FCC Okays Verizon To Steal Back Defecting Customers > why not?

reply to rizzo2dial

Re: why not?

What I wouldn't want is that my port or attempt to port be held up in limbo while I have to wait for a customer service rep call me back to attempt to make a deal for me.
What makes this different than TV service, is that you can have multiple TV services (FiOS, Cable, Satellite, Uverse) all at the same time, and not care. You can't have your phone number serviced by 2 different companies (unless its separarte for Local vs. LD).
--
Canada = Hollywood North

I see your point. Is it possible for someone other than the customer in question to submit a port request? I didn't think so. I thought you have to fax a signed LOA to the provider you want to port-TO. If so, then I've changed my mind, VZ should not be able to delay your port for that last-minute attempt to lure you back. However, back in the early days of long distance deregulation it was apparently possible for your long distance provider to be changed to someone else without your knowledge (I believe it was referred to as "slamming"). I bet VZ is somehow worried about a similar scenario (but it is likely unfounded due to the signed LOA requirement).

The port request is not submitted by the customer, per se. It's submitted by the incoming LEC to the outgoing LEC. There is an intermediary called the 3rd party verifier to prevent slamming. Once the customer initiates a change of service, as soon as they hang up with the 3rd party verification, they have no more involvement until regaining dial tone.

PFD

But the customer generally has to provide the intended-new-provider with a signed LOA, no?

Generally, no. Third-party verification effectively replaces this.