CenturyLink 'Fires' Customers For Excessive Use...
But Doesn't Provide Tools to Track Consumption
Earlier this month CenturyLink confirmed to us
that the company now imposes usage caps of 150 GB for 1.5 Mbps lines, and caps of 300 GB for anything faster. Users who exceed those caps get on-screen warnings and are urged to upgrade to faster tiers or business-class service. However, some other users in our forums say they are being kicked from the network entirely
for excessive use. One user, who freely admits he uses a lot of bandwidth, states that not only did he not receive one of the warnings before being disconnected, but that CenturyLink provides no tool to track usage:
I'm a heavy user and I was aware this may be a problem, so I did opt for the fastest speed Internet I could to get the largest data cap available for residential service. I also searched Centurylink for a data monitor tool in my account settings or something and could not find it. I came here and learned there was no such tool (at the time, not sure about today). With my previous ISP they had a data cap, but it was not enforced, I made the assumption that Centurylink is probably not enforcing this as well in light of them not providing the monitoring tool (my last ISP even had this).
Yes, users can use their own measurement tools and/or router firmware to track usage, but this very frequently doesn't match up with the ISP's own usage logs or data collection methodology. Traditionally the tools ISPs provide for their users haven't been particularly reliable either
, though that's a larger problem for companies that are trying to charge users overage fees per gigabyte, something CenturyLink tells us they're not doing -- yet.
Still, if you're going to the lengths of actually kicking people off of your network, perhaps making it clear how much data they're using is a good idea.
| |cdruGo ColtsPremium,MVM
Fort Wayne, IN
said by itsme :No, consumers want as much as they can get. ISPs want to minimize bandwidth usage while maximizing revenue. If ISPs only wanted as much money as possible, they would implement caps with overages or per-byte billing. If it was only about the money, they wouldn't get rid of bandwidth hogs as no revenue is worse than limited profitability. The only exception to this is if a person consumes more bandwidth then what their monthly rate actually pays for. Possible, but I bet not very likely.
No surprise here, users want to get as much out of the 'net as they can. Isp's want to get as much money out it's users as it can, you see..
Saint Clair Shores, MI
Re: Comcast on the other hand
said by ArrayList:How so? Comcast has not enforced it's cap since EARLY last year (think it was around Feb 2012). Big reason I was told (by a field tech so take this info with a grain of salt), was CC wants people to "stream" from it's xfinity service. Maybe CC internet ONLY users might see a cap/overages. Therefore I doubt CC will impose the 250gb cap on those who have their tv service too. Just a hunch.
just wait. overages are coming.
Saint Clair Shores, MI
Re: Comcast on the other hand
said by ArrayList:Maybe in your area but my cap enforcement has been "suspended" since early last year. I did see where they were upping caps though in some markets. Right now, with my service, my cap would go from 250 to 450gb per month. During mid Dec of 2012, my max used was 268gpb and mind you, I have 3 ROKU's and 1 BD player with internet access and the kids were home for almost 3 weeks with laptops, Roku access and phones using the net.
No, there were several blog posts last summer from people who had their service disconnected. They were enforcing as of last october IIRC.
I think my market may be lest strict because there is AT&T and WOW in my area. WOW does not have a cap, at least on the 50mbps service. I do recall not having a cap early last spring (that's march in my book )
Pleasant Hill, MO
Is business class uncapped?
If the customer is already on the 300GB line and has say a 10m line and using 350GB, and get asked to upgrade business class, would that mean a larger or no cap on them?
Earlier this month CenturyLink confirmed to us that the company now imposes usage caps of 150 GB for 1.5 Mbps lines, and caps of 300 GB for anything faster. Users who exceed those caps get on-screen warnings and are urged to upgrade to faster tiers or business-class service.
Pleasant Hill, MO
Re: Is business class uncapped?
said by silbaco:Well at least they know businesses need bandwidth, unlike TW.
Business lines are uncapped.
| |NormanSI gave her time to steal my mind awayPremium,MVMReviews:
San Jose, CA
Re: Correction- user was warned
said by TBBroadband:User's assumptions aside, he also states that there are multiple users in the house, and the browser redirects went to other users who weren't involved in the bill-paying, and had no idea what they were seeing. Any communications about the account usage should be positively directed to the party responsible for the account. A browser redirect is not sufficient for this purpose.
He also states that he was AWARE of the cap, but ASSUMED they did not enforce it only due to his old ISP did not.
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
CenturyLink Fires Customers for Excessive Use I am on my computer alot. /However/ in my area, which was previously a qwest area, purchased by CL, the maximum plan I can obtain is 1.5 mbps, anything higher is physically unavailable to me (I live in a rural area).
So recently I started having severe problems with being able to be online. I went through troubleshooting where they assured me everything was absolutely fine with my router... only it completely stopped working today. So they said they are sending me a new router, but then, I got home at midnight and noticed my other machine which I simply left attached to the modem via ethernet amazingly was able to access websites and such. Then I read this article and I'm thinking "how the heck would I know how much data I've used during the past month?" Like the other poster... couldn't find any tool to get that information. Nor did I receive any notification from CL regarding "excessive use."
But when I called up the tech support regarding the suddenly and seemingly working modem, well, um... they started talking about severe congestion in this area (which was rather a similar phrase they used for people using a lot of bandwidth) and they said that they didn't have the other tools to switch things over to "even things out" and said that it'll likely be a "problem" over the next few weeks to a month.
So, this is starting to make me think that I might be one of those they've decided to arbitrarily throttle, (although if the only plan you offer is 1.5, this hardly seems fair to me). Not to mention in terms of customer service, they have to to be second to the worst I've ever had to deal with (not because of the techs, necessarily, but because they can never find my account, one office doesn't communicate with the other, etc.) I told a friend of mine who lives in Italy of my difficulties with them and he said "Hey, it sounds like what it's like here in Italy." Niiiice.
I'd pretty well decided that I was going to be switching providers as soon as practicable. If you sell me a plan that has a lower speed (and I cannot physically purchase a higher speed) that was billed as internet on demand, I guess I pretty much expect you to stick with that... especially given that whole 5 year guaranteed pricing schtick they do.
CenturyLink Wants Me Back I've posted previously in this forum that CenturyLink "fired" me for excessive downloads. I then "fired" them for plain old telephone service, and moved to Comcast for cable and Oooma for VOIP, both of which I am very pleased with. Comcast's download speed is more than double what I was getting with CenturyLink.
Almost immediately after dropping CenturyLink I started receiving phone calls and postal mailings asking me to come back...with great offers on DSL service. Today, a CenturyLink rep knocked on my front door trying to sell me the service.
Before dropping CenturyLink, no one at the company's call centers were the least bit interested in retaining me as a customer, including the "supervisors" I politely asked to speak to.
Me thinks that CenturyLink may want to invest more money in retaining their existing customers than in trying to win back former customers that they have peeved off. For what it's worth, I had been a customer of CenturyLink and its predecessors (i.e. AT&T, Mountain Bell, US West, Qwest, etc.) with the same phone number for over 35 years.