dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
13467
share rss forum feed


nomorehughes

@prserv.net

Finally!! A class action against Hughes Net....

If you have had a bad experience with Hughes Net. Please voice your opinions and your experiences. I have been a customer of Hughes Net for 5 months and I have had enough. I will be terminating my contract as well as the many others who have and will be paying that ridiculous $300 fee to get out of a contract Hughes Net does not honor themselves.

Click on the link below to read about a class action suit that is being filed and tell them your stories!

»www.druginjurylawyerblog.com/200···nst.html


grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief

join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

4 edits
Deja Vu all over again. Many have tried, but nobody's succeeded - getting a nickel outa Hughes that is (except maybe the lawyers). The only class action lawsuit that actually went through to a judgment only resulted in the court ordering Hughes (then DirecPC) to change a few words in their service agreement. Coincidentally their name soon changed to Direcway.

What I see in your weblink is one ambulance chaser (www.druginjurylawyer.com says a lot) that was too lazy to properly troubleshoot his own connection. So he does what most lawyers do best; file a lawsuit. The other two partners in that firm probably have DSL/WIFI/cable - and could care less about the 3rd guy tilting at windmills.

/greg//
--
HN7000S/98cm Prodelin/2w Osiris/ProPlus - G16/1250H/Germantown - NAT 66.82.187.152/Gateway 66.82.25.10/DNS 66.82.4.12 and 66.82.4.8 - Firefox 3 - AVG+Firewall v7.5


Pesimist

join:2007-07-09
Valley, AL
Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
·HughesNet Satell..
reply to nomorehughes
Click for full size
downloadDavid L Scas···sNet.pdf 29,166 bytes
David L Scasta Vs HughesNet
The suit was brought by David L Scasta & others similarly situated back in September.

I see where he filed for voluntary dismissal yesterday filing attached). Hope the dismissal is only a delay until the judge approves class action status.


zalternate

join:2007-02-22
freedom land
reply to nomorehughes

The main thing this lawsuit could 'theoretically' achieve, is to not allow Hughes to sign up contracts longer than a 6 month term. How many people get hooked in to a 2 or 3 year term to only have their connection tank in 6 months(KU band specific). But until Class action is approved, we won't know the penalties to be Judged.
The second objective should be minimum 24 hour guaranteed speeds to listed package speed. 80% to be fair. And not 50%.
And another one is to have a more consumer friendly contract. A one sided contract where the user is too blame for slowdowns is just wrong.

Any money going back to the consumer would be a long shot. But killing long term contract terms would be sweet to many users that have given up and just keep paying till the contract is up, while having a dialup account to be able to connect to the web in the evening.

Satellite Internet should work, but Hughes(and others) excuse is that satellite is expensive to launch and maintain, So a certain amount of users 'must' be put on to achieve profitability. But the problem arises when all those users want to surf in the evening or after school.


Arion

join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI

1 recommendation

reply to nomorehughes
Yada yada yada. For the vast majority of us the system works fine the way it's supposed to. Hughes eliminating the FAP restrictions for between 3 to 5 hours every night is showing that they are attempting to solve some of the problems with the service. The fine print of every contract states that the speeds and availability are not guaranteed. Hughes is a multinational company whos legal department outclasses these fly by nite lawyers looking for quick money.

As a leviathan Hughes has it's problems and one of the biggest is the off sourcing of technical support. Most of us try to avoid them like the plague. However to get any satellite internet whatsover for less than a few hundred bucks a month is pretty awesome as it is.

Problem is most of the complainers are used to cable internet and true wireless broadband and then they are upset that they pay more for Hughes and get less performance. They try to make satellite internet something that it isn't. And also most of the complainers didn't do their homework before signing on and then once they are online they figure out that it isn't what they expected it to be.

Of course in Hughes commercials they don't accentuate the negative aspects or limitations of the service. (No company does that) But people need to do their homework before hand. The new spaceway service is going to make a big difference in gradually reducing the loading of existing gateways that are too crowded and I've seen less complaints on here about speed and performance since spaceway came on line.

Keeping in mind that on this forum there are more people that are having problems which leads you to think that the majority of folk's systems are not performing. It's just that these kinds of forums attract people that are having trouble. Most of the folks who's systems are doing fine are not on these forums. Couple of weeks ago I upgraded to pro plus and am getting better than my 1.5mb download speeds and as always the system is performing better than expected so I have no complaints. It isn't cable internet but I knew that going in. Thats the price you pay for living in the boonies.
--
HN7000S IA-8 1070 / 8-PSK 3/4 (14) / Router:67.142.140.83 /.74 1 watt / Pro plus/ Pentium 3.2ghz, 2gb ram / WinXP Pro / Opera 9.6 / www.bigbaywx.com


randyvsatus
Premium
join:2005-03-03
Monument, CO
said by Arion:
....Problem is most of the complainers are used to cable internet and true wireless broadband ...and...They try to make satellite internet something that it isn't.
The new spaceway service is going to make a big difference in gradually reducing the loading of existing gateways that are too crowded and I've seen less complaints on here about speed and performance since spaceway came on line.

... Most of the folks who's systems are doing fine are not on these forums.

And there are over 300,000 HughesNet customers...if all were miserable, this forum would be overwhelmed! I am amazed that so many folks fail to do the due diligence - then decide to sue, sue, sue....it's a pathetic testimony to the 7-11 type of society we live in today.


Pesimist

join:2007-07-09
Valley, AL
Reviews:
·AT&T Southeast
·HughesNet Satell..
said by randyvsatus:

said by Arion:
....Problem is most of the complainers are used to cable internet and true wireless broadband ...and...They try to make satellite internet something that it isn't.
The new spaceway service is going to make a big difference in gradually reducing the loading of existing gateways that are too crowded and I've seen less complaints on here about speed and performance since spaceway came on line.

... Most of the folks who's systems are doing fine are not on these forums.

....

Your probably right to some extent however, there are many out there that just put-up with status quo. They'll try again tomorrow in hopes that hughes net will work on another day. You won't see them on this site because they don't know about it.

In many cases, responses to true problems are not addressed here because of the bashing they get from folk's that haven't even had any experiences with hughes net, or if they have - they sure haven't posted either good or bad ratings.


tm

@direcpc.com
reply to nomorehughes
I have complained year after year yet continue to send money to Hughes. Now I am putting my money where my mouth is. By next Thursday I will have a point to point WISP T1 with less than 10 ms ping times.


Arion

join:2006-07-09
Marquette, MI
reply to nomorehughes
....

Your probably right to some extent however, there are many out there that just put-up with status quo. They'll try again tomorrow in hopes that hughes net will work on another day. You won't see them on this site because they don't know about it.

Yes, I know there are people like that or even those whose performance is only marginally better than dial up and they figure that is all that the service can do. But they are in the minority. I don't know about you but if my system crapped out and I'm paying $80 a month (on my plan) then I'm going to be proactive in that case, learn the system and figure out whats going wrong.

The three biggest complaints from people are download speeds, the fap and customer service. Outside of overloaded gateways the biggest problem in system performance is a marginal install. By making sure you get a good install (by familiarizing yourself with what the tech is supposed to do before he comes out) you can go a long way with making sure your getting what you pay for.
If your not a teckie then at least attempting to contact other customers the installer has serviced to see how their systems are working.

You can't get the fast download speeds without a fap for the system. Only so much data can squeeze through at any one time obviously so if you don't put some limits on then a few hogs are going to kill it for everyone else. Hughes gets kudo's in my book for opening the system up in the slow hours so those that want to download the big files can do so in the middle of the night without it counting against their bandwidth allotment. A simple use of a download manager with a scheduler takes care of that problem. So I think Hughes has finally found the appropriate balance here.

Customer service of course is abysmal but they are trying I believe. I called them a few weeks ago to upgrade to pro plus. I was on hold for about 3 minutes and talked to an American. The voice mail tree was a lot more streamlined and navigated much quicker than before.

The problem for all the satellite providers is the infrastructure is tremendously more expensive than for the terrestrial counterparts. They somehow have to find a way to make the service available and yet keep it affordable. As far as I know Hughes is the only company to show a profit off operations and thats only in the last few years. Wildblue hasn't shown a profit yet and I don't think Starband has ever been profitable. The one way providers go belly up all the time. It's a tight market. Looking at all the costs involved it's quite remarkable to get any satellite internet whatsoever for less than a few hundred bucks a month.

Sure, with my setup I'm paying probably $30 a month more than I would pay for comparable cable access and I'm only getting 1.5mb as opposed to anywhere between 3mb to 6mb dl speeds but I live in the boonies with the nearest neighbors over a quarter a mile away with tx lines off the poles so old that Edison himself must of hung them. I looked out my window the other day and saw a grey wolf going up the deer trail on my property and you can't see wolves, bear and moose in town very often. For me this system allows me to be somewhat intouch with technology and what the net has to offer but at the same time I can live the simpler life in the country. For me I get the best of both worlds!!
--
HN7000S IA-8 1070 / 8-PSK 3/4 (14) / Router:67.142.140.83 /.74 1 watt / Pro plus/ Pentium 3.2ghz, 2gb ram / WinXP Pro / Opera 9.6 / www.bigbaywx.com

laserfan

join:2005-01-14
Texas
reply to Pesimist
The suit was brought by David L Scasta...
Repeat after me:

Class Action Lawsuits benefit NO ONE except the lawyers.
Class Action Lawsuits benefit NO ONE except the lawyers.
Class Action Lawsuits benefit NO ONE except the lawyers.

Another truism IMHO is that people who Promote the idea of a CAL to others do so because they want someone else to do their dirty work for them, whether it be fixing their problem locally or communicating their issue to the company they feel is doing them wrong.

Maybe if people were dying I'd feel differently about this, but most product-oriented CALs are completely and utterly valueless to consumers in the end.
--
DW6000CEv5.4.1.11, G13/H1@127W, 1270MHz, SigTyp74, 10-20clients & 6+OSes

tobicat
Premium
join:2005-04-18
Tombstone, AZ
Hey the last one I was in ( I didn't even know it) I got $.04.
--
9000 spaceway III, 7000S SatMex 5 1270, Dlink wirless

laserfan

join:2005-01-14
Texas
said by tobicat:

Hey the last one I was in ( I didn't even know it) I got $.04.
I think I got a coupon worth 50 cents. The lawyers got MILLIONS!!!!

For-profit companies eventually pass-along their legal & settlement costs to end-user consumers, unless they go completely belly-up which also happens. In either case we lose.

But the lawyers always win; the class action lawsuit is the modern ambulance they all love to chase...
--
DW6000CEv5.4.1.11, G13/H1@127W, 1270MHz, SigTyp74, 10-20clients & 6+OSes


BeenThereToo

@gci.net
reply to nomorehughes
I received a ten minute phone card once. It's too bad I had to fly to Florida to pick it up.

Hughes was a good company. I just wish they hadn't gotten as bad as they have to make themselves a target. The suit won't succeed because they have the government in their pocket as the largest single satellite contractor, but if enough of these happen, maybe they will at least come clean with their customers.


randyvsatus
Premium
join:2005-03-03
Monument, CO
said by BeenThereToo :

..... The suit won't succeed because they have the government in their pocket.....
That statement is just plain rubbish, with no foundation to it at all.

The suit won't succeed because HughesNet (like em or hate em) has a time tested Subscriber Agreement that has protected them many times in the past. I don't defend some of what HughesNet has/is doing, but if your choices are limited for internet service, they will be around when many others go bust.
--
1.2M Dish |4 watt|iDirect|||Qwest DSL|7168 / 896 Kbps
Expand your moderator at work

reply to randyvsatus

Re: Finally!! A class action against Hughes Net....

You haven't done your research have you? Who is the leading supplier of Satellite for the government? Hughes has a long working relationship with Uncle Sam and dropped its available consumer bandwidth the same week a story appeared in the national media that quoted the government "bandwidth shortage." As a heavy military and government contractor (Hughes' bragging point, not mine), Hughes will undoubtedly enjoy enviable protections. Consumers are the bottom feeders on Hughes' feeding chain and as such will ultimately be forced to take what they get or go somewhere else. The agreement you speak of is merely incidental. It could consist of three words written on Kleenex and nothing would change.

Don't get me wrong. I was once an elated Direcway customer. I also had very few complaints when the company switched over to Hughes. I didn't notice any change in service, speed, or FAP until the story aired (sometime in 2004 or 2005, I believe) when service and availability steadily declined. Part of the decline could be coincidence, but the effect was far too broad and the changes too sweeping for mere coincidence. Hughes could make more money selling more bandwidth to its largest customer, which put everyone else in the back seat. It's not a conspiracy, just business.


grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief

join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY

4 edits
said by BeenThereB4Too :

Who is the leading supplier of Satellite for the government?
That would be Hughes Electronics Corporation, not to be confused with its subsidiary Hughes Network Systems (HughesNet). The subsidiaries that get the big government telcomm contracts are Hughes Aircraft Company and Hughes Telecommunications and Space Company. I know, I used to be a recipient of some of those contract services. And they're in the business of selling hardware anyway, not bandwidth.

HughesNet does derive some income from the US government, notably for disaster/relief, schools, broadband backup. But HughesNet is not in the business of selling mission critical bandwidth to the the military and intel communities. There are plenty of DoD-owned satellites for that. Matter of fact, HughesNet only owns one telcomm satellite - Spaceway 3. The majority bandwidth they sell is on transponder space leased from other companies. HughesNet is more interested in selling/leasing hardware to the government. The amount of actual bandwidth they sell worldwide to the US government - compared to that they sell to consumers and to industry - is small.

//greg//
--
HN7000S/98cm Prodelin/2w Osiris/ProPlus - G16/1250H/Germantown - NAT 66.82.187.152/Gateway 66.82.25.10/DNS 66.82.4.12 and 66.82.4.8 - Firefox 3 - AVG+Firewall v7.5


dbirdman
Premium,MVM
join:2003-07-07
usa
kudos:5

1 edit
Greg, while I'm with you in terms of how much bandwidth Hughes provides to the government (very little), I must say that your view of the company is severely outdated!

Hughes Electronics, once a subsidiary of GM, ceased to exist soon after it was purchased by Rupert Murdoch, and the entire company was renamed DirecTV (2003), with Direcway as a subsidiary.

The Space subsidiary ended in 2000, when GM sold it to Boeing.

Hughes Aircraft no longer exists as an entity.

When DirecTV sold off Direcway, the company became Hughes Communications, with Hughes Network Systems as a nominal subsidiary, but the two companies are essentially synonymous.

DirecTV also sold off many other parts of the old HEC, including their large stake in Panamsat (to KKR, but now owned by Intelsat) and Hughes Software (to Indian buyers, now Aricent).
--
W2K Server|Toshiba Satellite XP Pro|iDirect 3100 on Datastorm 1.2 meter XF3 with 4-watt BUC|HughesNet G28/1070/7000s Pro on 2-watt Datastorm G74|Sprint Air Card|1990 Blue Bird Wanderlodge Bus "Blue Thunder"|Author of PC-OPI and DSSatTool


grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief

join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY
I stand corrected. The weblink was consistent with the Hughes corporate architecture the last time I dealt with them professionally. I admit not having much reason to keep current since.

But the main argument is to quash the anonymous posters allegation that HughesNet is a major provider of bandwidth to the government. It ain't !! So on the meat of matter, we agree.

//greg//
--
HN7000S/98cm Prodelin/2w Osiris/ProPlus - G16/1250H/Germantown - NAT 66.82.187.152/Gateway 66.82.25.10/DNS 66.82.4.12 and 66.82.4.8 - Firefox 3 - AVG+Firewall v7.5

reply to nomorehughes
If that's true, then there is no excuse for how Hughes does business or treats its customers. Everyone who has dealt with the company, received shoddy service, and fell prey to their misleading advertising should receive a complete refund and Hughes should be ordered to abate the practice of overselling their system effective immediately. I say the suit would be a good thing and there should be many more.


nightbaron

@direcpc.com
reply to nomorehughes
When I talked to the sales rep about the service I asked if it had any limits to downloading, bandwidth etc and was told no,it was fast, it was on all the time and I could download or watch any video I wanted......... after I had signed the contract, the system was installed and running and they had all the cash.......... the install tech informed me about the FAP and told me there would be a penalty if I stopped the service before the end of the contract, so I am stuck with it. If I had been told the truth I would have chose another route. I can't watch a movie or download a demo or anything without fapping out and yes there are 3 , THREE freaking hours when I can download something without penalty, at 2 am in the morning my time, kind of limits my hopes of using it for something like netflicks, that is unless I want the kids to miss school and the wife and I miss work, so save it HUGHES is in the business of milking folks for a profit, the truth is if you cannot provide the service that you advertise on the tv and such as being a true broad band option for rural families then don't lie to us. I do not consider broad band being three hours in the freaking morning, I consider this as just one more giant milking the hard working folks out there with deception and legalism. If they are truly offering a great broad band service then why hide the FAP, why not make it just as open and obvious as their misleading statements about being able to watch video's, play games or downloading a program as there commercials and ads portray. They should have paid for this out right fraud in my opinion. Why is there no included FAP monitoring system too, after all if your wanting to control the amount of usage then why not have a monitor where folks know how close they are, no I think they like fapping out folks, after all that reduces the load real fast now doesn't it? Why do I pay twice to three times the costs for connecting to have less than a third the speed and far far less the usage, because I was lied to, trapped and ambushed into this and if I could do it over I wouldn't go near the company. A multi linked modem would be better on dial up than this, if my credit wasn't so important I would tell them to stick it but they have me by the short hairs and now I find that the stupid modem is preventing me from using my router for port forwarding so I am sorry I do not think that HUGHES is doing anything like a good job, they suck, ...........and that service tech, well he had to come back the next day to redo his work and then again the next week and again the week after that, and ah he was a professional.........right uh huh. They should have had the gateways for the load or shouldn't have started the service to begin with, and having misleading sales reps and incompetent service tech and installers only adds to my distaste for them. HUGHES use to be an honored name to me now it is something that brings thoughts of disgust and anger.
Expand your moderator at work


grohgreg
Dunno. Ask The Chief

join:2001-07-05
Dawson Springs, KY
reply to nightbaron

Re: Finally!! A class action against Hughes Net....

said by nightbaron :

When I talked to the sales rep about the service ...
This is a common problem when buying HughesNet service through the various online resellers. Your problem is with them, not with HughesNet. They take your money, give part of it to some anonymous installer - neither of which you will see or hear from again.

It's one of the top arguments against buying service online. Contract a local dealer/installer, get the right answers to your questions up front, have somebody to go back to when things go wrong.

//greg//
--
HN7000S/98cm Prodelin/2w Osiris/ProPlus - G16/1250H/Germantown - NAT 66.82.187.152/Gateway 66.82.25.10/DNS 66.82.4.12 and 66.82.4.8 - Firefox 3 - AVG+Firewall v7.5

laserfan

join:2005-01-14
Texas
reply to nomorehughes
For every product or service that is sold in the known universe, there are unscrupulous sales persons.

Caveat emptor--one must never, ever make one's buying decisions (at least when it comes to high-ticket items and on-going service contracts) based upon a single data point.
--
HN7000S v5.6.1.35 Home Plan, G13/H1@127W, 1270MHz, SigTyp 68, 10-20clients & 6+OSes

toucanne

join:2008-09-07
Pahrump, NV
reply to nightbaron
said by nightbaron :

Why is there no included FAP monitoring system too, after all if your wanting to control the amount of usage then why not have a monitor where folks know how close they are, no I think they like fapping out folks, after all that reduces the load real fast now doesn't it? Why do I pay twice to three times the costs for connecting to have less than a third the speed and far far less the usage,
Absolutely. I signed up with Direcway in January 05, it was my only choice other than dial-up. No one said a word about FAP then. I was first Fapped in mid-07, and only because I didn't know about it. The service tech was all accusatory and would not discuss FAP. Then, I did my homework. But I have $1,200 worth of equipment invested and still no other real choice out here in the boonies. The simplest thing Hughesnet could do for their customers would be to give us a way to prevent fapping out. I'd be the first to use it. As a graphic designer, I need broadband. As a volunteer for a non-profit, I have difficulty affording even $60 a month for their cheapest plan. I am a grandmother. I don't download porn or play games online, much less download whole movies, but a 200MB limit is ridiculous. I can't even get the updates for my laptop. I have tried setting the alarm at 1 am to do this, but that didn't even work. Now I update at my daughter's house, on a cable modem that has many times the speed at a fraction of the cost.
I was fapped again yesterday and I don't have the slightest clue why this time. I guess my main beef is that they just don't care about their customers' convenience, or they would find a way to help us avoid FAP.


sgneubeck
Premium
join:2006-05-07
Watsonville, CA

1 edit
toucanne, Hughesnet is not a service for you. The bandwidth by a satellite is too expensive for you. You need to move closer to the city. There is speed and FAP limits, that you need, available by satellite, but you are not willing to pay for it. This is not a fault of Hughesnet.

-Steven


SmokeDOG

@charter.com
reply to nomorehughes
As an installer (new to Hughes, but in the satellite business for years) I can understand both sides of the argument. However, I agree with the previous posts about people not doing your homework. It just seems to me that none of my customers have researched the service they are signing up for. They don't know what they can and can't do with it and what TERMS they are agreeing to. Satellite Internet is more restrictive than cable or DSL, yes, but it's apparent if one were to read up on the matter. It is written everywhere about the Fair Use Policy, almost every Q&A in the FAQ section on their website includes a reference to the policy. It is a way to manage demand, not that hard to figure out. But I do agree with finding a way to keep users in touch with how much they are actually using. However they do have a Usage Administration section on their homepage where you can check your usage.

I do know that there are thousands of happy customers, most of which knew what they were getting in to. High speeds in the middle of no where. I know cause I drive to these places.


yolarry

join:2007-12-29
Creston, WV
reply to nomorehughes
I just glad that the webpages are faster and I can download unlimted for 5 hours.

I happy just wish dsl was here and save be big $$$

toucanne

join:2008-09-07
Pahrump, NV
reply to SmokeDOG
said by SmokeDOG :

they do have a Usage Administration section on their homepage where you can check your usage.
They do, but it is 2 hours behind. It would be nice to be able to have something in real time, in order to avoid being fapped when you are approaching the limit.

I do know that there are thousands of happy customers, most of which knew what they were getting in to.
I signed an 8-page contract, which I read. Most of had to do with installation. None of it referred to FAP. This was in January of 05, when they were still DirecWay. I believe that FAP was instituted later, perhaps when they changed the name over to HughesNet. They certainly did not announce it loudy. Regardless, I had no choice at the time, and still don't. This is way better than dial-up. I am a happy customer 90% of the time. I just think they could be less insidious about the whole thing, and perhaps ease the limits, or take into consideration a person's overall monthly usage. Something.

jeeperjennie

join:2009-01-31
Hockley, TX
reply to nomorehughes
Question....I hear many of you complaining about this service.

I have had Hughes net for a little over a year now..I had Wild blue before Hughes. We had great connection with Wild Blue but their customer service was very poor...so we switched..Hughes was wonderful for the first 6 months...but this last six months has been horriable...their service has been getting slower and slower....we pay for the 1 mbps download and 200 kbps upload....I ran a speed test on about 5 diff web site all which read 879 kbps download and 130 kbps upload with on computer running...add a second computer and I got 700 kbps download and 100 kbps upload so I called Hughes net they had me run their speed test which showed 999 kbps down and 180 up with one and with two computer running

When I asked their customer service rep why we were getting such low numbers she told me that I should only use one computer at a time and that their service says you can numbers as high as 1 mbps down and 200 up but it was not promissed...

Question part....has anyone else ran these tests? and seen such drastic number changes...why are they telling me that other web sites test are not correct and theirs are?