Avalon mayor Martin Pagliughi wants answers about why Verizon left hundreds of residences and businesses on the Seven Mile Island with intermittent phone service for more than a week, with no notification or explanation forthcoming from the telephone company.

The service outage, which began Oct. 28, extended all the way until Nov. 8, forcing customers to endure incomplete calls, one-sided conversations, and other problems.

Verizon blamed a piece of failing equipment for the outage — a technology card installed at a switching office in central New Jersey.  The result was disrupted service for residents of both Avalon and neighboring Stone Harbor, and Verizon officials never realized it.

Verizon officials claimed technicians missed the failing card because an alarm on the card never sounded.  Dozens of complaints from customers were ignored by Verizon customer service representatives.

Pagluighi wants to know how this could have happened.

“It was very troubling to me that in an era of mass telecommunications and putting men on the moon that Verizon could not be aware of a big problem in Avalon and Stone Harbor while dozens of complaints were coming into their representatives,” Pagliughi told the Cape May County Herald.

He added that many residents told the borough that when they contacted Verizon to complain about the lack of telephone service, Verizon reps told them their complaint was the first one from Avalon.

“This outage is not only about an inconvenience to our community, it’s really about a critical public safety issue,” Pagliughi said. “It’s time for utilities that make a lucrative business in our communities to have a greater level of accountability for the services they are paid to provide,” he said.

The mayor met with public safety officials and representatives from Verizon to create a plan to prevent a repeat occurrence.  Had the winter storm that barreled up the east coast over the weekend struck at the same time as the phone outage, public safety could have been at risk.

The newspaper reports the parties agreed to take the following actions:

• A total replacement of the technology card that failed during the telephone outage. The card will be replaced by technicians sometime during January 2011 with no anticipated interruption of telephone service;
• Verizon will draft a plan that will result in greater recognition of a community-wide problem along with proper notification of emergency management authorities in the affected region;
• A special practice “drill” will be conducted involving county and municipal emergency management officials that will test Verizon’s new contingency plan to notify a community when a phone outage occurs;
• Verizon will arrange a field trip during the first quarter of 2011 so local officials can talk with staff at a local field office to discuss communication efforts between the utility and local emergency management officials.

Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz is calling on New York City’s telecommunications workers to be pressed into service to cope with the snow emergency created by a weekend blizzard that left more than two feet of snow in parts of New York and New Jersey.

Markowitz told WABC-TV news the mayor’s response to the storm was a “royal screw-up” and he’s angry Manhattan streets are bare while outer boroughs like his contend with roads that have not seen a plow since the storm began.

“Verizon, Cablevision, Time Warner — we need men and women that are healthy and able-bodied,” Markowitz appealed on air.  “Twelve bucks an hour — that’s a lot of money — up to fifteen bucks an hour, to be able to help our Sanitation Department clean out streets.”

“We need every available vehicle you’ve got to help clean this place up,” said Markowitz. “I want as to look as good as Broadway in Manhattan — clean it like Broadway in Manhattan, no more and no less.”

Much of the city remains under difficult driving conditions because of abandoned vehicles left in the middle of streets and a lack of plowing.  Disruptions to electric, phone and cable service have been reported because of accidents, damage done by snow removal vehicles, and moisture-related equipment failures.

Pressing companies like Verizon and Time Warner into service may not provide much assistance, considering vehicles belonging to both companies were themselves stuck in many locations around the city.

For residents upstate, already dealing with record-breaking snowfalls in December, the chaos downstate is mystifying.  Residents in Buffalo, Rochester, and Syracuse have another word for the holiday blizzard: Sunday.

The three cities continue their annual competition for the Golden Snowball Award for the upstate community left with the most white stuff:

Golden Snowball Totals for the 2010 – 2011 Snowfall Season
Updated  12/27/2010

Cities	This Season	Normal Average to Date	This Time Last Season	Normal Seasons Average	All Time Season Snowfall Record
Syracuse	73.1	32.3	12.5	121.1	192.1 inches ( 1992 – 1993 )
Rochester	46.8	26.1	20.4	100.3	161.7 inches ( 1959 – 1960 )
Buffalo	31.9	32.3	17.5	97	199.4 inches ( 1976 – 1977 )
Binghamton	31.1	22.8	19.8	81	134.0 inches ( 1995 – 1996 )
Albany	7.7	15.6	12.0	62.6	112.5 inches ( 1970 – 1971 )

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WABC New York City Copes With Storm Aftereffects 12-28-10.flv[/flv]

WABC-TV provides the views of Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz, as well as a roundup of the lightning-hot anger being felt by an increasing number of New Yorkers stuck at home because of unplowed streets. (17 minutes)

Verizon Wireless is willing to be aggressive to keep your business — if you are a good customer that pays your bill on time.

The company has been trying to deal with a growing number of its long-time customers who have gone “off-contract” and are still using phones they bought two, three, and even four years ago.  The issue?  Pricey data plans.

“A Verizon Wireless phone bill for a family of four can easily exceed $200 a month when smartphones come into play,” writes Stop the Cap! reader Jim in Honeoye Falls, N.Y. “Forget about $1.99 mystery data charge-inspired bill shock.  Just getting your regular monthly bill can cause your hair to fall out.”

Jim says his recent visit to Verizon left him numb when he ran the numbers about adding his teen children to his existing Verizon account.

“My daughter is fed up with AT&T and she wants out at the end of her contract, and she’s willing to sacrifice her iPhone to manage it,” Jim says. “Her brother shares the account and he’s offered choice words about AT&T’s dropped calls to all in earshot.”

“But I was stunned by the Verizon in-store representative who started throwing numbers at me about texting, data fees, and insurance — not to mention plan changes,” Jim said.  “I don’t remember cell phone service ever being this expensive.”

Jim is grandfathered into a plan sold by Verizon around five years ago, one that eats mobile web usage from the plan’s monthly minute allowance.

Those days are long gone.  A Verizon representative told Stop the Cap! the company did away with that arrangement “for the benefit of customers.”

“Customers would sometimes forget and leave their phone running a data application overnight and consume most of their plan’s minutes for the month,” was the story told to us.  “Customers would be angry and upset when they realized their minutes were gone.”

We countered it’s far worse to get a bill reflecting data use charged at $1.99 per megabyte, per instance — Verizon’s current policy for customers not on data plans.  That has led to some unfortunate bill shock incidents where customers have ended up with bills in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Verizon “helped” its customers there as well — mandating expensive data plans for customers owning today’s higher-end phones.  Verizon argues a $30 a month flat rate data plan is better than being socked with a huge bill at Verizon’s extraordinary pay-per-use price.

“That’s like telling a mugging victim to be thankful they weren’t also raped,” Jim retorts.

What burns Jim about all of this is that unlimited data service plans do not include unlimited texting.

“It’s offensive that Verizon asks you to pay $30 a month to push mobile data around, but that doesn’t include a single text message,” Jim writes. “If you forget to add a text plans, it’s 20 cents a message.”

Verizon offers a budget package of 250 text messages for $5 per month.

Jim’s journey is a familiar one we’ve heard repeatedly from Verizon Wireless customers who are interested in exploring today’s advanced feature phones, but are turned off by the corresponding fees levied by the wireless carrier — fees that can dramatically increase customer bills.

“We pay around $100 a month for two lines with Verizon when all of the taxes are added up,” Jim says. “To bring my kids on board, we’d have to upgrade away from our current cell phone plan to one with at least two mandatory data plans, which would add $60 a month to our bill just for that.”

Verizon’s back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest Jim’s new Verizon bill would easily exceed $200 a month based on their usage and plan features.

“That’s crazy,” Jim feels.

Those prices cause customers like Jim to head for the door, telling Verizon to leave their account the way it was when they walked in the door.

Verizon seems to be getting that, because the company is increasingly targeting upgrade offers to contract-renewal-resistant customers, especially with family members eager to jump into smartphones.

The most welcome news — rumors the company may explore offering a FamilyShare Data Plan that carries a usage allowance, but is charged per account, not per phone.  For casual users and those more than happy to switch to Wi-Fi where available, that could represent serious savings.

Find incredible deals on a vast array of products at Shoppok, your ultimate online shopping destination. Browse through various categories, from electronics to apparel, and experience a smooth shopping journey at Shoppok.com.

In the meantime, two promotions that are available offer some help for customers looking to upgrade:

FamilyShare – Smartphones Talk Free a/k/a $10 off data plan

Marketed in two ways, this promotion targets multi-line customers with one or more members seeking a smartphone upgrade, but do not want to have a stroke when they open the bill.

The promotion works with existing Verizon Nationwide Family SharePlans starting at $69.99 monthly access for 700 Anytime Minutes.  Add a $29.99 data plan for each additional smartphone and get $9.99 off your bill for each smartphone, per month, for the next two years. Sometimes this is pitched as “$10 off our unlimited $29.99 data plan” — because it is the price of the data plan that usually scares would-be smartphone customers back to their old phones.  Charging $20 instead of $30 is soothing enough to ease some customers on board the smartphone revolution.

“This is an ideal option for customers with a spouse or child wanting to move to a smartphone,” said Marni Walden, vice president and chief marketing officer for Verizon Wireless.

The caveats.  Your new smartphone will probably come with a two year contract extension and the primary line on the account is not qualified for the discount.  But there is an easy way around this.  If one or more lines on your account are not going to upgrade, simply have Verizon reassign one of those lines to be the primary line.  Legacy service plans no longer offered will have to be abandoned, and there is no way back to them.  This promotion expires January 7, 2011.

Talk (450 Minutes) With Unlimited Text and Data for $69.99 per month

Price conscious consumers have started giving carriers like Sprint a second look.  Rated the most improved carrier by Consumer Reports, Sprint’s aggressive pricing has begun to attract some Verizon customers.  In response, Verizon has been testing a new promotional plan that makes data and texting unlimited for one flat price.  The plan was initially open only to those who received an invitation in e-mail, but a quick call to Verizon Wireless customer service finds at least one call center that can add this plan for anyone — no invite required.

The plan’s price for single line accounts is $69.99 per month and a one year contract renewal is required for those with less than one year remaining on existing contracts (or those off-contract altogether.)  If you still have more than a year remaining on your contract, no further extension is required.

A companion FamilyShare plan delivers 1,400 minutes per month.  The monthly $139.99 price delivers service for two lines.  Each additional line is $19.99 per month, which includes unlimited texting and data.  For heavy users with several smartphones on an account, this plan can represent significant savings, and does not expire.

Caveats: Getting either plan might take a few calls to customer service.  Not every call center can add this promotion for customers.  Voice minutes might be too limited for some customers, but Verizon also offers the Friends & Family option, allowing unlimited calling to a select group of numbers.

Phone Promotions

This holiday season, selecting your new phone is probably going to be the cheapest part of your relationship with Verizon over the next two years.  The carrier is literally giving away several smartphones, offering buy one, get one deals on others.

Consumer advocates acquainted with the wireless market traditionally suggest the biggest savings come from online merchants like Wirefly, Dell Mobile, or Amazon.

At first glance, that advice seems sound.

Jim’s daughter and son both want the Droid X which sells for $199.99 on Verizon’s website. Verizon offers a Buy One, Get One special on the Droid X currently so the effective cost for two phones is $199.99.

But hang on a moment.  Dell Mobile (powered by Wirefly’s parent company) has the same phones for much less — $19.99 each, based on how the phones would be added to Jim’s account.  Until last evening, Dell even threw in a $25 gift card to sweeten the deal.  Excluding that, the difference in price between Verizon and Dell was a whopping $160 for the exact same phone.

Trying to narrow the difference used to be an exercise in futility for many Verizon customers.  With a market leadership position, Verizon doesn’t have to viciously compete on price.  As a result, hard fought negotiations often yielded little more than an accessory like a car charger thrown in to sweeten the deal.

But those days are starting to change, especially when Verizon considers you an excellent customer prepared to change carriers.

Lesson one for Jim was to avoid Verizon stores if he wanted the best possible deal.  As he discovered, Verizon store employees are recalcitrant about giving away the store as they try and protect their commissions and sales numbers.  Besides, many of the employees Jim dealt with seemed to know less about Verizon’s plans than he did.

Jim decided he could handle Verizon’s Smartphones Talk Free promotion, but he wasn’t about to leave $160 on Verizon’s table for the phones.  He visited a Verizon store in nearby Rochester to see what could be done about the price of the phones.

“Basically nothing was the answer,” Jim says.

“These guys will say anything to make a sale,” says Jim.  “But when you try and negotiate with them, they have little authority and less to offer.”

He reports a sales representative finally offered him free cell phone cases and a spare charger (a $100 value according to the Verizon rep — a value Jim disputes) instead of a price discount.

“I walked out,” said Jim.

While inquiring about how to place his order with Amazon, the online retailer instructed him to call Verizon directly to reconfigure something on his account before placing the order.

That was a fatal mistake… for Amazon.

“I was very surprised that the Verizon Wireless representative immediately started to fight for my business in ways the in-store reps never did,” Jim reports.

When Jim made it clear he was not about to give Verizon $160 more than he had to, the Verizon Wireless representative reviewed his account and placed Jim on hold.  Moments later, Jim learned Verizon would match Amazon’s offer.

“That was actually a relief for me because those third party online retailers have their own contracts you have to sign yourself committing to no account changes for six months, and you are never really sure whether they’ll configure the account properly,” Jim said.

Jim also scored free overnight FedEx shipping in time for Christmas and the representative promised to call him back after the phones arrived to finish setting up the account.

The only downside is that Verizon is still sticking Jim with mail-in rebates that will be fulfilled with debit cards.  His charges for the new phones will get added to his regular Verizon bill, however.  No credit card required.

Verizon’s willingness to extend offers can depend on your business relationship with the company.  Making late payments or arriving credit challenged can dramatically reduce how far Verizon will extend its hand.

Our advice to others in Jim’s position:

1. Call Verizon customer service and deal with them, not store employees when trying to negotiate the best deal.  A good phone rep will deliver discounts in-store salespeople know nothing about and won’t be willing to offer even if they did;
2. Make it about the price.  If you have a competing offer, share it with them.  Verizon can easily adjust prices downwards with their New Every Two $50 credit and do better with additional credits such as a free month of service to effectively knock your price down;
3. If they offer accessories, hold out for actual billing credits.  Buy your own accessories later;
4. Be prepared to hang up and call back if you get a difficult representative.  Some call centers are better than others;
5. Consider the competition.  Customers on individual plans might find far better deals with prepaid carriers like Page Plus that use Verizon’s network.  Or it may be time to consider a different carrier.
   

The Federal Communications Commission voted today to pass what Chairman Julius Genachowski called “Net Neutrality” — reforms that will guarantee a free and open Internet.  But critics charge any similarity to actual Net Neutrality is purely coincidental.

In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Democratic Commissioners approved Genachowski’s framework to keep providers from blocking access to websites.

Genachowski claims the rules will protect consumers from providers controlling the free flow of online content and will provide regulatory certainty for the broadband marketplace.  Providers, who have either lined up behind the chairman or have muted their criticism of the proposal in recent days, suggest they weren’t about to censor Internet content in the first place and that Net Neutrality is a cause in search of a problem.

Public interest groups were less than satisfied, dismissing today’s proceedings as “Net Neutrality-lite,” or “Net Neutrality with more (loop)holes than Swiss cheese.”  In particular, Genachowski’s willingness to exempt wireless broadband from the rules was a very sore spot among Net Neutrality proponents and some in Congress.

“Maybe you like Google Maps. Well, tough,” said Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) “If the FCC passes this weak rule, Verizon will be able to cut off access to the Google Maps app on your phone and force you to use their own mapping program, Verizon Navigator, even if it is not as good. And even if they charge money, when Google Maps is free.”

Franken is convinced excluding wireless networks from open Internet rules is the first step towards a free speech calamity.

“If corporations are allowed to prioritize content on the Internet, or they are allowed to block applications you access on your iPhone, there is nothing to prevent those same corporations from censoring political speech.”

Craig Aaron, managing director at Free Press bemoaned today’s vote over rules he suggests were written by the industry itself.

“These rules don’t do enough to stop the phone and cable companies from dividing the Internet into fast and slow lanes, and they fail to protect wireless users from discrimination. No longer can you get to the same Internet via your mobile device as you can via your laptop,” Aaron said. “The rules pave the way for AT&T to block your access to third-party applications and to require you to use its own preferred applications.”

The Obama Administration is likely to claim credit for the new rules and declare Net Neutrality a campaign promise fulfilled, a claim that makes several net activists’ blood boil.

“Chairman Genachowski ignored President Obama’s promise to the American people to take a ‘back seat to no one’ on Net Neutrality,” says Aaron. “He ignored the 2 million voices who petitioned for real Net Neutrality and the hundreds who came to public hearings across the country to ask him to protect the open Internet. And he ignored policymakers who urged him to protect consumers and maintain the Internet as a platform for innovation. It’s unfortunate that the only voices he chose to listen to were those coming from the very industry he’s charged with overseeing.”

Aneesh Chopra, Obama’s chief technology officer said on Dec. 1 that the FCC proposal was an “important step in preventing abuses and continuing to advance the Internet as an engine of productivity growth and innovation.”

Genachowski’s two fellow Democratic commissioners agreed, noting the policies probably don’t go far enough, but it’s a start and they wouldn’t oppose them.  But Commissioner Michael Copps made it clear he remains unhappy with how the entire debate was managed.  He fears corporate control of broadband content will bring the same mediocrity large corporations have managed to deliver Americans over radio and television.

“I don’t want the Internet to travel down the same road of special interest consolidation and gate-keeper control that other media and telecommunications industries — radio, television, film and cable — have traveled,” Copps said. “What an historic tragedy it would be,” he said, “to let that fate befall the dynamism of the Internet.”

If today’s mild net reforms are a step forward, it’s a small one say critics like the Center for Media Justice.  They suggest the FCC’s idea of Net Neutrality offers “minimal protections” for consumers.

“Our greatest fears have been realized,” said Malkia Cyril, Executive Director of the Center for Media Justice. “The Internet can only work if it’s a truly level playing field. Telecommunications companies have used their considerable wealth and lobbying might to exclude some of the most vulnerable communities from the only protection there is from their corporate abuses. These rules aren’t fair, and they don’t provide a path to equity or opportunity. We’re deeply concerned that today’s vote sends a clear message to our communities that if you access the Internet through your cell phone, you don’t count. The FCC has sadly shirked its responsibility to protect all Internet users equally.”

All of the debate may ultimately mean nothing should one of the providers decide to challenge the new rules in court.  The Commission failed to address an earlier court decision that ruled the Commission’s regulatory framework was based on nothing more than good intentions.  The agency was toying with the idea of reasserting authority over broadband using a different framework, but providers furiously lobbied against that, claiming it would “regulate the Internet” under rules designed for landlines.  The Commission’s decision to proceed under a foundation condemned by an earlier federal court ruling exposes an obvious weak spot providers could attack in additional lawsuits.

“We know these rules will be hotly contested,” said Betty Yu, MAG-Net Coordinator. “As they roll out, grassroots communities will continue to monitor the process, ensuring that the rights of wireless users are protected from the over reach and abuses of AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and other telecommunications companies. These rules are a compromise- unfortunately, what was lost in the deal are the rights of wireless users.”

Verizon may make things easier for Yu and other consumer groups to clear the playing field and start over again.  The company released a statement today that foreshadows a willingness to challenge the agency’s Net Neutrality rulemaking in court (underlining ours):

“While it will take some time for us to analyze the F.C.C.’s rules and the order once they are released, the F.C.C.’s decision apparently reaches far beyond the net neutrality rules it announced today,” the company said in a statement. “Based on today’s announcement, the FCC appears to assert broad authority for sweeping new regulation of broadband wireline and wireless networks and the Internet itself. This assertion of authority without solid statutory underpinnings will yield continued uncertainty for industry, innovators, and investors. In the long run, that is harmful to consumers and the nation.”

Net Neutrality Order Snippets

<

p style=”text-align: center;”>

The Federal Communications Commission’s Open Meeting introducing Net Neutrality and includes a vote on the rulemaking.  (2 hours, 42 minutes)

In a welcome turn of events, the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC), which has routinely turned up as a member of Big Telecom-backed astroturf campaigns and takes money from AT&T, has come together with Latinos for Internet Freedom to issue a joint statement calling on the Federal Communications Commission to adopt equal Net Neutrality policies for wired and wireless broadband services.

“Although we disagree on some of the components of the proposed network neutrality regulations, there is one point on which we are in lock step: the FCC’s network neutrality rules must apply equally to wireline and wireless internet access.  Of course we understand that what is ‘reasonable network management’ may be slightly different over different types of connections.  Cost is the primary barrier to broadband adoption, and Latinos are turning to their mobile phones as their only onramp to the internet.  We are committed to finding ways to lower broadband costs by increasing competition through wireless access and other means.  It is therefore essential that the FCC ensures that users of wireless and wireline services are protected by its openness rules.”

Of course, broadband providers’ demands for deregulation and unified opposition to Net Neutrality have never delivered and will never provide cheaper Internet service to anyone.  In fact, the court ruling that eliminated the FCC’s authority over broadband gave providers nearly a year of a wide open marketplace, yet many providers are now sending out notices they are -increasing- broadband prices for subscribers.  Net Neutrality has never been enforced against wireless networks either, and as a result most either usage cap, throttle, or charge enormous overlimit fees for users deemed to be “using too much.”

Increased competition can bring lower prices, but only if it extends well beyond today’s duopoly.  In areas where one provider is likely to maintain a de facto monopoly, effective oversight is required to ensure consumers receive adequate service at fair prices.

Still, it is a surprising and welcome change to see LULAC recognizing the true nature of broadband access for many economically-challenged Americans, especially in minority communities where unemployment continues to be catastrophic.  Some consumers are finding prepaid wireless broadband service to be one way onto the Internet, yet Big Telecom has sought to keep those networks exempt from any Net Neutrality consumer protections.  That cannot be allowed to happen.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon vs. Latinos for Internet Freedom.flv[/flv]

Watch these two competing spots from Verizon and the Latinos for Internet Freedom.  One is self-serving and a tad condescending, the other calls for a free and open Internet where individuals get a level playing field to tell their own stories and live their own lives without fear or special favor.  (2 minutes)