<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Re: Cancelling service on a phone number port makes sense, but in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20229470</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:12:16 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:12:16 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: Cancelling service on a phone number port makes sense, but</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20233448</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1522507"><b>Claude M</b></A> : I would never allow Verizon cancel my service to anything. They can't get simple things like appointments, adding or removing service (forget billing) straight, can you imagine them getting involved in your cable service?]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20233448</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:29:27 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Cancelling service on a phone number port makes sense, but</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229470</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1269402"><b>battleop</b></A> : Porting a number away will not automatically close an account.  The customer should call and cancel the service voice, internet, or video. ]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229470</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:48:45 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Re: Cancelling service on a phone number port makes sense, but</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229351</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/594412"><b>TK Junk Mail</b></A> : <div class="bquote"><small>said by  birdfeedr <A HREF="/useremail/u/449678"><IMG SRC="http://i.dslr.net/bb/profile.gif" ALT="See Profile" BORDER=0 WIDTH=16 HEIGHT=11></A> :</small><br><br>Canceling video should be the responsibility of the subscriber. <br><br>Canceling phone service is necessary, however, because of the ported number problem. You can't have two services pointing at the same number.<br> </div>Makes sense.<br><small>--<br><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/bqv2h"><b>My BLOG ..</b></a><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/2a9xcb"><i> .. Internet News ..</i></a><A HREF="http://tinyurl.com/yz8xto"><b> .. My Web Page</b></a></small>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229351</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:27:23 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Cancelling service on a phone number port makes sense, but</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229299</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/449678"><b>birdfeedr</b></A> : Canceling video should be the responsibility of the subscriber. I know Verizon likes to take advantage of existing wiring, and VZ is only "thinking of the customer" when it wants to make things easy. So, it does make some sense to argue Verizon should be able to cancel cable, but that's a real stretch.<br><br>If it was me, I'd like to opportunity to switch video feed from one source to the other, if I really wanted to compare, and be given the opportunity to cancel the Verizon video service and keep the cable. That's if *I* wanted to.<br><br>Of course, I canceled cable back in 1984, and waited for FiOS TV when it was available earlier this year. :D :D<br><br>Canceling phone service is necessary, however, because of the ported number problem. You can't have two services pointing at the same number.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20229299</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:17:37 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
