dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
7638
share rss forum feed

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON

Shocking info from Rogers!Is TecSavvy lying to us?

I placed an order to switch to Rogers internet as I am now 13 days with no service from TecSavvy.

I didn't want to pay the $50 connection fee so just called to ask to pick up a modem and simply plug it in as I am already on the Rogers network with my TecSavvy connection, here is what I was told:

"Because TecSavvy refused to provide Rogers the requested information on their customer base, specifically information on whether each customer has paid their bill on time, Rogers physically installed a filter on the cable line outside my house that is preventing me from accessing the internet"

The rep told me that this was done to all the TecSavvy Accounts for which TecSavvy did not report on to them. So a physical visit from Rogers is necessary to remove the filter on my line.

The rep further blasted TecSavvy telling me that TecSavvy is not telling their customers the entire truth and that Rogers will always take care of their own customers first and will not service TecSavvy customer problems if Rogers customer are in the queue.

I don't know what to think anymore, but it looks like I am not getting rid of this $50 install fee which I'm thinking TecSavvy should be covering if the above is true.

FYI

Just checked my lines outside, there is no filter on the street level junction box (easy access and unlocked on my neighbors front lawn), but there was a filter in the box at the side of my house with a yellow tape with the following markings SNBR - 2/XXROG PPC 331. The XX are actual # that I removed in case its a serial #, but long story short I think it is a cable TV filter as I do not have TV service from Rogers and removing this device had not impact on my internet, still down. Lines are clearly marked TPIA and I now have clear 100% proof that Rogers lies through their teeth.

Bottom line both companies are likely lying and I have no Internet until I pay Rogers $50 plus HST to hand deliver a modem using a third party contracted service technician.

This all sucks!!! As do TecSavvy and Rogers!


martyb

join:2013-05-18
Wemindji, QC
Teksavvy (why are ppl putting a C in that these days? Weird...) in no way has to tell Rogers "who has paid their bill on time", that is utter BS - it is up to Teksavvy to have a sound business plan, the end customer billing disputes with Teksavvy do not influence how Rogers delivers TPIA. What an idiotic notion, dreamed up no doubt by a desperate Rogers salesperson.

Why are you talking to Rogers reps if you are a TSI customer? So in your post above, the only people that seem to be lying to you is Rogers...


Jethro86

join:2005-05-27
Winchester, ON
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
reply to M_R
said by M_R:

The rep further blasted TecSavvy telling me that TecSavvy is not telling their customers the entire truth and that Rogers will always take care of their own customers first and will not service TecSavvy customer problems if Rogers customer are in the queue.

So Teksavvy is in the wrong by "lying" when Rogers admits they won't take care of Teksavvy customers if they have Rogers customers to take care of.
Sounds to me like the proof that's needed to go to the CRTC or Competition Bureau to show how Rogers is trying to destroy a competitor.

NBomb

join:2007-01-23
Etobicoke, ON
reply to M_R
The name of the company is right up there on the top of the screen. And in many other places. As soon as I saw that misspelling, I ignored the rest of the post.

MFido

join:2012-10-19
kudos:2
reply to M_R
Rogers is BS-ing you ... and you belive them ... LOL


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

3 edits

3 recommendations

reply to NBomb
said by NBomb:

The name of the company is right up there on the top of the screen. And in many other places. As soon as I saw that misspelling, I ignored the rest of the post.

His spelling (error in company name) determines your ability to read his post? You knock him for the mistake he made on the company so I wonder if we should do the same with your post? (I won't of course even though you made a mistake as well) If you took as much time to read what he was saying and how unbelievably upsetting it is Rogers may be telling people these stories as you do writing a post about not reading his post, you would be just as upset about what this OP was possibly told.

said by MFido:

Rogers is BS-ing you ... and you belive them ... LOL

That's irrelevant to what the OP is saying. Completely and utterly irrelevant and sad that it's all you're focused on. There is a very serious and blatant issue here and I can see Marc's blood boiling over reading that post if Rogers is telling people this lately.

People need to stop making fun of customers/people who don't know better and thinks it makes them or any other Teksavvy customer smarter or better. There are believe it or not people who believe what they are told by their ISP. It's no different then asking them to believe what Teksavvy tells them. Cannot fault the users for this.

The real issue IMHO is what Rogers may have told the OP. I find that the most disturbing of it all.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1
reply to M_R
said by M_R:

"Because TecSavvy refused to provide Rogers the requested information on their customer base, specifically information on whether each customer has paid their bill on time, Rogers physically installed a filter on the cable line outside my house that is preventing me from accessing the internet"

The rep told me that this was done to all the TecSavvy Accounts for which TecSavvy did not report on to them. So a physical visit from Rogers is necessary to remove the filter on my line.

Complete and utter fabrication. The Rogers rep was outright lying to you to avoid discounting the install fee.

said by M_R:

The rep further blasted TecSavvy telling me that TecSavvy is not telling their customers the entire truth and that Rogers will always take care of their own customers first and will not service TecSavvy customer problems if Rogers customer are in the queue.

Well, the second part of that has long been thought to be true at least.

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to MFido
said by MFido:

Rogers is BS-ing you ... and you belive them ... LOL

All I know is that I have no internet. Rogers is a greedy bully in this game they are playing hardball with the third party providers. They are using dirty tactics and are being anti-competitive despite their TPIA commitments. But in the end I am a consumer who pays his bill every month and does not have service which I use for my livelihood. I have no choice but to now go where I will have dependable service, and the fact that that is ROGERS just sucks!

TekSavvy also wasted my time and BS-ed me by not including my region in their updates making me wait on hold over an hour thinking they would get me going as Richmond Hill finnally fell off their outage list, well Richmond hill is still down and still not on their outage list, so I don't believe TEK Savvy either.

TeKSavvy has had the most horrendous customer service support since this problem occurred on Sept 25th, They have not owned the problem, have wasted my time with BS troubleshooting knowing full well that the problem was out of their control, they have taken over 5 days to get back to me on an open ticket with the utmost BS troubleshooting requests I've seen given what they know is going on. They have not communicated or made me aware of the problems by email or snail mail. I have not been offered an alternative connection (WIND Mobile cards) like some others have (despite opening 2 tickets) so they are likely providing some form of preferential treatment to some and not others. I am Pissed with TeKSavvy because they have truly sucked when me their customer has needed them to shine.

When everything was up and running they have been great, no complaints, but providing a service (discounted or not) also has a component of fixing whats busted and or in this case when it is outside of their control, owning the problem which at least in my experience they haven't done.

TeKSavvy TSI's and even their CEO Marc spend more time on this third party forum than they do on their own forum where I, as a customer turned to and wasted my first week of down time looking for help and got none.

and as for NBomb , get a life you looser, and go kiss some more TeKSavvy ass, the spelling is inconsequential to the real problems at hand which I'm sure you are also ignoring. Can't wait till your TPIA line gets cut by either Rogers or Bell and you are shit out of luck for 2 weeks.

As for the name it's stupid, it should be Tech which is the abbreviation for Technology not Tek, but I signed up for savings not spelling, but now have grief and no service.

Sorry for the rant but I'm just fed up

As an aside, I just called Rogers again, they checked and confirmed my Line to be "HOT" so I was granted authority to go and pick up a modem which I'm doing right now and as soon as I get my connection up and running I'm out of hear hopefully for good.

I thank the community here on DSLReports and how it has responded and posted to my posts in the last two days. Most of you were great until this post . I understand TeKsavvy is fighting the good fight but its customers are suffering and should be better treated in these dyer times.

Over and out!


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
reply to M_R
All you are doing M_R is proving to Rogers that their dirty play works and giving them justification to continue doing it.

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

.... here is what I was told:

[A] "Because TecSavvy refused to provide Rogers the requested information on their customer base, specifically information on whether each customer has paid their bill on time, Rogers physically installed a filter on the cable line outside my house that is preventing me from accessing the internet"

[B] The rep told me that this was done to all the TecSavvy Accounts for which TecSavvy did not report on to them. So a physical visit from Rogers is necessary to remove the filter on my line.

[C] The rep further blasted TecSavvy telling me that TecSavvy is not telling their customers the entire truth and that Rogers will always take care of their own customers first and will not service TecSavvy customer problems if Rogers customer are in the queue.

[A] - Rogers has no need, or right, to know whether an individual TSI customer has paid their bill to TSI or not. Rogers customer is TSI, not you. All Rogers needs to know is if TSI has paid their TOTAL bill (for 100k+ customers each month) to Rogers.

[B] - No filter is placed on a line for internet service irrespective of whether a specific address has internet service from Rogers or TSI, or not. The ONLY filter a location will have is one to prevent TV service (if the customer does not pay for it). You can have internet service without cable TV.

If you have internet service from TSI then Rogers IS supposed to do is install an orange tag on your line INSIDE the grey connection box outside your home. This orange tag lets the Rogers tech know that your internet service is supplied via an indie ISP and that they are to leave the connection working unless YOU cancel the service with the indie ISP.

[C] - It's not beyond the possible that the Rogers rep was telling the truth on this one ... that Rogers will screw TSI customers when it comes to fixing problems on Rogers' side of the fence.

What I find funny in all this is that TSI has about 100,000 (maybe more) cable internet customers - most probably on Rogers. That more than likely makes TSI Rogers single largest customer, yet Rogers treats TSI like shit. That wouldn't happen in any other line of business - suppliers bend over backwards to serve their largest customers all the time. But all Rogers wants to do is to get Teksavvy to bend over and take it up the a$$.

bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
kudos:1

1 recommendation

said by MaynardKrebs:

That wouldn't happen in any other line of business - suppliers bend over backwards to serve their largest customers all the time. But all Rogers wants to do is to get Teksavvy to bend over and take it up the a$$.

Not too many other lines of business where the supplier is also a retail competitor though.

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to sbrook
said by sbrook:

All you are doing M_R is proving to Rogers that their dirty play works and giving them justification to continue doing it.

sbrook would have me twiddle my thumbs and not make a living for 30 + days waiting with no ETA for my livelihood to return so that I can save $5 a month in my internet connection and make a point that Rogers is wrong?

very silly

you can can do the suffering for me I'll support you, for me me I need service and am somewhat happy to screw Rogers at $45 month knowing that this is a plan they don't like giving out

Nitra

join:2011-09-15
Montreal
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·ELECTRONICBOX

1 recommendation

Then switch back to Rogers, and file with the CRTC, they need to know this is going on.

»services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/instance···Lang=eng
Fill out a submission next to the box "CNOC - Part 1 application requesting relief to improve the quality of wholesale high-speed access services provided by cable carriers"

This issue you're having is already before the CRTC, Rogers just asked for another 30-day extension.

»www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments···ication/

It's very important that the CRTC hears from people that are going through this.


sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:13
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·WIND Mobile

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to M_R
IF you need internet to make a living then you should not be messing around with residential services from Rogers or Bell. You should have a business class service with a business class SLA.

If you insist on going with residential services but rely on the internet for your living, then you need a back up on a DIFFERENT wire. In other words, you need DSL as well as cable.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh and uncaring ... but by their terms of service essentially all Rogers or Bell has to do to meet their obligations on a residential service is put their wire in your house. It doesn't have to work, it doesn't have to meet any performance specs nor does it have to be active even one day a month. For a business, that is totally unacceptable.

I ran a business out of my home but I'm willing to take the risk. I can be without internet for several days without serious impact because I can go and get email elsewhere.

I save about 40% on my internet bill ... which is significant.

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to Nitra
said by Nitra:

Then switch back to Rogers, and file with the CRTC, they need to know this is going on.

»services.crtc.gc.ca/pub/instance···Lang=eng
Fill out a submission next to the box "CNOC - Part 1 application requesting relief to improve the quality of wholesale high-speed access services provided by cable carriers"

This issue you're having is already before the CRTC, Rogers just asked for another 30-day extension.

»www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments···ication/

It's very important that the CRTC hears from people that are going through this.

^^^^^^^^^^^ Did it yesterday ^^^^^^

Nitra

join:2011-09-15
Montreal
Personally, I'd not want to reward Rogers, move to Teksavvy DSL if you can get it, I'm sure they'll work something out with you regarding activation. Marc is a pretty good guy.

DigitalRain

join:2013-03-16
reply to M_R
The Rogers was representative was straight up lying to you. MaynardKrebs did an excellent job of explaining why, so there is no need me for me to rehash his answer.

That said, 13 days downtime is beyond unacceptable, no matter who's at fault. Even though I have 3 services with TekSavvy at my residence with which I do not have problems (well..not really..Last night I had 10 minutes of downtime followed up severe packet loss during the Rogers maintenance window which had resolved itself when I woke up this morning, but anyways), I would look elsewhere if something like this were to ever happen to me.

If I had to hazard a guess as to what happened, Richmond Hill was fixed for most people who had been impacted by the outage in question, leading to the multi-fault ticket or tickets with Rogers being closed due to their reporting a resolution. The number of people impacted by any remaining problems in Richmond Hill consequently fell below the threshold needed to open a new multi-fault ticket with Rogers, which in turn requires TekSavvy and its agents to jump through a number of hoops and ask you to perform steps that are irrelevant to the issue that you are facing to open a single-fault ticket.


elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2
Reviews:
·VMedia
reply to MaynardKrebs
And just to add,Robellus went to the CRTC to get a regulation in place to prevent people from switching if their bill wasn't paid.

That went over like a ton of bricks in the public and was quickly dropped. So if Robellus needs CRTC approval do to so, and didn't bother with it do you really think Teksavvy is doing that?

If I don't pay my tab with TSI,they have many ways to come after me for the money, preventing a switch is not one of them.
--
No, I didn't. Honest... I ran out of gas. I... I had a flat tire. I didn't have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn't come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake.......


Question

@videotron.ca

1 recommendation

reply to M_R
If I may, I have a privacy related question for Marc, or whoever wears the TSI privacy hat.

Is it standard procedure at Teksavvy to pass on transaction and billing info on a per subscriber basis to Rogers, including late payments or accounts due?

From what was said above it appears to be the case. Not sure if I noticed this in the Teksavvy privacy policy.


TypeS

join:2012-12-17
London, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
·TekSavvy Cable
Rogers collects account holder info for the connection, and on transfers it must match Rogers' database. But that's about it. For the financial, Rogers will be like any other company, they send TSI a monthly bill and expect payment. It's up to TSI to request disconnects for non-payment, Rogers won't care, they still expect to be paid even if TSI wasn't.


TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:28

1 recommendation

reply to Question
No we don't share anything with anybody. This whole thread is nonsense as we are a prepaid service.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy


Question

@videotron.ca
said by TSI Marc:

No we don't share anything with anybody. This whole thread is nonsense as we are a prepaid service.

TY for the reply. It did indeed seem rather off.

It's up to "M_R" to put this in writing to the CRTC about what is said in the current file going (it can also be verified by the CRTC since those calls are recorded). Guess if I don't see it in a few days... i'll draw my own conclusion about this entire topic.


TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:28
Everybody can go leave their comments here:

»CRTC asks for your comments to CNOC Cable Part 1
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

No we don't share anything with anybody. This whole thread is nonsense as we are a prepaid service.

The sending of info from one company to the other perhaps is nonsense, and it has been established in this thread that Rogers reps lie, but choose your words wisely as I really resent your comment that "this whole thread is nonsense".

As the CEO of TeKSavvy, you are doing exactly what I have complained about in this thread, you're not owning the problem, and continuously pointing your finger at a comments link on a Government website.

In this thread I have stated that I am going back to Rogers, it that why you are downplaying a thread that has accurately described both sides of the fence in your companies outage situation? or is it the acvcurate description this thread contains of the less than adequate resolutions and customer service I have received from TekSavvy during this critical time for your company.

I am now writing to you on my less than 5 minutes established new Rogers connection. This sir, is your failure that I had to switch, regardless of the tactics Rogers has used.

I have indeed left comments with the CNOC link bellow as you have so many time asked people to do on these forums, and they we're favorable to your company and its position in this situation, so a flippant response from you stating that "this whole thread is nonsense" pisses me off, even more so, considering I'm already pissed at your company for not being able to provide internet connectivity for almost 2 weeks and counting on my "prepaid service". I do want and expect a refund, even more so now that you have reminded me that I pay in advance on a monthly bases.

It seams like you are spending too much time worrying about the CNOC filling than righting your sinking ship. I have left countless suggestions with your tech support representatives since Sept 25th as to what you could have should have done to improve customer perception and experience during this critical time for your company. It seems nothing was done, and as a result, you have lost me as a customer and have now even personally left a bad taste in my mouth to boot after the fact. Great work Chief!

I wish you all the best of luck with your CNOC crusade, it is an important fight to fight as nobody should be bullied by Rogers et al., but you may want to consider the costs of what you are doing as I truly believe your ship is sinking and it needs its Captain.

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to M_R
My CNOC comments receipt

Your comment was successfully submitted to the CRTC.
A copy of this submission has been sent to you by email.
You are commenting on the Part 1 - Application # 2013-1311-3 -8660-C182-201313113
CNOC - Part 1 application requesting relief to improve the quality of wholesale high-speed access services provided by cable carriers
Case Number: 200088
Date submitted: 2013-10-07


corster
Premium
join:2002-02-23
Gatineau, QC

1 recommendation

reply to M_R
said by M_R:

It seams like you are spending too much time worrying about the CNOC filling than righting your sinking ship. I have left countless suggestions with your tech support representatives since Sept 25th as to what you could have should have done to improve customer perception and experience during this critical time for your company. It seems nothing was done, and as a result, you have lost me as a customer and have now even personally left a bad taste in my mouth to boot after the fact. Great work Chief!

The entire purpose of the CNOC filing is to "right the sinking ship", so to speak. TSI is constrained by the procedures put into place by the current TPIA tariff, which is exactly what they have been following from Day 1.


TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:28
reply to M_R
I'm sorry. I'm not following you... Above you wrote: "I now have clear 100% proof that Rogers lies through their teeth."

How exactly did I or TekSavvy get lumped in there?
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy


TSI Marc
Premium,VIP
join:2006-06-23
Chatham, ON
kudos:28
reply to M_R
Also M_R, I wasn't saying that your issue was nonsense.. I was saying that the notion that we lied or shared info or that there's any truth what you were told... Is nonsense.
--
Marc - CEO/TekSavvy

M_R

join:2013-10-07
Richmond Hill, ON
reply to TSI Marc
said by TSI Marc:

1) I'm sorry. I'm not following you... Above you wrote: "I now have clear 100% proof that Rogers lies through their teeth."

2)How exactly did I or TekSavvy get lumped in there?

1) no internet blocking filters present on the cable lines at my address either at my house or at my street level hook up

2) you responded to this thread with your flippant remark that "This whole thread is nonsense" not to mention you are the CEO of the company that had my "prepaid" internet service down for 13 day with no ETA or end in sight and did not take the care to let me and the likely thousands of other customers affected, know, either directly or indirectly what was going on. Especially critical as this has been an ongoing issue with TekSavvy and Rogers since the summer, so you should have some experience as to how to deal with these outages by now.

Just saw your second post, unfortunately that's not how your first response read, but thank you for clearing it up.

BrettD
Premium
join:2009-12-26
Ottawa, ON
reply to M_R
Did you RECORD this call's audio?

Regrettably, you feel you have proof, but to anyone else this is still technically hearsay. A recording of a conversation like this would add greater credibility to your report and others like this.

If anyone wants to record a call with the incumbent I have some suggestions for the most useful recording possible, based on my experience. I strongly encourage you to record ALL your calls with ALL the businesses you deal with on the phone, in case a recording error is made or misunderstanding arises and your discount or service is not what you were offered.

1. Make a COMPLETE, unabridged recording. Start the phone line recorder before you dial, state the purpose of the call and number you are calling, record your dialing (DTMF tones), and the answer, get the answering party to provide employee ID, then go into the issues.

2. If a strange statement like the one reported above is given, IN THE SAME CALL ask to speak to a supervisor. Ask for the supervisor's ID and position. Ask for confirmation of what you were told. If you get confirmation of what you were told it makes it harder for the incumbent to completely deny it afterwards.

4. Try to provide as little private personal info as possible in the conversation, as you will, as much as possible, make the recording available without missing pieces or editing. Keep your call focused, as you will want to make the unabridged call public.

3. Only stop the recorder after you have hung up. Do NOT edit the file in any way.

4. Make a pristine copy or three of the ORIGINAL recording.

5. At this stage, you may edit out personal identification details in the recording, only on a copy. Ideally just mask them out (don't delete), with the recording keeping the original length.

5. Share the recording (the original if possible) with the CRTC in response to the CNOC report. Share here.

You are a party to the conversation so this recording is legal in Canada. No notification to the other party is required.

You can record your wired phone call with a recorder like " NEXXTECH TELEPHONE HANDSET MINI RECORDER CONTROL" available at The Source. I don't know how to record a call on a cell phone - it varies a lot. Some may have apps, some are built in, and others, you could record the call on speaker phone mode with a recording device close by.

I'd suggest you test your technique a few times before making a call to the incumbent so you know you are able to record the cleanest audio possible.

I'd be glad to answer any questions about this. PM me if you wish.

Last year I received $$$$ in damages from a copyright infringement lawsuit I filed (I am a photojournalist). It was settled before trial. One of my stronger pieces of evidence was a recording I made of a conversation between myself and an employee of the infringing party, where they stated clearly that they had infringed. I filed that recording as part of my evidence.

Brett