Complaint Review: Charter Communications - Reno Nevada

I'm sorry, but I feel that I should make a comment to the allogations that Charter is operating unethically in it's practices.

Maybe before you throw around such heavy words, you should do a little bit of precursory research into what exactly it is that you are complaining about.

When you sign up for cable service with ANY provider, not just Charter Communications, you are signing a 'verbal contract'.  Verbal Contracts are binding just as much as written/signed contracts.  The contract is then mailed out to you with your first bill of service.  The cable industry as a whole operates on a Pre-Bill billing method, as do several Telecom companies (try reading your Cell Phone bill every once in a while, they do the same thing).  This means that the company bills you for the services they will provide you over the course of the next month (normally fix set to run from x to y where x is the date your services started on and y is the date prior to x in the next month.). 

With this contract, you agree to pay the bill by a certain date (usually 15 days from x) and also that if you didn't, you would be charged a late fee, which by the way is normally a static $20 to $40 depending on company, it is not based on a percentage of your monthly rate as several have said before.  Your submittal of payment for your first bill is a binding 'signature' of acceptance to both the verbal and the written [delivered by bill] contract.  Paying for a service delivered with a contract is legally binding as having accepting the terms of the contract.  Maybe if you are this quick to jump the gun on companies operating legally, you should read all bills of service before you pay them (and I don't just mean read what you are paying for, read the entire bill including all of the small print).

As for the "non-cable" fee for having internet only, this fee is levied due to the way Cable Internet operates.  Cable based services run through a single pipeline.  Internet and Phone services utilize 'channels' of cable service to deliver their content.  Internet typically run within the +2db to +20db range on RF wavelength which is the same location that most basic cable services (including your broadcast stations) operate on.  Phone runs on the +4 to +22 range.  In order to allow you to receive Internet or Phone, basic cable has to be delivered as well.  If you have a tv and broadband cable internet, you have basic service if you put two and two together.  For this reason, most cable companies (not just Charter) charge a basic access fee to recoup lost costs of delivering basic service for free.  By the way, did I mention that this access fee is normally cheaper than the company sells their basic service for?  So in essence, you are getting basic cable at a discounted rate.  I understand the whole "whether I wanted it or not" dilemma, but the issue is that Charter (or any other cable operator) are not the ones that created the methods in which their services are delivered, they simply implement them.  If you want it to change, then develop a better method of delivering Cable Access Internet Phone and TV services, get the idea patented, and then approach the big dogs of the industry (Comcast, Time Warner, Charter) and pitch it as a game changing technology for their company.  Seems to me that if you previous company wasn't charging you these fees, maybe there is a reason they sold out to Charter.  Most cable companies that are purchased by Charter (and other larger conglomerates) are companies with financial struggles who are unable to maintain their network any longer.  This is the case with some of the most historic purchases (if you want proof check out the acquisition of Marcus Cable by Charter Communications, this was one of their largest single purchases and the purchase was to buy out a company ran by one of the industry giants of the time).

The final point "Charter Communications Has a monopoly" is a joke.  Maybe you should read more into the Cable Communications Act of 1984 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_Communications_Act_of_1984) which governs how a Cable company operates.  Cable companies are required to bid on municipalities.  Local governing agencies are required to review bids that are offered and accept the company of their choosing.  What this means, is that your local governments ultimately determine which cable companies are allowed to operate within your city/region.  Cable franchises must submit claim for territory in their bid, if approved, the cable company is the sole operator of that franchise.  They are then responsible for maintaining the lines in that area and delivering service to a percentage of every household within the franchised limits (normally they are only required to service up to 70% of the total number of occupied households based on annual census).  Due to franchising of service areas, no two cable companies (note that I said CABLE companies) will operate in the same area at the same time unless the companies have a mutual agreement to permit the primary operator to provide carrier access (leased lines) to the secondary company for a nominal fee.  I agree that this is outdated and despite being originally design to promote competition (by defranchising the large operators that owned entire states and regions in the 80s), it does not anymore.  However, until the laws are re-written, it is still the law.  For this reason alone, you cannot state that a cable company has a 'monopoly', simply for the fact that a monopoly is an unfair advantage gained from less than admirable business tactics.  Cable 'monopolies' are gained by operating within the law.  If you truly want to know more, research it, but several large companies (Charter included) are currently and have been actively petitioning the FCC and Supreme Court to challenge these regulations and De-monopolize cable districts, which would allow all cable providers to provide service in any area.  Granted, this doesnt mean if you don't like Charter you could just up and switch to Bright House, the cable operator of your choice would still require physical presence in you area to provide the service, the government (or a single governing organization) would own the cable lines, and the cable operators would be required to pay leasing fees to utilize them.  This has potential for both good and bad.  The good, you get fair competitive pricing on your services.  The bad, if the company or organization that owns the lines, doesn't maintain them properly or promptly, then all providers [and their customers] would suffer.  Changes to the regulations in such a way, would require further legislation to ensure that service access lines are maintained properly and that a certain percentage of all inbound profits the owning company makes be spent on said maintenance (this is how copper POTS phone lines are governed).

Hopefully I have been able to dispel some of the myth that I see floating around in the original post and its rebuttals.

I don't consider myself an Industry expert, but I have been involved in the telecommunications industry for several years.  I am not currently an employee of any cable operator, and my opinions [and factual information] are certainly not biased.

One last note, the original poster mentioned having seen many complaints about Charter, I beg them to answer this question.  When do you not find negative comments regarding X service provider?  In most cases, those who have nothing negative to say, tend to say nothing at all when it comes to providing feedback on a company and its operation.  You will find just as many complaints if you search and scour the internet for Comcast, Time Warner, Bright House, AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile, DirecTV, Dish Network, Adelphia, et al.  You name the company and do the same searches for them that you did for Charter, you will find just as many if not more negative results.  The fact is, that the only time people think to mention their service provider online, is when they are frustrated by them, angry, or upset.  Food for thought.

Reno and Nevada already have a bad reputation in the national media; a talk with home insurers confirms people and businesses are fleeing Reno and Nevada.  These shocking behaviors by Reno businesses and Nevada public employees give a further black-eye to Reno and Nevada which are increasingly becoming and known as A Blighted Ghost-town and State.  The Reno Charter Communications has been notorious for years for their laziness, incompetence, corruption, extortion, blackmail, civil rights violations, abuses, perjury, fraud, false documents, and sewer cleanliness yet have never been held acountable for their illegal and unethical behaviors due to corruption - they pay bribes to each other and public employees.

Clearly those individuals who are defending Charter are people who have never been subscribers. Comparing Charter's billing practices to credit card and telephone companies simply do not understand the situation. The phrase "billing in advance" seems simple to me, yet evidently it's so for everyone. For Jenelle and others benefit, I'll elaborate. Here's an example - On December 20th I get a bill from Charter for service from January 5th to Feburary 6th. If Charter does not receive my payment AT LEAST 5 days prior to the first day of the billing cycle, they assess a late fee. I can send off a payment for Jan. 5th to Feb. on December 26th and it's likely too late. I was informed that even if my payment is recorded as being received on January 2nd, the 'processing time' can delay the 'post date' until after the 5th.. My problem is that Charter assesses late fees SEVERAL DAYS BEFORE PROVIDING ANY SERVICE WHATSOEVER. An accurate comparison to such a practice using credit cards would be something like this; Your November statement had a charge for an annual fee for the following year, and it's due December 1st. You send off payment and it's received by the C.C. company on Nov. 25th. However, processing time makes the 'official' pay date as December 2nd.. That's considered late and you are assesed a fee. Even though the new year is a month away and the FIRST DAY of the year for which you paid the annual fee is a month off, too bad because this company says any payment a customer makes must be 30 or more days prior to service being provided. Although this is an extreme example, the point is charging late fees for something that you have paid in advance for, just NOT ENOUGH IN ADVANCE! I'm NOT talking about GRACE PERIODS! I know what a grace period is, and Charter doesn't. Now, as for my issues with being charged the 'non-cable access fee', it's nothing like a telephone line I simply don't choose to use. This is more like the telephone company charging me for having only one line instead of two. It's like charging someone for not having 'call waiting' or 'caller ID'. Would you like a non-call waiting fee? I never ordered television, I don't want it. Just because Charter runs the television lines as well as broadband, I'm supposed to subscribe to both or I'm imposed with a fee? Do you understand the concept of imposing fees for not buying everything a company has available for purchase? I don't have cable television but don't use it, then complain about paying! My bill reads "NON-CABLE ACCESS FEE- $5.00" I pay $5.00 because I CHOOSE to subscribe to broadband only. Is it ethical to charge fee's on customers because they don't buy everything the company offers? GET REAL! Because of their monopoly, this practice is unethical and should not be allowed to continue!

TOO MANY CUSTOMERS ARE CANCELING,BECAUSE CHARTER CABLE HAVE LOTS OF "OUTAGE" TOO MUCH MAINTENANCE. I FEEL SORRY FOR THOSE WHO LIVE AT RIVERSIDE/HESPERIA/SAN BERNARDINO/BIGBEAR,LONGBEACH PASADENA MALIBU,CALABASAS. I AM NOT HAPPY WORKING FOR CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS. INSIDE THE CALL CENTER AT IRWINDALE, THE MEXICANS EMPLOYEE GOT BETTER CHANCES TO GET PROMOTED OR MORE SALARY BECUSE THE FACILITY MANAGEMENT MOST OF THEM ARE MEXICAN TOO MANY FAVOURTISM. MANAGEMENT INSIDE DO NOTHING BUT DOING THE SAME JOB OVER AND OVER WITH LESS RESULT.DOES THE CALLCENTER DOES NOT HAVE ENOUGH CUSTOMER SERVICE. AND THE COMPUTER AND TELEPHONE SYSTEM ARE ALL F**K UP TO MANY PROBLEMS. CUSTOMERS ARE GETTING CHARGE FOR PPV MOVIES WITH OUT SUB ORDERING IT. I DID SOME INVESTIGATING...WE HAVE A DEPT BUILDING THAT WOULD BETTA TESTING OUR PPV SYSTEM AND THEY WOULD JUST PICK ANY CUSTOMERS ACCOUNT AND IT COULD RESULT SUB BILL TO GO HIGH. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS IS INCREASING THIER RATES BY NEXT YEAR 2005. NOT BECAUSE TO BETTER SERVICE OR BECAUSE TO BUY BETTER EQUIPMENT..MAYBE THE CFO MR CARL VOGEL NEEDS TO SECURE HIS FINANCIAL AND THE REST OF COORPORATE SALARY TO INCREASE. I KEEP ASKING THE MANAGEMENT TO GET TRANSFER TO DIFF DEPT SO I COULD UPGRADE MY SKILLS, INSTEAD , THE MEXICAN APPLICANTS GOT MORE CHANCE OF ANY OPEN POSSITION. JUST BECASUE I AM NOT THIER BUDDY DRINKING AFTER WORK. CHARTER COORPORATE IS SAME OLD s**t. I WAS TRYING TO REPORT SOME ISSUES AT COORPORATE AT ST LUIS.THEY TOTALY JUST DID NOT DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT. I THINK CHARTER IS A MONOPOLY, THAY FORCE US TO GET INTO STOCK MARKET OF CHARTER AND I THINK THE MORE EMPLOYEE SIGN UO FOR STOCK THE MORE IT GOES UP AND WILL MAKE THE NONE EMPLOYEE INVESTOR BELEIVE WOW THEY ARE PICKING UP GOOD BUSINESS. NOT KNOWING BY THE HLEP OF EMPLOYEES STOCK AND SOME OF MR.PAUL ALLEN'S POCKET MONEY ON IT AND THAT MAKES THE STOCK LOOK GOOD FOR CHARTER. THIS IS BUNCH OF BOLONY. UNTIL NEXT TIME...INSIDE REPORT.

Pardon me if this gets a little brash... I am warning all in advance. I am an ex-employee due to my husbands military relocation. And although Charter is not a perfect company, this appears to be your issue and not theirs. Nothing in your posts point out Charter being unethical. Every reply to this post has had one tone: YOU HAVE OPTIONS. Whether you choose another option is YOUR CHOICE. As for the cost of wireless...have you reported that company for not providing a lower cost equipment for those that can't afford it? I am assuming here (and you know where assumptions can lead you...) that DSL is not available in the "rural part of Reno" you reside in. Living in a rural area has its pro's and con's. In your case, lack of available alternate internet providers is a con. If DSL is not available, then have you also filed a report against your local telephone company for not having that service available in your "rural" area? As for the charges for basic service which you CHOOSE not to use not being charged by the previous company... there is a reason why they were bought out (and normally that reason has to do with moolah.) Please refer to my last post... the telephone company charges for a basic line whether you use it for phone calls or not. This is the same basic philosophy. It is BUSINESS. As for the billing...am I to assume that you don't have a phone? Please refer to Beverly's 1st post. You are billed in advance for that service as well. Again, did you post a report against your telephone company as well? Charter's billing system puts your bill due about 10 days into your billing cycle. You have a grace period of about another 10 days before a late fee is assessed. At that point you are approx 20 days into your billing cycle. 10+10=20. Is 20 days INTO your billing cycle too far in advance? Be logical. The 10 day grace period is better than my credit cards... one day late and a $29 late fee is assessed. And don't let that $29 late fee take me over the limit, or else I get another $29 over-the-limit fee added too. This teaches us adults to pay our bills on time to avoid additional fees. Your late fee can't be more than $5. Find me a company that doesn't charge late fees... So until you come up with something conniving or unethical or legally wrong, in my opinion you will continue to get the same responses as ALL of the replies to your report. Is everyone else "missing the point"? If you are considering filing reports on all the companies who's logical policies you don't like, can you please file one for me too?!? I think that its unfair to have to pay security deposits, long distance charges and my worst irritation...paying before you pump at the gas station if you are paying with cash. CHARTER IS NOT RIPPING YOU OFF IN THIS CASE. If you are crossing your fingers that another cable company will buy Charter out, then please look up Time Warner, TCI, COX etc. on this site to see their reports. Thank you for your time and goodnight.

I just wanted to add that Charter is the only broadband provider available for the rural part of Reno I reside in. I concede it is possible to get service from another provider, but it would have to be dial up, or wireless. Dial up is totally slow and wireless requires additional equipment on top of monthly costs making it prohibitively expensive. The fact that I can get service provided to me other than Charter, is missing the point. Suggesting consumers just terminate service from a company that conducts their business unfairly doesn't solve anything and allows an unethical company to continue to operate without impunity. I worte this because I want to do something about Charter ripping us off! For the record, I started my service with another provider that was taken over by Charter after the fact. Only then did the charges for 'NOT' buying television service begin. That is also when the late fees started being charged for not paying 'ENOUGH' in advance. I understand the concept of paying in advance, I just don't agree with being charged late fees for service that is not paid an arbitrary amount of days prior to any service I get from them.

Okay, I'll admit, I fired off the cuff on this one. I didn't look into the situation close enough. Apparently what Charter charges for is basic cable service -- whether or not you use it is up to you. They don't provide internet service to non-customers since they have to provide the same lines and so forth to you as they do to everyone else. So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there. But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees. In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others. I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly. I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are. There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all. So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!

Okay, I'll admit, I fired off the cuff on this one. I didn't look into the situation close enough. Apparently what Charter charges for is basic cable service -- whether or not you use it is up to you. They don't provide internet service to non-customers since they have to provide the same lines and so forth to you as they do to everyone else. So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there. But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees. In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others. I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly. I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are. There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all. So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!

Okay, I'll admit, I fired off the cuff on this one. I didn't look into the situation close enough. Apparently what Charter charges for is basic cable service -- whether or not you use it is up to you. They don't provide internet service to non-customers since they have to provide the same lines and so forth to you as they do to everyone else. So, you're not paying NOT to have cable. You're paying for having cable service you don't want. There's a big difference there. But, I'm also sure that they told you what all these charges would be upfront and you chose to accept them. As far as not paying enough in advance, I'm sure your bill says on it when it is due. They don't arbitrarily set a date and not tell you... you know when it's due, if you don't pay it, like anybody else they're going to charge you late fees. In a nutshell: you think you're paying too much for your internet service and you're blaming Charter because you don't like the terms they set -- which you agreed to. So, go out and find another internet provider. I bet if you open your phone book you find plenty of others. I did a quick yellow pages search on Yahoo and came up with 28 providers for internet service in Reno. Four that specifically have a listing for broadband services (and it doesn't even include Charter). Hardly a monopoly. I'm sorry I didn't check into this before replying before. That makes me look foolish, and I was. I stand by the advice though that if you feel you're being taken advantage of by anyone you should consult a lawyer -- sometimes all it takes is them explaining what's going on and what your rights are. There's those pre-paid legal services that will review all your contracts and such included in your basic fee, they'll write a certain number of letters for you, consult with you on problems, etc. I've never used one, but I've seen them and they're not expensive at all. So, hopefully, I have redeemed myself here by having done some research and clarifying the situation. Good luck on your search for a moderately priced internet provider!

With dsl and dial-up you have to have an "active" phone line. The telephone company charges a fee for this line...even if it is used for internet use only. To accept the above fact while being upset with another company with the same principal is unfair, in my opinion. A possible solution is to sit down and determine all actual costs of your internet service and speeds (including non-cable fees.) Compare that number to silimlar services with dsl or dial-up to make a decision on what best suits your needs. Remember list any applicable equipment costs/rentals/purchases and contract terms, if any. Good luck to you. I hope this helps a small bit with your frustration.

I can't believe that Charter is allowed to charge people for NOT having cable service in their homes... that's what this indiidual is complaining about. Mainly. To have to pay $10 a month because you do not have cable service, in order to have internet service does not seem quite right. There are a lot of law firms out there just looking for new class action suits to file, this looks like it might be right up their alley. Give a few of 'em a call. Can't hurt, you, might hurt Charter enough to straighten up their act. It would be one thing to offer a discount to cable subscribers. But to do the reverse and charge someone for NOT having a service is wrong. And, yes, the FCC might just have something to say about it, have you called them? Have you called your town government? Local papers? Most states have a citizen's utility board that governs these sorts of charges too, start with your Secretary of State's office to see who regulates them in your state. There's a lot you can try. I can't guarantee results, but it seems to me that there's going to be someone that will listen and act on this. But, by the way, it is unlikely that they have a monopoly on internet service in your area. Have you contacted your local telephone company about a DSL line? Plus, there's always dial-up services which are a lot faster than they used to be. There are other options out there, including Direct TV which also provides internet service. Use your overpriced internet service to find an alternative that suits you better. But, also, you have to acknowledge that cable, internet, your telephone, and most other services bill for the service portion of their fees in advance. Your phone company charges your fee for usage in advance and then bills you for your actual calls during the next billing cycle. This helps to minimize their losses when people don't pay -- and you have to honestly accept the fact that we're all penalized because of the few who DON'T pay their bills. You'll find most utilities do it this way and as long as they tell you in advance what you will be charged and when, it is your choice to accept those terms or not. Whew, this has turned into a book. Anyway, as you can see, there's plenty you can do and plenty of choices you have... it might just take a bit of digging.

First of all, when you SUBSCRIBE to cable, you are agreeing to pay in advance for your service. Because cable and internet are not utiilies, or necessities, they are billed a month in advance. My monthly statement reads: For services from 3/15-4/14 and that means, to me, that I am paying for services that I haven't used yet. You are not being ripped off! When you agreed to receive Charter's services, you agreed to pay in advance for them.