|reply to areacode304 |
Re: Massive discrepancy between Suddenlink's meter and my own
said by areacode304:According to Pete Abel himself, we in the 304 area code are not under the usage cap yet. He stated that we'd get a letter stating the caps and consequences. My meter is useless also, as I have proven the one day my house didn't have power and I wasn't even home (and was on vacation the prior week, so it wasn't aggregate) I was shown to have used 12GB, with their headend down, my modem down, my computer/router/wireless all down.
While that's true, Suddenlink has instituted a bandwidth cap in his region which has automatic overage fees attached if the cap is exceeded. The bandwidth that their (faulty as all hell) meter shows that he used would be held against him if he were to exceed the cap, even though he couldn't have used it due to the outage.
One could argue, should they want to start shit about this, that Suddenlink is intentionally altering their meter in an effort to make users go over their limit and have to pay more on their next billing cycle. I'm not saying that the argument would be taken seriously by a court of law or that Suddenlink is actually guilty of such practices, but stirring the pot would bring a fair amount of negative attention that I doubt any business would want. Once an allegation goes public, consumer opinion tends to drop considerably and is exceptionally difficult to sway back in the company's favor.
I should note that since Suddenlink seems to operate in markets where there is little to nothing in the way of viable alternatives for television and internet services, they would likely survive the shitstorm based solely on the fact that not doing business with them would mean having significantly less access to the outside world. Well played, Suddenlink. Even when you lose, you win.