As a general rule, when somebody starts blustering about laws without actually providing any hard evidence and citations of which laws, in particular, they believe have been violated, I tune them out.
However, since you want something more specific...
First off, the 2-Wire 2701HG-G is not a wireless N, but rather a wireless G.
The first version of the 2-wire had 802.11g. The second version had 802.11n. You say they replaced the modem and it didn't fix it... given that Bell rolled out the Sagemcom modem almost 2 years ago, and launched it in earnest more than a year ago, while it's possible that a repair technician still had a 2-wire in his truck and gave you a replacement 2-wire, it's extremely unlikely that it would have been a rev.1 version, and far more likely they'd have given you a Sagemcom. If they'd mailed you out a modem, you probably wouldn't have gotten a 2-wire in the first place, and while the Sagemcom is an absolutely terrible router, it, too, has 802.11n. They also released a 2nd version of the Cellpipe 61v that had 802.11n on it, too.
While it's true that the Sagemcom is a steaming pile of donkey poop as a router, it, too, has 802.11n, and will bridge the PPPoE on FTTN. They do something weird on FTTH when you try to bridge it, but you're not on FTTH if you're using a 2-wire.
Let's not forget about the fact that establishing multiple PPPoE sessions with or through the same modem is NOT the same thing as bridging the modem to establish only ONE PPPoE session. The modem does not magically bridge itself. This is something that must be done manually.
Actually, it's something I'm doing right now with my connection. It did not require any special configuration in the modem at all... factory reset the modem, plug in a computer and turn off wireless through the firmware, and then plug in a Linksys router and configure it for PPPoE. The modem establishes a walled-garden PPPoE session which it uses to automatically update the firmware, and it bridges the PPPoE session from the router, offloading all routing to the router.
Speaking of the modem automatically updating its firmware, has it ocurred to you that this is what happened when you plugged in your Bell modem? If you didn't want it to happen, then you shouldn't have plugged it in.
What you also don't understand obviously is that in the eyes of federal law, once a company breaches their contract on any clause in part or in whole, the contract in its entirety is null and void. The same holds true for ToS agreements.
I sincerely doubt that Bell violated their terms of service in any way, because nowhere in their terms of service for residential service do they assure a level of service at all, or even service availability. In fact, their service contract and even the fine print on their website is quite clear that they cannot guarantee service availability. If you want an SLA, then they will politely suggest you contact Bell Business Internet instead of Bell Residential Sales.
Since Bell has violated theirs repeatedly, I am not bound to the no liability clause, meaning I am fully within my right to pursue legal recourse.
As I said, good luck with that. It's your money. The most you will *ever* get back from them is what you've paid them over the course of your contract, and it's extremely unlikely you'd even get that. If your lawyer believes otherwise, that's his prerogative, but if I had a lawyer who believed that, I'd retain other council.
Additionally, you also made mention of not honouring the warranty. This is a pathetic joke because the warranty on any modem is only for 1 year, and this modem is more than 2 years old, therefore there is no warranty.
Not true, actually. As long as you're renting the modem from them, they have an obligation to make sure it's in working order. Even if the hardware is more than 2 years old, they will still replace it free of charge. While you can raise a stink and get them to waive the modem rental fee, it's still considered a rental and not an outright purchase, even on the new one-time modem rental fee.
They refused to support it based on the fact that it wasn't in the configuration they wanted it in.
So, you expected them to support something they didn't sell you, and with no guarantee that your hardware wasn't the cause of the issues? Did it occur to you to put it into the configuration they wanted in order to prove it was their hardware, so that they could, you know, send you a replacement modem like you wanted?
This boils down to a case of the modem itself was broken, yet Bell insisted on charging me a monthly rental fee, but refused to provide me with a modem that actually works. Wouldn't this aggravate you just slightly?
Not really. You wouldn't let them follow their procedures to prove the hardware issue, and I have no idea how you managed to make it to executive care without somebody suggesting that they waive the modem rental fee. Heck, they don't even charge the modem rental fee any more on new installs, just a one-time $50 "modem rental fee" that usually gets waived. You wouldn't even have had to escalate to a supervisor to get that option applied to your bill, let alone gone as far as executive care.
These are just some of the inconsistencies between reality and your claims. Again, I must suggest that you check your facts before you try to rebut any posts as it will save you a lot of time and won't make it obvious that you don't know what you're talking about.
*shrugs* I work in the industry and I'm familiar with Bell's products and procedures. I've also been in the situation of having to answer the claims when somebody goes to his lawyer and doesn't tell the lawyer the whole truth. If your lawyer is in full possession of the facts, and still says that you should try suing Bell, then I'd hire a new lawyer. But that's just me.
I think you have some reading
to do. Specifically, this
. Start with section 7, page 15. Sections 12 and 20 are worth reading, too. Section 21 is the one that deals with your 3rd party router, and basically says you're on your own. Section 22 is the one that makes me laugh about your $13k claim, btw, and the one you should probably make sure your lawyer has read.
You agreed to their ToS by purchasing the service. Now you've cancelled the service. If you choose to sue them, that's your choice to make. But you *really* should leave it at that and call it a day. You stand to lose a lot more than you stand to gain.
It seems to me like you're more concerned with cramming new products down the throats of customers who already have the existing hardware that just needs updating of the software, rather than providing solutions to the problem.
You're expressing surprise that a Bell modem would try to update its firmware, and you're saying that I'm the one who's not in possession of all the facts? Interesting. I'm not pretending to know everything that's happened in your situation: I don't have access to your account data/ticket history with Bell, and I can't listen to the calls you had with tech. support. But I'm equally certain that you're not telling the whole truth here, and that at the very least, you haven't actually *read* the ToS that you agreed to when you signed up for Bell in the first place.
Mods, please don't delete his post this time... I don't take personal offense to it, and I have a feeling somebody at Bell legal is going to enjoy reading this thread.