CableOne Customers Capped, Then Charged More

Re: Confusing hold-over

the BBB doesnt really do anything unless their members then they just drop them or what ever. Companies don't even have to respond to the complaints. The BBB is just a way for customers to complain and the company just saying we'll deal with it and that's the end of that.

the AG is a different story but still not much would happen; pass a few buck to him/her and be done. Unless it was Spitzer from NY

permalink · 2007-09-18 20:32:38 ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Not true bud. I live in Ohio and trust me, enough complaints must have spurred the AG into action. RR backed down from their caps after complaints. They tried three times to cap users here. I complained to AG each time and BBB. No caps. It all depends if your AG is worth a you know what or not. If he is, then they have the power to hold companies to their advertising, big or small.

permalink · 2007-09-18 20:35:00 ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

They havent had a cap on service since TWC took over my area and that was about 4 years ago. I live in Ohio as well. And the caps then were 3gig up and 3gig down. That was quit a bit even then. We didn't have nearly as much as we do now on the Internet. No real Internet downloads of video and music (except Napster at that time; the end anyways), no VoIP except Yahoo or MSN voice chat. just email and eBay or some photo sharing.

They really don't have to advertise anything. Its the TOS and the AUP. TWC has it in their AUP and the TOS. Even in the Business TOS for RR Ohio Biz customers fro Mid-Ohio it does not state its Unlimited usage. www.roadrunnerohio.biz is the direct page that Mid Ohio maintains outside of the Branded TWC Corp. site where the TOS and the AUP are easy to find.

permalink · 2007-09-18 20:40:31 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Hott,

It did on their website, at least where I live. It started unlimited internet access. I told them I wanted to access what I wished on an "unlimited basis". Hence, my argument had merit and ground. Thankfully, the AG must have agreed as RR backed down after what I assume was a huge outpouring of complaints. DSLREPORTS profiled my story. Since that effort a few years back, I haven't heard a word.

permalink · 2007-09-18 22:03:51 ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

I know it said that on their site a few years ago that was when they first came here. When that was i signed up with Earthlink to get unlimited service. after i was installed for Elink they changed their minds on service and went fully unlimited. I never said you're argument had merit and ground though. But the service still isn't unlimited to business users and i would assume the same to a residential user they just don't enforce anything.

permalink · 2007-09-18 22:14:09 ·

jc100 join:2002-04-10	Re: Confusing hold-over Well we had different services, man. I had Time Warner you had Earthlink. There lies the difference. Time Warner advertised for many years unlimited internet connection. While earthlink leases their lines from Time Warner, they are a separate entity when it comes to TOS. Therefore, I can't speak for anyone's experience with Earthlink, only Time Warner.
	permalink · 2007-09-18 22:56:43 · ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

no you missed what i said. TWC was capped when i first signed up when they came to my area about 4 years ago. I signed up for earthlink then because of it. When RR changed the policy i changed back to them. But RR Biz class is capped. And i since since they do that I wouldn't doubt they have a policy on Rez customers as well they just don't enforce it.

I have RR currently.

permalink · 2007-09-18 23:25:55 ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Strange, Road Runner Residential isn't capped here. They tried and it failed miserably. As I said, dslreports profiled my story and it must have inspired a lot of others to complain along with me. Their first attempt was 15 GB and 5 USD for every 5 gigs over. Failed. Their second attempt was 40 GB and overage meant an automatic upgrade to business. Sorta failed. If I recall correctly, they sent me a letter on this one twice. I contacted the AG and BBB... and RR called me each time trying to resolve the matter. I clearly explained to the woman, who got to know me very well, my stance that unlimited internet access meant I could access whatever I wanted. As long as they CLEARLY advertise it on my local website (each website in Ohio is different, if you didn't know. It depends on if you are in eastern, wester, etc), I expect to get what I pay for. Hence, after the third call the woman was like, I am just calling because I have to. I know your stance. After that call, they just let it go. My guess, the outpouring complaints and the AG must have stuck them in their place. I haven't had any problems since then (knock on wood). If I ever do, I will gladly start another campaign. Once again, it's a companies prerogative to have caps. However, its not within their right to not clearly state them on their website and advertising. RR has never stated that on their page. Yet, since its been a non issue for a few years, I've let the matter drop. If it resurfaces, that would be my other argument. It's a customers right and an expectation that a company clearly state what limits they have before anyone signs up. This information should be clearly present on the on their website and advertisings, as I said. Consequently, this opens the door for legal matters, as did my case above. I actually had an attorney contact me wanting to do a class action lawsuit when I had my issue above. No Joke.

permalink · 2007-09-19 05:51:53 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

I didnt say that RoadRunner was capped You didnt read what i said or are only reading what you want to. I did not say that Res service was capped. I said chances are it is and they don't enforce so there is no need to tell the customers about this. But I do know with RoadRunner if you are using too much bandwidth to impact a node they will hunt you down. They target you as a business and running servers. Which is the whole point of business class services. And just because each Region is Different RoadRunner is not. They keep the same policies with Time Warner its just worded differently with the name of the region but always referred to as Time Warner Cable (TWC) and RoadRunner (RR) or (HSI) as their agreements say.

And they don't have to state anything on their website or when you sign up. As long as its in their AUP or TOS and you don't read it thats you're problem. You agree to those as soon as you logon to the Internet or use their services.

Attorney's always want a class action. And i Don't see how its a lawsuit matter. Comcast does it and gets away with it. If you're using so much bandwidth that it actually brings down the Node or network to where its targeting the customer then you have problems and they should have the right to shut your service off.

And actually Ohio has other matters to handle at the AG's office than worrying about RoadRunner's policies and their day to day business.

permalink · 2007-09-19 11:52:14 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Hott,

First, the TOS can state whatever it wishes, but they CANNOT advertise in contradiction to it. If the tos says they limit, and they advertise unlimited in CLEAR print, you have what's called bait and switch. You are telling people one thing when they sign up, and selling them another. Hence, RR could not do this and it is a VALID AG matter. Second, you said you guessed RR had caps residentially and that is why I brought up the matter here. Whether or not they are enforced selectively or not, is an aside issue. It's the fact they WERE enforced that had sparked me to take action. Whether or not you agree with my action is your choice. However, no matter what you argue, a company is NEVER allowed to state two different things. It'd be like a car dealer selling you a Porsche and giving you a Mercedes upon delivery. You have to state your product for what it is, fine print or not. The tag can't say Porsche and the fine print say Mercedes. Consequently, RR obviously lost the matter or didn't wish to pursue as it's been a few years later with no word. If they wouldn't have backed down, I would have definitely class actioned them. Lawyers love suing, but the argument here lies with what they are telling people, versus the TOS.

permalink · 2007-09-19 14:27:45 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

ehhh tell your problem to Comcast and see what they'll tell you. the same thing RR would most likely tell you; take the service or take a hike. Only because you'd be targeted as a non-profitable customer. The most you'll get out of it anymore is a gift card for Time Warner Services with a class action or any law suit for that matter. And single person has enough money to take on TWC or RoadRunner in court; they'll drag that out so long you'd end up giving the lawyer your house in just fees and still end up oweing them more.

And i doubt you emailing and calling the AG's office made RR change their minds. They most likely decided to change the policy since it was when the service came out.

The fact that they reserve the right to monitor and set their network so it decides not to impact customers is their option and you agree to that. Unlimited does not mean unlimited bandwidth usage that it impacts the network or anyone on your NODE.

Either way they reserve the right to monitor their network

RR's AUP: »help.rr.com/HMSFaqs/e_rr_sub_agreement.aspx

Sections:

General:

(c) The Road Runner Service may be provided by Operator subject to certain limits on the maximum amount of bandwidth consumption available to Subscriber per month for the level of Road Runner Service subscribed for by Subscriber. Operator will provide Subscriber with information regarding any such limits from time to time.

NOW here is what you want the service is NOT Unlimited Bandwidth/usage to hog their network:

(d) Subscriber acknowledges and agrees that Road Runner and Operator shall each have the right to monitor Subscriber's “bandwidth consumption” (i.e. aggregate volume of data that may be sent or received) at any time and on an on-going basis, and to limit excessive bandwidth consumption by Subscriber (as determined by Road Runner and/or Operator) by any means available to Operator or Road Runner, including suspension or termination of the Road Runner Service.

6. Review and Enforcement.

(c) Subscriber agrees that Road Runner shall have the right to take any action that it deems appropriate to protect the Road Runner Service or its facilities, including suspension or termination of Subscriber's account.

And for using RoadRunner you agree to NOT file a class action against them or be part of one stating here:

13. Arbitration. ANY CONTROVERSY OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS AGREEMENT (BUT NOT ANY CLAIMS ARISING OUT OF THE THEFT OR OTHER UNAUTHORIZED RECEIPT OF THE ROAD RUNNER SERVICE ON THE PART OF SUBSCRIBER) SHALL BE RESOLVED BY BINDING ARBITRATION COMMENCED WITHIN ONE YEAR UNDER THE THEN-CURRENT COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION RULES OF THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION (OR ANY CONSUMER RULES ADOPTED BY THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION TO WHICH BOTH PARTIES AGREE), EXCEPT THAT EITHER PARTY MAY SEEK EQUITABLE OR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF ONLY IN AN APPROPRIATE COURT OF LAW OR EQUITY. NO CLAIM SUBJECT TO ARBITRATION UNDER THIS AGREEMENT MAY BE COMBINED WITH A CLAIM SUBJECT TO RESOLUTION BEFORE A COURT OF LAW OR EQUITY. THE ARBITRABILITY OF DISPUTES SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE ARBITRATOR. ANY AWARD OF THE ARBITRATOR SHALL BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE REASONS FOR THE AWARD. JUDGMENT UPON AN AWARD MAY BE ENTERED IN ANY COURT HAVING COMPETENT JURISDICTION. THE ARBITRATOR SHALL NOT HAVE THE POWER TO AWARD ANY DAMAGES IN EXCESS OF THE APPLICABLE LIMITS SET FORTH IN OR EXCLUDED UNDER SECTIONS 9 AND 10 OF THIS AGREEMENT. THE FEDERAL ARBITRATION ACT, 9 U.S.C. SECTIONS 1 TO 16, SHALL GOVERN THE INTERPRETATION AND ENFORCEMENT OF THIS PARAGRAPH. EACH PARTY SHALL BEAR ITS OWN EXPENSES AND THE COST OF ARBITRATOR(S) SHALL BE SHARED EXCEPT THAT SUBSCRIBER MAY RECOVER HIS/HER FILING AND ARBITRATOR(S)' FEES IF SUBSCRIBER IS THE PREVAILING PARTY. THE PARTIES EXPRESSLY WAIVE ANY ENTITLEMENT TO ATTORNEYS' FEES OR PUNITIVE DAMAGES TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW. CONSOLIDATED OR CLASS ACTION ARBITRATIONS SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED. THE ARBITRATOR SHALL NOT HAVE THE POWER TO ORDER PRE-HEARING DISCOVERY OF DOCUMENTS OR THE TAKING OF DEPOSITIONS, BUT MAY COMPEL ATTENDANCE OF WITNESSES AND THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AT THE HEARING.

This is also from TWCable.com site's AUP »help.twcable.com/html/twc_misp_aup.html:

The ISP Service may not be used to engage in any conduct that interferes with Operator's ability to provide service to others, including the use of excessive bandwidth.

The ISP Service may not be used in a manner that interferes with Operator's efficient operation of its facilities, the provision of services or the ability of others to utilize the ISP Service in a reasonable manner. Operator may use various tools and techniques in order to efficiently manage its networks and to ensure compliance with this Acceptable Use Policy (“Network Management Tools”). These may include detecting malicious traffic patterns and preventing the distribution of viruses or other malicious code, and managing network resources through techniques such as limiting the number of peer-to-peer sessions a user can conduct at the same time, limiting the aggregate bandwidth available for certain usage protocols such as peer-to-peer and newsgroups, and such other Network Management Tools as Operator may from time to time determine appropriate.

So actually they have you where they want you. You can't do anything to them by the agreements which state and you agree to when actually turning the cable modem ON and using the Internet. Due to the TOS and AUP being a binding contract on services they offer you and you accept you accept the knowledge that you agree to the terms.

Next time you should actually read the agreement. And like Comcast TWC reserves to terminate your services and NOT spell out how much is too much bandwidth.

Don't like it take your business to AT&T or Verizon because this subject about TWC is done. They win you can't do shit. The AG's office next time needs to read the binding agreements that you agreed to by actually using the network before they start bitching at RoadRunner and Time Warner. It's your job as a customer to know what you're getting into before you actually use the service or product. Which you even stated that in your post about cars. If you can't get online with Roadrunner at home get dial-up or go to the Library or a family members house to read the agreements before you sign on and actually use the service. If you ask they even tell you where the TOS and AUP is available for reading.

TOPIC CLOSED!

permalink · 2007-09-19 20:12:06 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Wrong. You simply don't get it. You can't advertise one thing and hide another clause in the Tos. Also, I am positive enough people complained. They mailed out 3 different usage letters. If they were set on a cap, they would have stuck by their guns. Obviously, they had some sort of backlash to make them change their minds. Hence, topic is not closed. Please read what I said carefully. YOU CAN'T SELL A PORSCHE AND GIVE SOMEONE A MERCEDES BECAUSE YOU STUCK IT IN THE CONTRACT! Its bait and switch and I bet RR did get in trouble or had lots complain.

permalink · 2007-09-19 20:22:20 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

Prove that RR even got contacted the AG? You have no proof. They don't claim unlimited bandwidth. they claim unlimited usage of the service as in no time limits not unlimited usage of bandwidth. its called MARKETING. and Comcast does the same thing. it's called protecting their network and them. They're not going to give you a residential connection and allow you to download 300Gigs per month and eat the bill and you only pay $44 for it. I know for a fact you wouldn't do it. It's not smart.

And its stupid for arguing about this. You're proved wrong you agreed to it. Time Warner stated it in their TOS its never really been updated since P2P became a big issue.

You go download 300gigs+ on their network file a class action and see how fast they down turn around and sue you or even drop your ass from their network. You'll be in default not them. Only because you agree to it when you signed up. Read the contract on what your buying. And really the car doesn't even really prove anything except the car dealer giving you a different product. Time Warner and RoadRunner doesn't. They give you unlimited service. It just doesn't say what part is unlimited. Next time read before you sign up. Because if you don't like how they run their business start your own ISP and compete against them using their TOS as your marketing strategy. Cause either way you agreed to the service without reading. And i see no where on their state that its states unlimited bandwidth and never seen any ads stating unlimited bandwidth or unlimited downloads. Or ANYTHING that says Unlimited.

permalink · 2007-09-19 20:37:06 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

First, I know RR got contacted. I WAS CONTACTED by them 3 times (RR) in response to my 3 complaints for each letter. THAT'S how I know. The BBB and AG both were in contact with them. I SPOKE PERSONALLY to RR's representative on three separate occasions in response to my complaints. Therefore, THAT'S exactly how I know.

Second, they stated on their site unlimited internet access in those words. They didn't say ALWAYS on connection as they do now. They changed it after all that. Wonder why (sarcasm). However, they still never state caps on their website which they would be required to do if they wish to impose them. You can't hide caps. While they are free to limit their service, they CANNOT hide the limit from you. It'd be like renting a car and they don't tell you the maximum miles you can put on it. Then, when you take it back, they hit you with fees because you drove over it. Life doesn't work that way. Hence, if I ever have anymore problems (hope I don't), I'd file on that basis. However, my first complaint must have worked. I spoke to RR personally in DIRECT regards to my previous problems and haven't heard a peep since. It only took 3 separate complaints and I imagine others doing them. However, in the end the desired result was had.

permalink · 2007-09-19 20:52:45 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

Since you're on here now do this. Call Time Warner and tell them you want Tier 2 Internet you have a question about RoadRunner. Ask them if they know anything about the AUP and the TOS about RoadRunner or the Cable Operator reserving the right to limit how much you use. I just called them They predefined area is the same as Comcast's they said. What ever they notice first or if someone calls and complains about the services slowing down all of a sudden. The cap is roughly at 300Gigs per month depending on the area. Same as Comcast I talked to someone in Toronto named Ryan doubt you'll get to the same call center but Call up Tier 2 and ask them.

Since TWC's CSRs don't know anything.

Also RoadRunner Security files the bandwidth usage and monitoring and not the abuse department. They also now are stating they do slow down P2P connections in ALL areas regardless on what it is. Torrents so far as left okay as long as they don't see a large amount being transferred over a day or two. They target that as a server. Also email is closely watched as well.

If you pop-up in your system you get a warning notice in your email but the Rep said he has never seen or heard of RoadRunner actually turning the connection off after they send a warning letter.

permalink · 2007-09-19 21:04:11 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Hott,

You can argue with me all you want. First, the letters I got years back were 1) 15GB cap and 5 dollars for every 5 GB over. 2) 40 GB cap and upgraded to business (got two of these) if it continued. Since then, I have had 0 problems. You can state whatever, but every market is different. You seem to fail to grasp this concept. Maybe where you live in Ohio has little competition. Where I live has 4 providers. Earthlink, TimeWarner and 2 DSL providers. Hence, I bet this makes a difference in Time Warner not imposing those caps here after the fiascal they had with me a few years back. There is too much competition in this area. Where ever and ISP has competition, they are less apt to get away with their crap. Once again, your area and my area are NOT the same. Either which way, I have not had ANY problems since my reporting of them. I know they were contacted as I spoke directly to RR. If they ever bug me again, I am sure I'll win. You just wont read my post. TOS OR NO TOS DOESN'T MATTER. CAPS HAVE TO BE STATED CLEARLY. You can't hide a limit and harass people for breaking it. That's where Comcast is getting in trouble now, too.

permalink · 2007-09-19 21:25:39 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

It is not a Time Warner issue. Its RoadRunner. Call RoadRunner and ask them about their policy. They're allowed to do it since their the ISP. Not Time Warner. Its a nationwide agreement every customer has with RoadRunner. Even Insight in Columbus. But like i said here they had caps that were stated which were 4 years ago. They took them off when more and more people started using the internet and more and more media applications started to appear.

Everyone on TWC has Earthlink thats a given. But RR does state the caps if you ask RoadRunner NOT Time Warner. RoadRunner is the ONE WHO DOES THE CAPS if needed before TWC. You fail to grab that.

Comcast is not getting in trouble. It's clearly stated and people agree to it. Its called a contract and a clause. Comcast has no legal issues with this. You won't win in suing them. You agree NOT to sue them as a class action so good luck on finding a lawyer that will take the case without the $$$$$ all up front. I read your post but you're post is not about RoadRunner its about TWC. TWC and RoadRunner are not the same company. One is the ISP and one is the actual operator who leases the lines to RoadRunner. But like i said use 300+gigs in a month and see if you don't get hit. All you have to do is ask RoadRunner. But since TWC doesn't care since their not the ISP paying for the bandwidth they don't disclose this. RoadRunner does when you ask them. You fail to actually see the difference in the two companies. But whatever. Hit that limit and get kicked or a letter gets sent and when they tell the new Ohio AG who is more concerned about other things than fighting your legal battles for free you'll find out.

Cause all you seem to care about is getting a business class product with unlimited everything at $44 per month. IF you want to use the connection for servers and unlimited bandwidth buy a dedicated T Line.

permalink · 2007-09-19 21:34:39 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

First man, you are confused. Road Runner is a GENERIC NAME for internet. The people providing Roadrunner are

1) Time Warner who owns the lines
2) Earthlink who sublets them.

These are TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES with TWO different agreements. NOT EVERYONE having RR has Earthlink. I have Time Warner as my provider. It has nothing to do with Earthlink.

Second, if someone wishes to pursue Comcast they WILL get into trouble UNLESS they are clearly stating the caps on their website. Stating they can limit your service in the TOS is one thing. However, they are REQUIRED to state what limits there are so you can avoid them. Am I not making sense to you? You cant give someone a rental car and specify in the contract there are mileage limits without stating what the limits are. It's called bait and switch to say there's a limit but then hit the person returning the car with a large bill, claiming he should have known what they were, even if not stated. That's the whole argument. Comcast is NOT clearly stating their limits and people do not know what they have to do avoid them. PLAIN AND SIMPLE.

It should be noted too, that the agreement where you can't sue was invalidated in Georgia. However, you could opt out of it in other states. Hence, it is nonbinding.

permalink · 2007-09-19 22:03:10 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

It is binding only because they allow you to offer a civil suit. Not a class action. The reason why comcast got in trouble was of the way the law suit was worded in the agreement.

I didnt say anything about Earthlink's RoadRunner product. RoadRunner uses the same TOS and AUP as they do with ever Cale Operator that uses them as the ISP. Time Warner IS NOT the only one who uses RoadRunner. Insight in Ohio uses RoadRunner as well. They ARE NOT Time Warner Cable. Bright House in Bakersfield and in MI, Indy's Bright house and there are many others. Go look it up. RoadRunner is an ISP not a cable operator. They do as they wish. Next time just ask RoadRunner what the actual bandwidth usage is before you sign up. It's up to the ISP to tell you what the bandwidth usage is. Not the cable operator since they are two different companies.

HAHAHAHAHAHA

permalink · 2007-09-20 14:42:45 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Hott,

You simply DO NOT UNDERSTAND. First, Comcast users who opted out of the arbitration are NOT BOUND to it. Hence, they can class action. They have 30 days to opt out I think from time of sign up.

Second, Road Runner is Generic and each ISP offering the service has their OWN SET OF RULES / TOS. Earthlinks Rules are not the same as Time Warner. Time Warners are not the same as Brighthouse or Insight. The point is, each one is their own entity. WHY CAN'T you understand this man? Hence, Time Warner Road runner in my case HAD ON THEIR WEBSITE FOR MY AREA about unlimited. Hence, I got them on that fact. Whether or not you can grasp this concept is beyond me. EACH ISP OFFERS THEIR SEVICE AT THEIR OWN PRICING AND OWN RESTRICTIONS. Time warner had it on their SITE FOR MY AREA unlimited internet access. This is where they got into trouble. It's not the OWNER of the lines who limits usage but the ISP providing the service FFS!!

permalink · 2007-09-20 14:53:44 · Print ·

hottboiinnc
ME

join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

Reviews:

Re: Confusing hold-over

RoadRunner does not state unlimited. Time Warner has nothing to do with the service being unlimited. And nobody said anything about Earthlink being part of the same company. you keep trying to put words in my mouth.

Nobody said anything about other ISPs offering services over TWC or other companies networks. Nobody said it was the owner of the lines. You keep claiming that its the cable companies issue. You need to actually learn to read and stop trying to blame the damn cable companies when its actually the ISP Division or the ISP that has been contracted to offer the services.

and WHY CANT YOU FUC*IN UNDERSTAND! TWC IS NOT ROADRUNNER! TWC CAN ADVERTISE ALL THEY WANT ITS UNLIMITED. IT IS ON THEIR END BUT WITH ROADRUNNER ITS NOT! And RoadRunner does not maintain a website other than their RR.com website. Time Warner maintains the TWC websites. Which is why they all use Except a couple; the timewarnercable.com/whatever domain. YOU can file complaints on TWC all you want. ITS NOT THEM THAT WILL CANCEL YOU! IT WOULD BE ROADRUNNER SINCE YOU ARE THEIR INTERNET CUSTOMER AND THEY ARE YOUR ISP NOT TIME WARNER'S. TWC JUST OFFERS THE SERVICE AND DOES THE BILLING! YOU FAIL TO UNDERSTAND THAT!

SO get off your damn high-horse about TWC, Earthlink and any other ISP and start talking about RoadRunner. RR does NOT advertise anything as being unlimited. THATS THE PART WHERE YOU DON"T UNDERSTAND AND ARE THE ONLY CUSTOMER OF TWCs or RR that bitches about this.

CRY CRY CRY CRY!

permalink · 2007-09-20 18:38:36 · Print ·

trucknman

@spcsdns.net

said by hottboiinnc:

the BBB doesnt really do anything unless their members then they just drop them or what ever. Companies don't even have to respond to the complaints. The BBB is just a way for customers to complain and the company just saying we'll deal with it and that's the end of that.

the AG is a different story but still not much would happen; pass a few buck to him/her and be done. Unless it was Spitzer from NY

Richard Blumenthal from CT is pretty good too. He went after AOL when they were pulling their shenannigans about the unlimited stuff.

permalink · 2007-09-20 00:15:28 · Print ·

jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: Confusing hold-over

Truck,

Exactly my point. If the AG is any good, he or she can force action to be taken. This is not to say all AG's will, but some do take consumer complaints very seriously. Companies that are trying to sell a product, different than the one they offer, will get nailed by those AGs. Once again, some states will simply overlook this fact, while other's wont. The AG we had at the time (not sure who it was anymore), must have taken action. Time Warner Road Runner gave up their fight in this area after a bit of kicking and screaming. Still, they gave it up. Hence, the adage that one should always try, stands steadfast. Those living in Comcast areas should take hope from my story and pursue the matter until its beaten dead into the ground!

permalink · 2007-09-20 01:38:47 · Print ·

evilghost
Premium
join:2003-11-22
Springville, AL

Completely reasonable.

The limits look quite reasonable to be honest. Might be nice to not have your aggregate bandwidth and latency in the toilet because of a couple of crapbags in your area absolutely must run P2P or newsgroup downloads 100% of the time.

Unlimited means you can be connected without a time limit, like the old dial-up days and "$9.99 for 15 hours". No one in their right mind thinks it means unlimited bandwidth. I'd fully expect my ISP to dropkick me if I were consuming 100% bandwidth 100% of the time.

Now lets hear from the pirates...

permalink · 2007-09-18 16:34:36 · Print ·

See 22 replies to this post

Rick Premium,MVM join:2001-02-06 Waterbury, CT	LOL and people complain about comcasts THREE HUNDRED GIG A MONTH unspoken CAPS? Be VERY careful what you wish for folks when you ask for caps to be put in firm #'s. This is what they would probably look like. -- The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!
	permalink · 2007-09-18 16:35:51 · ·

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5

Re: LOL

said by Rick:

and people complain about comcasts THREE HUNDRED GIG A MONTH unspoken CAPS?

Be VERY careful what you wish for folks when you ask for caps to be put in firm #'s.

This is what they would probably look like.

If Comcast implemented this policy in lieu of the unspoken caps, then P2P users could download up 1 TB in a month.

Math:
From another thread, we know that 450GB is a third of 6 Mbps X 1 month:
450 GB X 3 = 1350 GB
As speed would be at 50% for half a day, we take 75% of that
1350 GB X 0.75 = 1012.5 GB

That's not so shabby, considering!
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon USA
Are you affected by Comcast's RST forging? How to test it! -or- Read my original report.

permalink · 2007-09-18 17:08:31 · Print ·

Rick
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-06
Waterbury, CT

Re: LOL

Not too shabby?
You'd better read the chart again.

From NOON until midnight..on the residential plus service..which I'm using because price wise.it's the most comparable to Comcasts standard tier..
a person can download 1.35 Gigs max.

Take that times 30 days and you have 40 gigs MAX a person could download ALL MONTH long during those hours.

True...a person could then download at 3Mb whatever they want apparently from Midnight until noon the next day..but note that's 1/2 the speeds of comcast and certainly is hours when many people wouldn't even be using a connection.

IMO..this doesn't come CLOSE to what Comcast offers people..
in terms of speeds nor ability to download data.
--
The Coyote captured the RR! Roadrunner Rick is now Comcastic!

permalink · 2007-09-19 03:40:35 · Print ·

funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5