dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
38
share rss forum feed


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to shrug

Re: Incompetent technician cut off my Internet!

This is the second time this has happened in a period of six months FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASON. This isn't an equipment breakdown, a rodent incident or any pathetic excuse. This is the work of an INCOMPETENT technician depriving me of a service I've already paid for.

As a result of this, I have no other choice but to seek financial compensation above the current monthly Internet costs. Starting tomorrow, both TekSavvy and Bell Canada will be fined $100 EACH per FULL day that I'm without Internet service, up to a maximum of $7,000, the maximum amount that can be claimed in Quebec Small Claims Court.

It is time to make corporations financially responsible for their blatant incompetence.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



Angelo
The Network Guy
Premium
join:2002-06-18

call in and have a ticket open to correct this issue as soon as possible...



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

I will. But I had to come in to work to do all of this because being put on hold would have run down my mobile phone minutes. Not that it wouldn't have mattered considering that even if I did have wired phone service, I still would have been without the line.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to Angelo

Bad time to call. Perpetually on hold.

Expand your moderator at work


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada
reply to milnoc

Re: Incompetent technician cut off my Internet!

While I feel your pain, ToS usually specifically limit damages on residential services. Typically, they are considered 'best effort' vs. a business grade service, which would include an SLA with measurements, and penalty clauses...

You're probably SoL for anything above a refund of the actual service costs.

As for the actual cause; if you live in an MDU, the riser wiring isn't in Bell's assignment system... Butting into a pair, hearing no dial tone, and assuming its unused and available is pretty standard practice. Lazy, no doubt, but hardly uncommon... When it DOES get fixed, request special-service caps get installed... Just little red plastic covers that identify pairs of extra interest for future installers.



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

There's just one catch. My line didn't go through the telecom room. It was routed directly to the Bell cabinet OUTSIDE of the building. That's what the last technician did searching for a clean line when my service was upgraded from 5/800 to 16/1.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to milnoc

said by milnoc:

This is the second time this has happened in a period of six months FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASON. This isn't an equipment breakdown, a rodent incident or any pathetic excuse. This is the work of an INCOMPETENT technician depriving me of a service I've already paid for.

As a result of this, I have no other choice but to seek financial compensation above the current monthly Internet costs. Starting tomorrow, both TekSavvy and Bell Canada will be fined $100 EACH per FULL day that I'm without Internet service, up to a maximum of $7,000, the maximum amount that can be claimed in Quebec Small Claims Court.

It is time to make corporations financially responsible for their blatant incompetence.

....I believe if you probably look at the TSI TOS, you can't seek claim for damages above what you pay them in monthly service.

Excerpt from said TOS/AUP: »secure.teksavvy.com/en/termspolicies.asp

5. Warranty

1. Customer acknowledges that TekSavvy does not warrant uninterrupted or error free Services or the content, availability, accuracy or any other aspect of any information including, without limitation, all data, files and all other information or content in any form or of any type, accessible or made available to or by Customer or its end users through the use of the Services. TekSavvy shall be permitted from time to time to interrupt the Services in order to provide maintenance to the Services, as more specifically set out in the Schedules.
2. The warranties provided in this Agreement are in lieu of all other warranties and conditions. The Customer hereby waives all other warranties and conditions, express, implied or statutory, including any warranty of merchantability, fitness of a particular purpose, or availability or reliability of the Services.

6. Remedies

a. SUBJECT TO SECTION 8, TEKSAVVY'S AND THE THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS' TOTAL CUMULATIVE LIABILITY, IF ANY, TO THE CUSTOMER FOR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT AND THE PROVISION OF THE SERVICES WILL IN NO EVENT EXCEED THE TOTAL AGGREGATE MONTHLY CHARGES (NET OF ALL DISCOUNTS AND CREDITS) PAID BY THE CUSTOMER DURING THE PERIOD SUCH DAMAGES WERE INCURRED, SUCH PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED THREE (3) MONTHS, FOR THE SPECIFIC SERVICES THAT ALLEGEDLY GIVE RISE TO THE DAMAGES.

b. CUSTOMER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES AGAINST TEKSAVVY IN RESPECT OF THE SERVICES AND THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE AS STATED IN THIS AGREEMENT.

The Caps are from the website...so, like I said...you can't get more than whatever your monthly billing is, I guess if you're paying $3100/month for your internet services, then the $100 day to TSI would be relevant, otherwise since you've agreed to the service, you've agreed to the terms and conditions therein...otherwise you can disconnect the service...

Your "Time and mobile phone minutes" would be irrelevant in a court of law....again if it was important that you didn't have downtime, have a backup....

That's all I can say, people like this used to try and throw that argument at me all the time....looks like the TSI Lawyers did their homework on this one, sorry, you lose.


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

You're not the judge.


GreenEnvy22

join:2011-08-04
St Catharines, ON
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
reply to nitzguy

I'm not saying the OP here is right or wrong, but TOS's are not the final word in the legal world. TOS's can't take away your legal rights, even if the wording says it does. That won't stand up in court. A judge can always decide to ignore a TOS if the situation warrants or if he feels it's unfair/too restrictive.

Whether or not his claim would have any success or not I'm not sure, especially on the Teksavvy end as they are also a victim of Bell here.



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

The problem here is that both companies can deny responsibility. Bell denies responsibility because I'm not a Bell customer, and TekSavvy denies responsibility because the incident was caused by a Bell technician.

By going after both of them at once, this makes it easier for a judge to work out who's responsible for the incident, and how much I should be awarded in compensation if I win.

Of course, that's if it comes to that. They can get out of paying anything at all if my Internet connection is restored on Monday.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



ChuckcZar

@teksavvy.com

Bell's track record in court is pitiful to say the least even with all their overpaid lawyers.



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

Heading home now. I'll try to use a tether on my phone, but it might not work, or it'll be too slow. That means I'll have to stay at the office a lot longer just to have enough resources to complete my daily tasks.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to GreenEnvy22

said by GreenEnvy22:

I'm not saying the OP here is right or wrong, but TOS's are not the final word in the legal world. TOS's can't take away your legal rights, even if the wording says it does. That won't stand up in court. A judge can always decide to ignore a TOS if the situation warrants or if he feels it's unfair/too restrictive.

Whether or not his claim would have any success or not I'm not sure, especially on the Teksavvy end as they are also a victim of Bell here.

Who said anything about legal rights? TSI would definitely not be negligent on their part. They are doing the best that they can on a best effort service.

You're right, I'm not the judge, but I'm pretty sure that its just about iron clad, based on the amount of times I heard in calls "I'm losing hundreds of dollars a day because my internet is down and its all your fault and I'm going to sue you".....

To my knowledge I was never asked to testify in a court and never heard about a court proceeding regarding an internet service outage.

Unless you can prove gross negligence on TSI's part, and unless you have the name of the Bell Technician in question....it could have been ANYONE in that room, what if someone went in there and goofed around with the wires?

I'm not sure why you even indicate Bell since as we know your services are not with them so they have no "duty to perform"...and in reality don't know you from a hole in the ground from a customer standpoint.

I know you want to be on your soapbox and it sucks that its happenned on a long weekend. Long story short, I'm sure your internet service will not be restored on Monday.

....Also going after both of them doesn't make it easier for a judge to work out who's responsible for the incident....it makes it easier for both parties to claim judgment against you when you lose.

Just to remind you of a little history:

»news.nationalpost.com/2012/08/09···-ticket/

If you want to be liable for both TSI's and Bell's lawyers fees as a result, be my guest....I wish you luck.


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

You're comparing the possibility of my future small claims court case with a failed class action lawsuit over a $30 parking ticket? Heh!

Also, for small claims court, you don't need a lawyer, and the fees are low. That was done intentionally so that people could demand fair compensation over issues in which the amounts involved don't justify a full court case.

Granted, the case against TekSavvy (if it ever escalades to that level) could be tricky as they're located in Chatham, Ontario. If the Quebec court doesn't recognize jurisdiction, I'd have to plead my case in Ontario.

And look at the implications if I lose completely and have no recourse whatsoever because I went with a third-party ISP. That would mean YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHTS as a customer if your third-party Internet connection fails due to neglect by the last-mile provider. Knowing this, why would ANYONE ever take a chance purchasing any kind of service from a third-party provider?

That could kill off the whole industry.

on a side note, I couldn't get my phone tether to work. I'm missing the appropriate software. Gotta pick that up at work today, the only place I still have proper Internet access.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



JCohen
Premium
join:2010-10-19
Nepean, ON
kudos:9
Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to milnoc

said by milnoc:

As a result of this, I have no other choice but to seek financial compensation above the current monthly Internet costs. Starting tomorrow, both TekSavvy and Bell Canada will be fined $100 EACH per FULL day that I'm without Internet service, up to a maximum of $7,000, the maximum amount that can be claimed in Quebec Small Claims Court.

It is time to make corporations financially responsible for their blatant incompetence.

Yea, cause $7,000 is going to make a company as big as Bell financially responsible. In 2010 they had a revenue of $10.069 Billion, $7,000 is just pennies and not even worth your time to try and get; guess what else, you'll have even more lost days at work when you try to fight them.


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

On my own, no. it won't make a difference. But if I win, people will realize they can sue and win as well, especially once I publish how I won my case.

And if I lose, depending on the circumstances, it could not only bring to light serious flaws in Canada's telecom regulations, it could also result in the introduction of tougher consumer protection laws.

Any way you look at it, my actions could potentially expose a lot of the industry's dirty laundry. And selling the ebook about my experience for a buck could help pay off all of the costs.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



dillyhammer
START me up
Premium,MVM
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..
reply to JCohen

said by JCohen:

Yea, cause $7,000 is going to make a company as big as Bell financially responsible. In 2010 they had a revenue of $10.069 Billion, $7,000 is just pennies

Man, that is so not the point.

The point is, when you do something wrong you should pay a price. That is the very foundation of our court systems, and our belief systems in general.

Someone needs to be on the carpet for this BS.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil -»[Burloak] Usage Based Billing Nightmare
Make The Switch - »openmedia.ca/switch


nuageux

@videotron.ca

Ya but it's a mistake, it will always happen. They don't want to do mistake, when they have to come back to fix the mistake, it cost money to them. Why this mistake happen two times? Maybe there's something wrong, a mix-up with the wiring? Wich wiring, the one owned by Bell or the interior wiring of the building? If it's with the interior wiring of the building and if it's owned by the building's owner, maybe the building owner is responsable about these mistakes, maybe it's the one who have to pay?

Anyway, I think you over reacted about that! If the customer isn't happy with his adsl Internet connection, maybe he must switch to cable?



milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2

The building's wiring is owned by Bell. My demarc is the phone jack in the wall.

The only option for the cable "last mile" is Videotron.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live



nitzguy
Premium
join:2002-07-11
Sudbury, ON
reply to dillyhammer

said by dillyhammer:

said by JCohen:

Yea, cause $7,000 is going to make a company as big as Bell financially responsible. In 2010 they had a revenue of $10.069 Billion, $7,000 is just pennies

Man, that is so not the point.

The point is, when you do something wrong you should pay a price. That is the very foundation of our court systems, and our belief systems in general.

Someone needs to be on the carpet for this BS.

Mike



Listen, unless you can prove GROSS NEGLIGENCE on the part of Bell/Tech its a moot point, it was a simple accident, these things happen...

No Court of law, especially a "small claims court" is going to award what you're looking for.

Especially jurisdiction, since you'd be in Ontario, you'd be subject to the laws of the land of Ontario...

When an innocent mistake is made, the court should NOT be the recourse.

Internet access is not enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...Internet is not a right.....(although most people here would think otherwise).

But I wish you luck in your quest. You can receive judgment even if you do win, and then how do you enforce collection on them?

Again, I wish you luck but I feel like you're fighting a losing battle, and even in small claims court, the defendants in this case if successful would still have you pay the court costs that they incurred and I'm sure their lawyers won't come cheap.


Tx
bronx cheers from cheap seats
Premium
join:2008-11-19
Mississauga, ON
kudos:12
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·FreePhoneLine
·Rogers Hi-Speed
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

said by milnoc:

This is the second time this has happened in a period of six months FOR EXACTLY THE SAME REASON. This isn't an equipment breakdown, a rodent incident or any pathetic excuse. This is the work of an INCOMPETENT technician depriving me of a service I've already paid for.

As a result of this, I have no other choice but to seek financial compensation above the current monthly Internet costs. Starting tomorrow, both TekSavvy and Bell Canada will be fined $100 EACH per FULL day that I'm without Internet service, up to a maximum of $7,000, the maximum amount that can be claimed in Quebec Small Claims Court.

It is time to make corporations financially responsible for their blatant incompetence.

....I believe if you probably look at the TSI TOS, you can't seek claim for damages above what you pay them in monthly service.

Excerpt from said TOS/AUP: »secure.teksavvy.com/en/termspolicies.asp

5. Warranty

1. Customer acknowledges that TekSavvy does not warrant uninterrupted or error free Services or the content, availability, accuracy or any other aspect of any information including, without limitation, all data, files and all other information or content in any form or of any type, accessible or made available to or by Customer or its end users through the use of the Services. TekSavvy shall be permitted from time to time to interrupt the Services in order to provide maintenance to the Services, as more specifically set out in the Schedules.
2. The warranties provided in this Agreement are in lieu of all other warranties and conditions. The Customer hereby waives all other warranties and conditions, express, implied or statutory, including any warranty of merchantability, fitness of a particular purpose, or availability or reliability of the Services.

6. Remedies

a. SUBJECT TO SECTION 8, TEKSAVVY'S AND THE THIRD PARTY PROVIDERS' TOTAL CUMULATIVE LIABILITY, IF ANY, TO THE CUSTOMER FOR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THIS AGREEMENT AND THE PROVISION OF THE SERVICES WILL IN NO EVENT EXCEED THE TOTAL AGGREGATE MONTHLY CHARGES (NET OF ALL DISCOUNTS AND CREDITS) PAID BY THE CUSTOMER DURING THE PERIOD SUCH DAMAGES WERE INCURRED, SUCH PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED THREE (3) MONTHS, FOR THE SPECIFIC SERVICES THAT ALLEGEDLY GIVE RISE TO THE DAMAGES.

b. CUSTOMER'S SOLE AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES AGAINST TEKSAVVY IN RESPECT OF THE SERVICES AND THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE AS STATED IN THIS AGREEMENT.

The Caps are from the website...so, like I said...you can't get more than whatever your monthly billing is, I guess if you're paying $3100/month for your internet services, then the $100 day to TSI would be relevant, otherwise since you've agreed to the service, you've agreed to the terms and conditions therein...otherwise you can disconnect the service...

Your "Time and mobile phone minutes" would be irrelevant in a court of law....again if it was important that you didn't have downtime, have a backup....

That's all I can say, people like this used to try and throw that argument at me all the time....looks like the TSI Lawyers did their homework on this one, sorry, you lose.

No one looses yet. That's jumping to a harsh conclusion without a judges ruling. TOS is agreed upon, as is a 3 year contract with Rogers for example, but this does not stop a judge from ruling in favor of the plaintiff on extraordinary grounds. It has happened under other criteria.

I think TSI and Bell are in favor. Odds in winning without real proof of suffering or serious loss of income or how one came about a $100 /day number without justification would be thrown out faster than you can say Bell Sucks


Inssomniak
The Glitch
Premium
join:2005-04-06
Cayuga, ON
kudos:2
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

Internet access is not enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...Internet is not a right.....(although most people here would think otherwise).

+1
--
OptionsDSL Wireless Internet
»www.optionsdsl.ca


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to nitzguy

said by nitzguy:

Listen, unless you can prove GROSS NEGLIGENCE on the part of Bell/Tech its a moot point, it was a simple accident, these things happen...

Bullshit. You make a mistake, you must make reparations for that mistake. That's the ethical thing to do.

And this particular mistake happened not once, but twice.

Got a call from Bell. The line will be reconnected on Wednesday morning. That means I'll be demanding $200 each from Bell Canada and TekSavvy as compensation.

Unless they send the same INCOMPETENT technician, at which point I'll refuse them entry. I've already warned TekSavvy about this.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live

Grappler

join:2002-09-01
Ottawa, ON

said by milnoc:

Bullshit. You make a mistake, you must make reparations for that mistake. That's the ethical thing to do.

...

Unless they send the same INCOMPETENT technician, at which point I'll refuse them entry. I've already warned TekSavvy about this.

I guess then you will not get connected as you will be refusing entry to all the technicians that will be sent. (you already stated you cannot identify the technician)

Do not confuse ethical with legal.
Expand your moderator at work

MaynardKrebs
Heave Steve, for the good of the country
Premium
join:2009-06-17
kudos:4
reply to nitzguy

Re: Incompetent technician cut off my Internet!

said by nitzguy:



Listen, unless you can prove GROSS NEGLIGENCE on the part of Bell/Tech its a moot point, it was a simple accident, these things happen...

Just because 'accidents happen' does not mean that the victim is SOL.

You rear-end somebody in your car and what happens to the victim's repair costs? Either your insurance company pays, or you do out-of-pocket. Bell is self-insured & TSI is self-insured.

TSI is responsible to directly compensate the customer as they are the so called 'service provider'. Bell is responsible for contributory negligence in the same way that jerkass parents are if their kid leaves the moveable basketball post/net in the street at night and you drive down the road and smack into it (happens in Forest Hill where some people think they own the road too).


milnoc

join:2001-03-05
H3B
kudos:2
reply to Grappler

said by Grappler:

I guess then you will not get connected as you will be refusing entry to all the technicians that will be sent. (you already stated you cannot identify the technician)

Do not confuse ethical with legal.

I don't know his name, but I do know what he looks like.

And if a company uses legal means to behave unethically, what does that say about the entire organisation?

Andre, the tech is scheduled to show up tomorrow morning. Hopefully.

If service isn't restored, I'll have to reconsider doing business with your company. Losing service like this due to blatant INCOMPETENCE is simply unacceptable.

Or maybe MALICIOUS INTENT. "Breaking" a customer's existing connection while working on another customer's connection would be a neat little way for a subcontracted technician to get repeated service calls (and service call payments) to the same building address.
--
Watch my future television channel's public test broadcast!
»thecanadianpublic.com/live


LazMan
Premium
join:2003-03-26
canada

1 edit

said by milnoc:

And if a company uses legal means to behave unethically, what does that say about the entire organisation?

If service isn't restored, I'll have to reconsider doing business with your company. Losing service like this due to blatant INCOMPETENCE is simply unacceptable.

Or maybe MALICIOUS INTENT. "Breaking" a customer's existing connection while working on another customer's connection would be a neat little way for a subcontracted technician to get repeated service calls (and service call payments) to the same building address.

Wow - tin foil hat's on a little tight today, isn't it?

A BTS tech pulls a jumper with no dial-tone - on an non-standard installed service (you said they previously ran a direct drop from the JWI, as the wiring in your MDU's messed), and suddenly it's "malicious intent"?!?

To be honest, while it's a pain in the ass to be without internet, you're really starting to sound like the kind of customer company's don't mind losing. Threatening to sue, talking about mal intent, and generally being wound for sound...

If you legitimately need an internet connection to do business; then pay for a business service - they come with SLA's, priority repairs, etc, etc - but that service level comes with an appropriate cost.

I'm not trying to defend Bell (TSI pretty much doesn't have a horse in the race, other then being stuck in the middle) - but you're making a mountain out of a mole-hill, IMO...


battleop

join:2005-09-28
00000
reply to milnoc

We can safely assume that you have a 100% perfect work record with a single mistake ever since the first day you started working?
--
I do not, have not, and will not work for AT&T/Comcast/Verizon/Charter or similar sized company.