan of any BBB office's ratings would quickly reveal that. Yes, there is a membership fee, but that's mostly to allow companies the option of publicly promoting their (good) BBB rating using the BBB's logo. Not saying such things never happen in non-profits, but by their own standards, the BBB wouldn't even let DirecTV pay for membership with their current standing, which reflects a lack of unanswered complaints. One can argue about the validity of the complaints (which we don't even know), but it's hard to dispute the fact that the company has flat out ignored its own customers, since the proof is right in the file.

And no matter WHAT you think of the BBB, no one is writing letters to this organization without being pretty ticked off about something and trying very hard to get it fixed, usually over a long period of time, with the company directly. The BBB is a stop of last resort for most consumers.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

susanandmark said:


> Funny how when DirecTV gets an "F" from the Better Business Bureau, which by the way is a non profit entity that, love them or hate them, have done a lot of good for the American consumer over the last 50 years, it's because the BBB is bad. But, when they get a high customer service rating from, say, J.D. Powers (a for profit survey company), that's highly touted by DirecTV and proof of their superior business model.
> 
> It's fairly typical for people to think those reviews that reflect their own opinions are accurate and those that disagree are flawed in some way or other.


The fact that DIRECTV got an 'F' despite responding to all but a handful (<50) of the complaints is a bit suspicious.









*Source*: http://www.la.bbb.org/Business-Report/DirecTV-Inc-81000357

Let's realize first that this is 39,000 complaints out of 18,000,000 subscribers or a BBB complaint rate of 0.22% .. Less thane 1/4 of 1% of DIRECTV subscribers feel a need to even talk to the BBB.

Looks like slightly more than half required adjustment either in bill or in practice while the other half found DIRECTV to be performing correctly based on contract terms.

Even if it's bad because more than 50 percent should have been "fixed," it just doesn't makes sense that it's an 'F' .. Almost every single complaint was addressed. It seems as if at a minimum it should be a 'D' because some effort was made regarding each complaint, but perhaps 'D' because folks didn't like the response that was received.

Either way, it's a nice sound bite to say that DIRECTV received an 'F' from the BBB. I just don't think it's truly representative of the companies performance. DIRECTV certainly has areas in which they need to improve. I believe they have improved over the last 3-4 years in these areas and that there is more work to be done, but this story and this rating really don't seem to be telling the whole truth.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

DirecTv also fails to follow their own policy...Per the Terms of Service I received in the mail yesterday:


> (2) Up to $300 Access Card Replacement Fee, if you lose or fail to return your Access Card (a partial credit may be posted to your account if the Access Card is later returned). If you request overnight delivery of a replacement Access Card, a shipping and handling fee of up to $16.50 applies.


Today I called to get a new access card for a owned receiver I bought from an individual. The access card department refused to send it overnight. When I brought up their TOS, the CSR asked her supervisor who told her to tell me, yes, I could order it overnight, but it would take 3 days to get approval to do so. Give me a frickin break here. If it suits DirecTv, it will be enforced. If it suits you, forget it, they will come up with an excuse every time.

Edit: Or as Dougs statistics above point out, and 50% of the time. Personally, I dont have time to file a complain with the BBB because DirecTv failed to follow their own TOS. I see 15,321 people found the time to make them abide by it.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> Funny how when DirecTV gets an "F" from the Better Business Bureau, which by the way is a non profit entity that, love them or hate them, have done a lot of good for the American consumer over the last 50 years, it's because the BBB is bad. But, when they get a high customer service rating from, say, J.D. Powers (a for-profit survey company), that's highly touted by DirecTV and proof of their superior business model.
> 
> It's fairly typical for people to think those reviews that reflect their own opinions are accurate and those that disagree are flawed in some way or other.
> 
> ...


You've mentioned before in which month your current contract will expire. What are you plans then?


----------



## Beerstalker (Feb 9, 2009)

Doesn't sound wrong to me Dave. The quote you put up says replacement access card, meaning if one of your exisitng receivers had a problem with the access card they would send one out overnight to make sure you wouldn't be without programming.

You are trying to order an additional access card, which is not what that quote is talking about.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Hoosier205 said:


> You've mentioned before in which month your current contract will expire. What are you plans then?


You know, you can love a product and hate the customer support for it.
You can love the customer support but hate the product.

Personally, Id choose to keep DirecTv for the product, but that doesnt mean I have to love the hoops and hassles of calling in for anything.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

Beerstalker said:


> Doesn't sound wrong to me Dave. The quote you put up says replacement access card, meaning if one of your exisitng receivers had a problem with the access card they would send one out overnight to make sure you wouldn't be without programming.
> 
> You are trying to order an additional access card, which is not what that quote is talking about.


Its a replacement access card. The one in the receiver could not be reauthorized. Error 726.
The section in the TOS for obtaining a card references the section I quoted above. No other references are made to access cards in the TOS.

From my bill:


> 05/06/2010 PXXXXXXX0014 Access Card Replacement - Charge $20.00 $1.20


----------



## bills976 (Jun 30, 2002)

Davenlr said:


> You know, you can love a product and hate the customer support for it.
> You can love the customer support but hate the product.
> 
> Personally, Id choose to keep DirecTv for the product, but that doesnt mean I have to love the hoops and hassles of calling in for anything.


This may be the best post on this board that I've seen in years.

I love DirecTV's product... but their frontline CSR staff is extremely spotty and their terms & conditions are extremely lopsided in favor of them. The company's business practices also leave a lot to be desired, but that's just my opinion.

It's actually the complete reverse of Comcast (at least in this area). Their TV product is awful but I've had very good luck with their locally based CSRs when it comes to resolving issues with my internet service.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

bills976 said:


> It's actually the complete reverse of Comcast (at least in this area). Their TV product is awful but I've had very good luck with their locally based CSRs when it comes to resolving issues with my internet service.


+1. Always got great customer service from Comcast. Their TV product just sucks here tho.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

susanandmark said:


> Funny how when DirecTV gets an "F" from the Better Business Bureau, which by the way is a non profit entity that, love them or hate them, have done a lot of good for the American consumer over the last 50 years, it's because the BBB is bad. But, when they get a high customer service rating from, say, J.D. Powers (a for-profit survey company), that's highly touted by DirecTV and proof of their superior business model.
> 
> It's fairly typical for people to think those reviews that reflect their own opinions are accurate and those that disagree are flawed in some way or other.
> 
> ...


So because it's a non profit organization it doesn't have it's own agenda? That's not true at all. All an NPO means is that it does not share it's surplus of funds outside of the organization and uses it to further itself. It does not mean that they are not in business to make money. The BBB has done nothing for me for my lifetime so to say it's helped the american consumer is a bit of an overstatement. The BBB may or may not be something useful to each person. I would say if it was truly a work horse of the american consumer there would be hundreds of thousands of complaints on many companies.

Your last statement is very incorrect actually. I do know what type of complaints for companies go through the BBB. I have dealt with these complaints for multiple companies. To say that people use it as a last resort is also factually incorrect. Many people use the AG and BBB to get to escalated departments for even mundane requests. I could get into the numbers but Doug already did so very succinctly already.

You have 1 organization giving them an F and the page with that rating has conflicting information. They say complaints are about deceptive marketing and yet on the right it says "No questions about the truth of this company's advertising has come to our attention. ". The reason for the ratings are for Unanswered Complaints and Government Action. They have 1 Unanswered and the BBB gives Dish a C because of Government Action. So 1 unanswered complaint makes you go from a C to an F.

I would say that you should read some of the complaints as well but it's clear you have an axe to grind anyways. The bottom line is most of those complaints are without merit. There are some valid issues on there but overall most of them are not.

Let's also not ignore the ability to tag someone's complaint as funny. Clearly a company serious about consumer advocation would allow someone else to say that a customers complaint is funny.


----------



## CorpITGuy (Apr 12, 2007)

BBB closed a complaint of mine with AT&T that was *never* resolved. AT&T was clearly in violation of their TOS. They just happened to know that the amount in question wasn't enough for me to sue over.... so they could brush me off. And, their buddies at the BBB are anxious to close every single case. If they can't say they "resolve" issues, why should a company pay to be a member?

If anything, this reflects even BETTER on D* than they might deserve.

I second everything *Davenlr* said. Great service, sucky support. I choose to stay with them, because *everyone* has sucky support these days. They know we have no other choice... Dish support is awful, Charter (local TV) support is awful AND their service is terrible.

Excellent customer service is a rarity these days. D* has improved, but let's face it, they have NO intention of becoming an A+ company, because that would destroy their bottom line. Investors don't like that.

The rest of us just make a values judgement... "is putting up with this worth it?" In my case, absolutely.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Can someone please tell what the point of this thread is? 

Who in the hell cares if DirecTV gets an "F"? I personally do not care one bit how the BBB rates D* because the experiences and complaints of others simply do not matter to me. I am very happy with what I get from D* and the sevice I have recieved since becoming a sub.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

SPACEMAKER said:


> Who in the hell cares if DirecTV gets an "F"? I personally do not care one bit how the BBB rates D* because the experiences and complaints of others simply do not matter to me.


OK, that is certainly your privilege. Others obviously do care and have just as much right to express their opinion as you. Well, unless heretics and infidels don't have the same rights as true believers.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

SPACEMAKER said:


> Can someone please tell what the point of this thread is?


People like to vent .. this is a great place to do that. It really is OK.

My personal opinion on DIRECTV service is that I am very satisfied. I have had a few interactions with CSRs over the year that are undesirable. I've had even more interactions with CSRs in which service was (IMHO) way above what I would be satisfactory service. Most of my calls fall in the middle in which they are neither bad nor good, so the bottom line is that the good outweighs the bad and I am (as a result) more than satisfied with DIRECTV's customer service.

I'm also not the type of person that will let one single CSR ruin my experience. If I find that a CSR to be unacceptable, my course of action would be to end the call and then call back at a later time. I've done this maybe once or twice since I started DIRECTV in 1996.

My worst experience with CSRs was a period of time when it took extended periods of times to reach a CSR .. We're talking 30 minute waits each time you call in. This lasted perhaps a year, but was many years back now. Since that time I have found that DIRECTV's customer service has in fact gotten better year over year. I do call in from time to time to see what deals may be available for me from a programming perspective, but I don't watch it like a hawk and try to milk it for every single dime. I'm certainly not going to get angry if I call DIRECTV for a freebie and they decline. Disappointed perhaps, but not angry.

The bottom line for me is that DIRECTV has improved it's customer service. The fact that the BBB gives DIRECTV an 'F' just seems suspicious. I'd accept a 'D' (but disagree with it personally) .. an 'F' just seems like a blatant attempt to penalize a company that chooses to not pay the BBB any fees:


> This company is not accredited by the Better Business Bureau. This fact does not disparage the company in any way.


 Source.

They say that they don't factor in the fact that DIRECTV is not a member of the BBB .. yet DIRECTV gets an 'F' for one single unanswered complaint out of 39,000 complaints filed? :shrug:


----------



## papa_azteca (Jan 11, 2007)

susanandmark said:


> And no matter WHAT you think of the BBB, no one is writing letters to this organization without being pretty ticked off about something and trying very hard to get it fixed, usually over a long period of time, with the company directly. The BBB is a stop of last resort for most consumers.


Many years ago I worked for a regional cell phone company and one of my responsibilities was responding to the BBB complaints we had received. I did this for close to 3 years. I can assure that every complaint was an immediate response to customers' feeling that the were not taken care of and sent in within a few days of them calling in or visiting a store. We would hear "well, if I don't get it my way, I'm complaining to the BBB" as a threat on a daily basis. We had a standard response for it and the message was clear, "you do what feel you have to do". (that was not what we said but that is what we meant). Every complaint was always addressed in a timely manner but the majority of the time is was in favor of the company because there was proof that we operated correctly, mostly through signed contracts but mostly recorded calls and documented accounts. Most of the complaints would state that the customer was "misinformed" or "lied" to about this or that but when I researched it, it had to do with the customer not getting what they wanted or the customer's failure not to fully understand or read what they were agreeing to. There were many that stood out but the one that stands to this day was the complaint that came in about me.

The customer had renewed her contract over the internet for 2 different phones in Feb. She calls in 3 months later because apparently, when the order was placed, the numbers were mixed up and the phone she WANTED ended up programmed with her husband's number and vice versa. Instead of contacting us right away she dealt with it by her using the phone she wanted with her husband's phone number. She had enough of recieving her husband's calls and wanted to cancel, claiming that we did not hold our end of our contract. The order was entered in incorrectly by her over the internet and she agreed to the order vial electronic signature. And she never called to tell us about the mistake. Nonetheless, at the time the fix was simple: go into a retail store to get the numbers swapped as she wanted and my rep offered to waive the $25 fee on both of them to switch the numbers (something we did not have to do because it was not our fault). She refused. She wanted brand NEW phones for the mistake; HER MISTAKE. The call escalated to me and I refused. She wanted to cancel and I advised her of the early termination fee. She stated to me, on a recorded phone call, that she will not pay it. I offered to waive the $350 in early termination fees if she would return the phones (something that we would normally would not offer); if not I would charge the full retail prices of the phones in the total amount of $575. I also offered to send her pre-paid boxes so there would not be any additional cost to her. She wanted to keep the phones and refused to pay the $350. I cancelled her account and charged the $350 via her last payment method (DIRECTV was not the first to do this practice). Her complaint: she was not told that she was renewing her contract. So there wouldn't be conflict of interest, I let my partner address it and made sure that he included our manager and regional VP in every step and response. My partner sent our response to the BBB, which during the time, we were in negotiation for our dues with them. Their report to the customer: we failed to respond in a timely manner and the matter was going unresolved. How did I know? All unresolved manners and late responses are sent directly to our CEO, which in turn had be addressed by my manager and regional VP. Our proof was there that our response was submitted and returned WAY before the deadline. That's when I lost faith in the BBB.

I know this is long but I know many of those complaints to the BBB are immediate backlashes by customers that don't get their way. Customers need to come to the realization that just because you pay money to a company for the services that you agree to doesn't mean that you should get additional treatment. And if you ask for something and you're told "no" don't throw a temper tantrum about it. You don't like, leave, even if means paying to early cancellation fee. I would rather be done with a company than stay with them longer and complain, complain and complain because of how I was treated 8 months ago. Now, if you were wronged, sure address it. Make the company provides the proof. But if the proof is there in your favor and it's still not addressed, file the complaint with the CEO. DIRECTV has always responsded to complaints that are directed to the CEOs. However, that doesn't always mean that you will get your way.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

Barry in Conyers said:


> OK, that is certainly your privilege. Others obviously do care and have just as much right to express their opinion as you. Well, unless heretics and infidels don't have the same rights as true believers.


:lol: I don't quite know where to go with this. That creepy last sentence has thrown me a bit.

But my point is, why is this "F" rating such a big deal? Anyone with even the smallest amount of intelligence and/or common sense can clearly see that an "F" rating is beyond ridiculous considering the tiny percentage of complaints filed in relation to the number of customers. And I would be willing to bet that a large percentage of the claims filed were by people who failed to read their contract.

The one thing I did learn by looking through this thread is that the BBB's ratings really don't mean much.


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

SPACEMAKER said:


> :lol: I don't quite know where to go with this. That creepy last sentence has thrown me a bit.
> 
> But my point is, why is this "F" rating such a big deal? Anyone with even the smallest amount of intelligence and/or common sense can clearly see that an "F" rating is beyond ridiculous considering the tiny percentage of complaints filed in relation to the number of customers. And I would be willing to bet that a large percentage of the claims filed were by people who failed to read their contract.
> 
> The one thing I did learn by looking through this thread is that the BBB's ratings really don't mean much.


The *F* stands for *F*orgot to pay the BBB their extortion money.


----------



## dubber deux (Mar 8, 2009)

*

Fact is that you CAN gauge the worthiness of a business according to the BBB ratings..and from what I have experienced those BBB ratings are SPOT on!*


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

dubber deux said:


> *
> 
> Fact is that you CAN gauge the worthiness of a business according to the BBB ratings..and from what I have experienced those BBB ratings are SPOT on!*


I'd give DIRECTV an 'A' but would be equally satisfied in my response if I gave them a 'B+' .. BBB says they have an 'F' .. So In my estimation on this sample size of one .. The BBB is definitely NOT "SPOT on!"

Just like every other entity in the world, the BBB is not (and will never be) 100% right 100% of the time.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

dubber deux said:


> *
> 
> Fact is that you CAN gauge the worthiness of a business according to the BBB ratings..and from what I have experienced those BBB ratings are SPOT on!*


/rofl spot on? Not in a million years. Have dealt with a number of companies that the BBB have given a poor rating, personal expierence is that those companies gave tremendous service.

Cs is in the eye of the beholder - get what you want on one call and the company is the best thing since sliced bread, turn around and be told no the next time you call and the company is the wrst thing in the world, the spawn of the devil and complain to the toothless BBB, they send a letter, if the company responds great, if they don't, which happens often since the BBB cannot do a darn thing about it, and they give the company a downcheck.

Funny that the companies that actually donate to the BBB seem to never be in the bad company list.


----------



## SPACEMAKER (Dec 11, 2007)

dubber deux said:


> *
> 
> Fact is that you CAN gauge the worthiness of a business according to the BBB ratings..and from what I have experienced those BBB ratings are SPOT on!*


Wow. :lol:


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

SPACEMAKER said:


> Wow. :lol:


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Since this topic arose in another thread, and I *****ed to get that thread back on topic, I'll continue the argument here.

As a client of the BBB, I found them no paragons of virtue. I joined the BBB one year in my stereo store. I wanted to demonstrate to customers that we took care of them, and thought a BBB membership sticker on the glass by the front door would help. Dealing with them from the inside was very disillusioning. Beyond of a great mediation service they had for members, and one we never had to use, I found them an aggressive, sales driven organization. And funny, even though we had no complaints or even any positive remarks from customers, the fact that we were a member gave us their top rating. Imagine that.

Worse was when I decided not to re-up the next year. They insisted we razor blade the sticker off the glass. Fair enough if a bit strident. Worse was the threat that if we did have a complaint, it would might not go well for us because we were no longer a member. At the time I blamed that on the young, inexperienced salesperson who called on me from the BBB. Whatever the reason, the implication sure hit me wrong. I've run away from them ever since.


----------



## ranmic (Jun 12, 2010)

BBB in my experience will only make you look bad if you are not or no longer a member. I filed a complaint against a company a couple of years ago and while the company was a non-BBB member their rating dropped. I still got not resolution from the company and after a couple of months I saw they had become a member and their rating went from a D to a B+. I lost a ton of respect for them after that.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

An interesting read about the BBB and how you can get an A rating, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/business-bureau-best-ratings-money-buy/story?id=12123843



> The Better Business Bureau, one of the country's best known consumer watchdog groups, is being accused by business owners of running a "pay for play" scheme in which A plus ratings are awarded to those who pay membership fees, and F ratings used to punish those who don't.
> 
> To prove the point, a group of Los Angeles business owners paid $425 to the Better Business Bureau and were able to obtain an A minus grade for a non-existent company called Hamas, named after the Middle Eastern terror group.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

RAD said:


> An interesting read about the BBB and how you can get an A rating, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/business-bureau-best-ratings-money-buy/story?id=12123843


A shakedown outfit..............nice, if true.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

On the local ABC news they showed in the story a woman in LA that had a C+ rating due to an complaint, which had been resolved to the consumers satisfaction. BBB said that even though it was cleared up the only way she could get an A was to pay to be a member, which she did, the next day the web site showed an A rating. Wolfgang Puck was also interviewed about being told to pay a membership to get a better rating.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

RAD said:


> An interesting read about the BBB and how you can get an A rating, http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/business-bureau-best-ratings-money-buy/story?id=12123843


Maybe with all their "mistakes" the BBB should give themselves an "F".


----------



## JackBauer112 (Aug 16, 2010)

I can see with E*'s programming issues and D*'s major sub increase, the grades will definitely change within a year that D* gets a B+ and E* gets a D or F. D* deserves a A-B rating and be in the BBB bureau members.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

RAD said:


> On the local ABC news they showed in the story a woman in LA that had a C+ rating due to an complaint, which had been resolved to the consumers satisfaction. BBB said that even though it was cleared up the only way she could get an A was to pay to be a member, which she did, the next day the web site showed an A rating. Wolfgang Puck was also interviewed about being told to pay a membership to get a better rating.


find it interesting that people are still suprised by the BBB tactics for their "ratings"


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

wingrider01 said:


> find it interesting that people are still suprised by the BBB tactics for their "ratings"


I was disappointed and surprised when this thread started--seemingly 5 years ago. 

At that point I had no idea. And think it BBB should be spanked for that type of extortion.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Barcthespark said:


> Yikes!
> 
> http://www.tvpredictions.com/dbbb011210.htm


According to latest news making the national airwaves, a non-paying members get a 'F' for one complaint, but an organization like the terrorists group *Hamas* get a 'A+' when their annual $425 fee is paid.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

20/20 tonight has a whole BBB devoted show.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

TBlazer07 said:


> 20/20 tonight has a whole BBB devoted show.


Thanks .. just set it to record.

As far as I know, DIRECTV doesn't pay the BBB to be a member and DISH does. Certainly the raw numbers from BBB don't line up with an 'F' if the system were legit. I don't think it would show an 'A' either so no need for folks to get up in arms, but with virtually all issues addressed to a conclusion (by BBB's own numbers), how can you give them a Fail. It's just a racket.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Only 10 minutes in and it's great to see ABC expose what a sham the BBB is. :lol: Slime balls.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Yeah, it was a relatively short segment, but the BBB definitely looks like a racket after that clip.

The most telling was the one lady with a single complaint that has been resolved .. She asks to have it removed and they tell her .. sure, pay and we will. She does and they do.

I certainly don't trust their ratings because they are somewhat nonsensical. Wolfgang Puck has an 'F' :shrug: .. No way. I've been to a Puck restaurant and even if the littlest thing goes wrong, they work to make it right. He simply refuses to pay the extortion.


----------



## Barcthespark (Dec 16, 2007)

When I started this thread I had no idea that the BBB operates this way. They've been around forever and I always assumed they were on the up-and-up.

I didn't get to see the ABC piece but I did read about it on consumerist.com. 
http://consumerist.com/2010/11/ag-s...rthy-after-bbb-gives-a--to-hamas.html#_logout


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

I give the BBB an "FFF" for Frequently & Fraudulently Falsifying their ratings!


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

Barcthespark said:


> When I started this thread I had no idea that the BBB operates this way. They've been around forever and I always assumed they were on the up-and-up.
> 
> I didn't get to see the ABC piece but I did read about it on consumerist.com.
> http://consumerist.com/2010/11/ag-s...rthy-after-bbb-gives-a--to-hamas.html#_logout


It's simple to just remind yourself that no organization or person ever does anything with getting something out of it. Kind acts make people who do them feel better. Organizations, even those "for the people" and charities are there to make money. The BBB has always been a scam but before the information age it was harder for people to get that information out there.


----------



## kcaudiofx (Dec 27, 2009)

rkr0923 said:


> BBB only grades with the complants they receive......not surprised D* gets a F


+2

Review sites stink these days and always have.. A good percentage of us civilians only take the time to post their experience with a company when its a bad experience.. Yes, people do take the time if its a great experience but very rare..


----------



## kcaudiofx (Dec 27, 2009)

Doug Brott said:


> Yeah, it was a relatively short segment, but the BBB definitely looks like a racket after that clip.
> 
> The most telling was the one lady with a single complaint that has been resolved .. She asks to have it removed and they tell her .. sure, pay and we will. She does and they do.
> 
> I certainly don't trust their ratings because they are somewhat nonsensical. Wolfgang Puck has an 'F' :shrug: .. No way. I've been to a Puck restaurant and even if the littlest thing goes wrong, they work to make it right. He simply refuses to pay the extortion.


Sounds about right, when I opened up my company 2.5 years ago, BBB wanted $399 from my to be put on there.. Crazy, no way in hell am I payin anything to be put on a review site.. I am on YELP for free and get business from there  Its always about the money.. crazy


----------



## ronsanjim (Mar 19, 2008)

The BBB rates an *F* for their extortion, lying, and overall fraudulent activities. Thank goodness they are under investigation by the various state Attorney Generals. Long overdue....


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Yeah, and again, I'm not claiming DIRECTV deserves an 'A' (although I personally would give them an 'A') .. It's just that 'F' doesn't even begin to make sense. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it should be no worse than a 'C-' but probably should really rate about a 'B-' when you take into account every little aspect.


----------



## SteveHas (Feb 7, 2007)

this makes NO sense what so ever
a "F"?
fraud?
lies?
who writes this crap, I mean really.
Comcast is better then D*
in what reality is this remotely true?
I would give D* a B+at the very least


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

BBB is just a Racket and this has been going on for years. It is like paying CNET.COM to give you a Great Review of your New Electronic Gadget.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

SteveHas said:


> in what reality is this remotely true?


For a few, D* has surprised them with stiff ETFs after commitments that they forgot about (or weren't told about) as well as the ever-popular failure to return equipment charge applied to their credit card without notice even after D* had received the equipment "in a timely manner".

Comcast doesn't have a "failure to activate receiver" charge.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

harsh said:


> For a few, D* has surprised them with stiff ETFs after commitments that they forgot about (or weren't told about) as well as the ever-popular failure to return equipment charge applied to their credit card without notice even after D* had received the equipment "in a timely manner".
> 
> Comcast doesn't have a "failure to activate receiver" charge.


These are some of the reasons why I can see a 'C-' possible. However, there's still 19 million customers that stick around with a large contingent not just satisfied, but extremely satisfied. It's the 'F' that doesn't make sense and now we know why it's there.


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

harsh said:


> For a few, D* has surprised them with stiff ETFs after commitments that they forgot about (or weren't told about) as well as the ever-popular failure to return equipment charge applied to their credit card without notice even after D* had received the equipment "in a timely manner".
> 
> Comcast doesn't have a "failure to activate receiver" charge.


Comcra... er, Comcast doesn't ship set top boxes to customers either.


----------



## LOCODUDE (Aug 8, 2007)

:up::up:This has been quite a good read......


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

harsh said:


> For a few, D* has surprised them with stiff ETFs after commitments that they forgot about (or weren't told about) as well as the ever-popular failure to return equipment charge applied to their credit card without notice even after D* had received the equipment "in a timely manner".
> 
> Comcast doesn't have a "failure to activate receiver" charge.


Explain this to me then.

Both DirecTv and Dish both have committment periods.
Both charge ETFs
Both charge non-return fees for leased equipment.
Dish goes so far as to charge a return shipping charge upon cancellation for leased receivers. DirecTv does not.

DirecTv who is not a "member" rates a "F"
Dish who is a "member" rates a "C"

Same types of complaints over the same issues. Yet the members gets a C and the non-member gets a F. No scam here.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I would give Directv a "B" and Dish a "C".


----------



## n3ntj (Dec 18, 2006)

I thought D* always says they have the highest rating for customer satisfaction year after year over E* and all cable companies.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

n3ntj said:


> I thought D* always says they have the highest rating for customer satisfaction year after year over E* and all cable companies.


They do, depending on the survey company.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

n3ntj said:


> I thought D* always says they have the highest rating for customer satisfaction year after year over E* and all cable companies.


J D Powers


----------



## DodgerKing (Apr 28, 2008)




----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


>


Awesomesauce!

- Merg


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

The BBB needs to be Investigated for Fraud by the FBI as they are a National Scam and have been for years and years.

It's all about the money.


----------



## smolenski (Oct 25, 2006)

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-18-worst-companies-in-america-2010-11?slop=1#slideshow-start

I got to say that my 15 years with DTV have been relatively good. I think I pay a little more than other cable and sat companies, but think it's worth the cost. I get a great picture, have had good customer service and love the "Cutting Edge" group. I've heard some complain about the technology, but for me it's just fine.

The ASCI website has drilled down info that shows all subscription TV companies close in the ratings.

http://www.theacsi.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=18&Itemid=33


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RobertE said:


> Explain this to me then.


The issues that I raise have to do with DIRECTV not insuring that the customer expects the fees to be charged to their credit cards.

If you've been around DBSTalk for any length of time you've heard the laments about former subscribers being hit some time later with ETFs as well as those who have spent hours convincing DIRECTV that DIRECTV was indeed in receipt of their equipment. You've surely also seen the cautions to subscribers who leave should cancel the credit cards of record to skirt these issues.

Being vindictive towards former subscribers is not acceptable regardless of how much DIRECTV doesn't want them back and there have been more than a few calls here and elsewhere for the kinds of legal actions we aren't allowed to discuss.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

harsh said:


> The issues that I raise have to do with DIRECTV not insuring that the customer expects the fees to be charged to their credit cards.
> 
> If you've been around DBSTalk for any length of time you've heard the laments about former subscribers being hit some time later with ETFs as well as those who have spent hours convincing DIRECTV that DIRECTV was indeed in receipt of their equipment. You've surely also seen the cautions to subscribers who leave should cancel the credit cards of record to skirt these issues.
> 
> Being vindictive towards former subscribers is not acceptable regardless of how much DIRECTV doesn't want them back and there have been more than a few calls here and elsewhere for the kinds of legal actions we aren't allowed to discuss.


Your entire theory is based on a handful of complaints...posted here...on a website which attracts many people for the sole purpose of complaining. Good work.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Newshawk said:


> Comcra... er, Comcast doesn't ship set top boxes to customers either.


Like DIRECTV, Comcast/Xfinity delivers receivers and certainly expects receivers to be returned when they are no longer active. The difference is how you _may_ be treated when you cancel and the STB needs to be returned.


----------



## Terry740 (Nov 15, 2005)

trekologer said:


> The BBB is nothing more than a shakedown racket. You can read into this as DirecTV didn't pay annual dues. If they pay up, the rating will suddenly turn into an A.


I believe You have them confused with the Chamber of Commerce racketeers!


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Hoosier205 said:


> Your entire theory is based on a handful of complaints...posted here...on a website which attracts many people for the sole purpose of complaining. Good work.


It would seem to be possible to operate a company in such a way that there aren't legitimate and repeated examples of these complaints regardless of number. Blaming automation, an unmanageable number of customers or general oopsies doesn't go very far if those issues aren't being thoughtfully and systematically eliminated.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> It would seem to be possible to operate a company in such a way that there aren't legitimate and repeated examples of these complaints regardless of number. Blaming automation, an unmanageable number of customers or general oopsies doesn't go very far if those issues aren't being thoughtfully and systematically eliminated.


A perfect company with millions of users? Riiiiight.


----------



## adkinsjm (Mar 25, 2003)

harsh said:


> It would seem to be possible to operate a company in such a way that there aren't legitimate and repeated examples of these complaints regardless of number. Blaming automation, an unmanageable number of customers or general oopsies doesn't go very far if those issues aren't being thoughtfully and systematically eliminated.


If you don't like it, don't give DirecTV money every month.


----------



## Hoosier205 (Sep 3, 2007)

adkinsjm said:


> If you don't like it, don't give DirecTV money every month.


Oh he doesn't.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

harsh said:


> The issues that I raise have to do with DIRECTV not insuring that the customer expects the fees to be charged to their credit cards.
> 
> If you've been around DBSTalk for any length of time you've heard the laments about former subscribers being hit some time later with ETFs as well as those who have spent hours convincing DIRECTV that DIRECTV was indeed in receipt of their equipment. You've surely also seen the cautions to subscribers who leave should cancel the credit cards of record to skirt these issues.
> 
> Being vindictive towards former subscribers is not acceptable regardless of how much DIRECTV doesn't want them back and there have been more than a few calls here and elsewhere for the kinds of legal actions we aren't allowed to discuss.


Please. <insert higher Deity of ones choosing here> forbid that someone, anyone out in real life land takes the time to actually read the paperwork that they sign. If they take that time, they will clearly know what the ETFs are, what the non-return fees will be and where they will be applied.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

harsh said:


> issues aren't being thoughtfully and systematically eliminated.


I do wish all issues would be thoughtfully and systematically eliminated from all parts of our lives. DBSTalk is one place that I wish such thoughtful and systematic elimination of those issues were possible. Alas, it's an imperfect world, harsh as it may be, and those issues persist.

And persist.

And persist.


----------



## domingos35 (Jan 12, 2006)

quit giving excuses.
directv sucks


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

domingos35 said:


> quit giving excuses.
> directv sucks


Obviously you are a dish Troll since I looked at your past posts and all you do is put Directv down!!!

How long have you worked for Dish and how much do they pay you to Bash Directv???


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

domingos35 said:


> quit giving excuses.
> directv sucks


Every company has issues. There was a period where I was not happy with DirecTV, when it took three techs to install an ICK, and would have been a fourth if the third tech hadn't decided to give my suggestion a try. But I was much more frustrated when I had Time Warner. Or when my inlaws had no signal from their Dish system, and were told it would be a month before anyone could come out. But, I know people very happy with those systems as well.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

DodgerKing said:


>


One complaint should not make a grade. I also looked up the French Laundry. They get an NR, not enough information to give a rating. It's one of the most famous restaurants in the world, one of only 81 or so in the world to have 3 Michelin stars, and the BBB doesn't have enough info to give it any rating? Hard to believe.


----------



## marquitos2 (Jan 10, 2004)

You don't make sense, you most be E* spy and make D* looks bad or trying too


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

dpeters11 said:


> One complaint should not make a grade. I also looked up the French Laundry. They get an NR, not enough information to give a rating. It's one of the most famous restaurants in the world, one of only 81 or so in the world to have 3 Michelin stars, and the BBB doesn't have enough info to give it any rating? Hard to believe.


1. The French Laundry doesn't need the BBB's rinky-dink approval.

2. No one calls in to complain about a business being "Excellent".

The BBB's operation should be classified as a 'racket' because, like the mob which would charge a small business for "protection", the BBB charges a business money for a good rating -- no pay, no play.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

If a restaurant calls itself a "laundry" that's enough for a C right there.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Nick said:


> 1. The French Laundry doesn't need the BBB's rinky-dink approval.
> 
> 2. No one calls in to complain about a business being "Excellent".
> 
> The BBB's operation should be classified as a 'racket' because, like the mob which would charge a small business for "protection", the BBB charges a business money for a good rating -- no pay, no play.


And no one who's considering going there isn't going to look it up on the BBB first. I get that, but still. It's just funny to me that they don't have enough info on the business. It's like they just opened up and the BBB just heard about them.


----------



## Newshawk (Sep 3, 2004)

harsh said:


> Like DIRECTV, Comcast/Xfinity delivers receivers and certainly expects receivers to be returned when they are no longer active. The difference is how you _may_ be treated when you cancel and the STB needs to be returned.


Yeah, harsh, there is a difference. From the Comcra... er, Comcast Residential Agreement:



> Within ten (10) days of the date on which Services are disconnected, you will return all Comcast Equipment to us at our local business office or to our designee in working order, normal wear and tear excepted. Otherwise, *you will be charged the amount set forth in the current pricing lists for such Comcast Equipment, or the revised amount for which you receive notice; if no amount has been specified for the particular model of Comcast Equipment, you will be charged the retail price for a new replacement. You may also be charged incidental costs that we incur in replacing the Comcast Equipment*(emphasis added). Upon our request during regular business hours at a time agreed upon by you and us, you will permit us and our employees, agents, contractors, and representatives to access the Premises during regular business hours to remove all Comcast Equipment and other material provided by Comcast.


Of course, they don't list WHAT the current or retail price is. And the difference is _you _have to take the equipment to _them_!


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

harsh said:


> Like DIRECTV, Comcast/Xfinity delivers receivers and certainly expects receivers to be returned when they are no longer active. The difference is how you _may_ be treated when you cancel and the STB needs to be returned.


I've never seen a cable company allow you to cancel before you hand them all of your equipment. Oh you work M-F 8-5 well then you better take a day off to take all of your stuff down there and then cancel. So you stop paying your bill to save you a trip? Ok they charge you the fees for involuntary disconnect and then charge you for the equipment you have until you return it. Same thing from the cable companies.

I don't care enough but I would be interested to see how many complaints per cable company total there are. BBB does them regionally so they seem little.

Returning equipment to DirecTV is simple and free unlike any other company out there where you have to drive, pay for shipping, or pay for a technician to come to your home to pick it up.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Shades228 said:


> Returning equipment to DirecTV is simple and free unlike any other company out there where you have to drive, pay for shipping, or pay for a technician to come to your home to pick it up.


This is the theory. In practice, it doesn't always work this way. We must not casually dismiss those who have had to make numerous attempts to get their return cartons and those who have had to go to great lengths to prove that DIRECTV was in possession of returned receivers when they were charged for non-return.


----------



## Shades228 (Mar 18, 2008)

harsh said:


> This is the theory. In practice, it doesn't always work this way. We must not casually dismiss those who have had to make numerous attempts to get their return cartons and those who have had to go to great lengths to prove that DIRECTV was in possession of returned receivers when they were charged for non-return.


I suppose you have the number of customers who have had this issue? I bet it's less than .05% of all equipment returned through this method due to the sheer volumes.

This is about the BBB's rating for DirecTV not if DirecTV is perfect. No company ever is but the bottom line is at the end of the day they take care of their customers more often than not. The F rating is a joke and everyone knows it because the BBB is what I said it was at the beginning of this thread.

The only way any company should have an F is if they just outright ignore any comlpaint. Who's "favor" the dispute is resolved in shouldn't matter at all either in my oppinion.

People goto ripoff report, BBB, and every other site usually after they have a problem then before having the problem. Most of them do it for the same reason that reality TV exists too.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

http://www.bbb.org/nw-south-carolin...nd-oil/harsh-mart-in-spartanburg-sc-90001978/


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I think that the BBB should Investigate itself and give itself an "F" but I hope the FBI investigates them and proves them to be the SCAM that they are and have been for years and years.

It is nothing but Extortion.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

tcusta00 said:


> http://www.bbb.org/nw-south-carolin...nd-oil/harsh-mart-in-spartanburg-sc-90001978/


:lol: Priceless!


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

They say they are changing their ways. We'll see, it doesn't seem to address all the issues.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/business-bureau-grading-system/story?id=12181543


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Funny how in this report, Cox mentions how the BBB will stop the practice of giving additional points to members and only allowing A+ grades for members, yet in the interview on 20/20, he explicitly denied that members get better grades just for being members.

I loved this line: 


> Any attempt to question the integrity of the entire BBB organization is completely without merit.


Ummm, when the president of the company tells a lie about an unfair business practice, I believe that is exactly the time to question the integrity of a company.

- Merg


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

I had to stop reading when I got to this line:

'The BBB says an "independent third party" will assist in the review process.'

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the BBB _supposed_ to be that "independent third party" from the beginning?


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> I had to stop reading when I got to this line:
> 
> 'The BBB says an "independent third party" will assist in the review process.'
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the BBB _supposed_ to be that "independent third party" from the beginning?


!rolling

- Merg


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> I had to stop reading when I got to this line:
> 
> 'The BBB says an "independent third party" will assist in the review process.'
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't the BBB _supposed_ to be that "independent third party" from the beginning?


Wow, so that would be a "fourth party" to audit the "third party" who is supposed to be the watchdog for the "second party", providing reliability info to the "first party"... :scratchin

!rolling

Mike


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> Wow, so that would be a "fourth party" to audit the "third party" who is supposed to be the watchdog for the "second party", providing reliability info to the "first party"... :scratchin
> 
> !rolling
> 
> Mike


No kidding....this is getting curiouser and curiouser by the minute...


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I will bet good money that someone in the Department of Justice will find reason to Investigate this BS at BBB because once it gets into the Mainstream such as with this 20/20 Interview then it becomes political that needs attention.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> I will bet good money that someone in the Department of Justice will find reason to Investigate this BS at BBB because once it gets into the Mainstream such as with this 20/20 Interview then it becomes political that needs attention.


Somebody should look into it when Hamas can get a A rating. :nono:

Mike


----------



## ATARI (May 10, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Somebody should look into it when Hamas can get a A rating. :nono:
> 
> Mike


I agree, they should have gotten a 'B' tops.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Somebody should look into it when Hamas can get a A rating. :nono:
> 
> Mike





ATARI said:


> I agree, they should have gotten a 'B' tops.


They only got bumped to the 'A' since they paid for membership. Aren't you guys paying attention to this thread? :sure:

- Merg


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

richierich said:


> I will bet good money that someone in the Department of Justice will find reason to Investigate this BS at BBB because once it gets into the Mainstream such as with this 20/20 Interview then it becomes political that needs attention.


It kinda sounds like racketeering to me.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Drucifer said:


> It kinda sounds like racketeering to me.


Yes it does .. But in all seriousness, the BBB should have a good name. They are definitely recognizable. They can still clean up their act and make things better. Hopefully they do, because if they provide honest ratings, then it could be a good service.


----------



## Drucifer (Feb 12, 2009)

Doug Brott said:


> Yes it does .. But in all seriousness, the BBB should have a good name. They are definitely recognizable. *They can still clean up their act and make things better.* Hopefully they do, because if they provide honest ratings, then it could be a good service.


Now that it finally made the national news, they have little choice. But their man on the tube sound like one of those business idiots that believes a little sugar coating will clear things up.

My guess, in a couple of years we'll be right back we are now and it will start all over again.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

Yea, I know it's an old thread, and this link http://www.tvpredictions.com/dbbb031313.htm is for Swanni but it looks like the LA BBB is in a bit of trouble and maybe DIRECTV doesn't deserve a F rating.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Everyone should know by now that you get what you pay for with BBB.

If you want an "A" Rating you have to pay them so much to get it. There was a 60 Minutes Episode that showed the companies that paid to get an "A" Rating which were not "A" Companies but just paid to get the Rating.

The Government should sue them or shut them down as it is a Scam. :nono2:


----------



## gov (Jan 11, 2013)

Don't have much interaction with BBB.

However, I do many installs and uprgrades (independently) and I have NEVER had a problem with Cox Cable.

A few with DirecTV.

And a bunch with Dish.




However, even if I lived in a Cox Cable area, I would still have Direct. I'd probably even take Dish over Cox if for some reason I couldn't do Direct.

there are other factors besides BBB giving an F in my selection process.


----------



## donalddickerson2005 (Feb 13, 2012)

This thread was done over 3 years ago why now is it popping up again. Did DirecTV get another F this year.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> This thread was done over 3 years ago why now is it popping up again. Did DirecTV get another F this year.


No it came back up because there are current allegations that the BBB gave DirecTV a bad rating because they would not pay - which is SOP for the BBB organization. Pay about as much attention to the toothless BBB as I do to consumer reports


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

wingrider01 said:


> No it came back up because there are current allegations that the BBB gave DirecTV a bad rating because they would not pay - which is SOP for the BBB organization. Pay about as much attention to the toothless BBB as I do to consumer reports


I think normal procedure is supposed to be only members get A+, but doesn't mean non-payers get F's. That's where LA went wrong I think.


----------



## RAD (Aug 5, 2002)

donalddickerson2005 said:


> This thread was done over 3 years ago why now is it popping up again. Did DirecTV get another F this year.


As mentioned The LA BBB office has been kicked out by the national BBB office due to requiring companies to pay in order to not get a F rating. This is due to the LA Times doing an investigation this month into the practice.


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

dpeters11 said:


> I think normal procedure is supposed to be only members get A+, but doesn't mean non-payers get F's. That's where LA went wrong I think.


Not sure if it made the web but there was a 60 Minutes episode a few years back showing the BBB trying to sell upgrades to companies poor ratings is they paid for a membership. Can't find the 60 minutes episode - but the 20/20 one is here


----------



## wingrider01 (Sep 9, 2005)

RAD said:


> As mentioned The LA BBB office has been kicked out by the national BBB office due to requiring companies to pay in order to not get a F rating. This is due to the LA Times doing an investigation this month into the practice.


Wonder if they also kicked out the Denver Better Business Bureau for doing the same exact thing, seems more like a rotten underpinnings in the whole organization and not just offices


----------



## Ed Campbell (Feb 17, 2006)

wingrider01;3195002 said:


> No it came back up because there are current allegations that the BBB gave DirecTV a bad rating because they would not pay - which is SOP for the BBB organization. Pay about as much attention to the toothless BBB as I do to consumer reports


+1


----------



## quarrymen1 (Dec 14, 2006)

direct tv gets an A+from me ,I have never had a problem and if I did they quickly solved it, they've always been good to me,and helpful..been a customer since 1997 just about a year or two I guess after starting out..


----------



## allenn (Nov 19, 2005)

What are Charter, Comcast, Dish, and AT&T Uverses' BBB ratings? Some people can complain about anything. I give D* an A++.


----------



## dpeters11 (May 30, 2007)

Looks like the new Business Consumer Alliance give DirecTV a BB rating.


----------

