Skye Smith says:

Here is an email I sent to Frontier Customer Service today on behalf of an elderly friend. All of the information I’m about to post is fact. I am writing from Northwestern Arizona. I encourage everyone who has received questionable or outrageous billing from Frontier services, been victimized by their “misinterpretation of customer’s requests” and so on to share their own horror stories. And I, too, absolutely disagree with this internet “Cap” nonsense, which is simply another attempt to fleece customers during a time when the U.S. economy is in a downturn matched only by what was known as “The Great Depression”. Perhaps we can call this period in our history “The Genuinely Awful Depression.” My letter, below:

Hello. My name is Skye Smith and I am contacting you on behalf of Mr. Fred Senecal as an authorized legal representative. The email address provided is mine. When I view Mr. Senecal’s account online, I see a bill totaling $44.57. Yet, on 01/05/10 you sent him a bill in the amount of $101.78, citing an outstanding unpaid balance of $42.39, bringing the total charges on the printed bill to $144.17. Previously, you have overcharged Mr. Senecal $600 and in excess of $300. On the current printed statement, you have charged Mr. Senecal for “High Speed Internet Max”, when he requested your “High Speed Light DSL”. Initially, he requested when his original contract ended (on 11/17/09) that he be given dial-up service. Fred Senecal is 77 years old, not in good health and has memory issues. He is also not familiar with computer hardware and ports, as his desktop lacks both an internal modem and a corresponding phone jack area to plug in a phone line. He has an Ethernet port. A person from Frontier Service arrived at Mr. Senecal’s home and told him that he did not have the necessary equipment for dial-up. At this time, Mr. Senecal asked about the other options and told the Service employee that he wanted the DSL *LITE* package. The Service employee spent a few minutes trying to get Mr. Senecal’s DSL Lite installed, then informed Mr. Senecal that “Frontier had run out of ‘slots’ in the Chloride area and that additional ‘slots’ would need to be added before Mr. Senecal could get any internet service. This left Mr. Senecal without internet access for approximately two weeks. When a service person returned, he did not run any new cable or install any new software on Mr. Senecal’s PC. What the service person did was to plug the phone line into the back of the same modem Mr. Senecal had before, and plug in the ethernet and power cables. He then left, likely having checked to ensure that Mr. Senecal was indeed able to access the internet. After receiving this printed bill, which was quite different from the online account information, the following errors became apparent: Not only had Mr. Senecal been signed up for the “High Speed Internet Max”, but he was charged twice within the same bill for the more expensive service. One charge is in the amount of $20.10 for next month’s service in advance; the second is in the amount of $12.73 under “Other Charges and Credits” for the period of 12/18/09 – 01/05/10. You charged him twice for the same modem: $4.50 for the “Monthly Service” and $4.43 under the “Other Charges and Credits” category between the dates of 12/18/09 – 01/05/10. You charged Fred Senecal, an existing Frontier customer with modem, previously installed DSL cable to his residence and all the cables he already had in his possession an exorbitant $34.99 for a Service person to plug the cables back in. As for the ‘extra slot(s)’ that may have been required for Frontier’s coverage in the Chloride area, may I point out that your company is responsible for providing adequate infrastructure. You cannot expect the customer to subsidize your company when you find the need to expand or install additional ‘slots’ or equipment to accommodate a growing number of customers. I do not see any indication that Fred Senecal was credited for the time he was without internet service. In addition, you taxed him not only for the period of 01/06/10 to 02/05/10 (being for a period which started one day *after* the date on the printed bill), but included the amounts for 12/18/09 – 01/05/09 and taxed him based on the entire amount, including very dubious charges *and* services one month into the future. I question your practice of billing customers a full month in advance, as you cannot predict such events as lengthy outages due to inclement weather or failure of equipment in your infrastructure. You cannot predict whether a customer will die ten days into the month ahead. In addition, Fred Senecal called and spoke with one Customer Service Rep named “Pedro” in your Florida office(s). Pedro told Mr. Senecal, who had called to attempt to unravel the mysteries of your billing and was frustrated, in pain and feeling greatly stressed, that Mr. Senecal would get ONE MONTH FREE service. Instead, you appear to be charging him more than he can possibly owe. Perhaps it is your company’s policy to assume that senior citizens either cannot or will not read or question charges on their bills and simply write you a check, trusting that you are charging them accordingly. These are often people who, like Mr. Senecal, must survive on a limited income. This is the third time in several months I have seen outrageous and inexplicable charges on this man’s bill and this seems rather suspicious. In addition, you have caused Mr. Senecal untold stress and unnecessary upset and inconvenience during this same time period. I will be instructing Mr. Fred Senecal to telephone you tomorrow and pay the amount indicated online, which is $44.57. I will also be contacting the Regional Manager for Mohave County and, if necessary, will request the appropriate authorities to do an internal audit of your company. You have my email address and I expect a response, an explanation and an apology for upsetting a elderly man in poor health. Sincerely, Skye Smith