Some of Comcast’s customer service representatives and their supervisors could care less more than a million east-coast residents remain without power and thousands may no longer have a home.

Priority #1: Where is our equipment? If you can’t find it, you are going to pay for it.

Yes, once again the company that redefines lousy customer service is back to illustrate why their reputation as the 4th Most Hated Company in America is well-earned. The Don’t Care Comcast Customer Service Bears in Kabletown call centers are only too happy to give the desperate in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania a hard time.

Blogger Seth Clifford (via the Consumerist) doesn’t need Comcast’s attitude problem. His parents have already lost one home and are on the verge of losing another.

Comcast’s Shocking Realization: the Clifford family has bigger things to worry about than a set top box:

[My mother] was trying to explain to them that they stood to lose the entire house in an explosion and that the authorities were having trouble even reaching the area to cut the gas to prevent this. She mentioned that she wouldn’t be able to return the cable box and equipment because the storm had basically destroyed the area, and the house was perilously close to being destroyed completely as well.

Comcast’s reply to her?

We’re very sorry, but the price of the equipment will be charged to your account if you’re unable to return it.

That’s right: in the middle of a natural disaster, the worst our area has seen in decades, at a time when my parents have already lost one house and stand to lose the other, as well as everything in it (remember, it’s not a rental so it’s fully furnished and they live there for part of the year – there are family keepsakes, antiques, and the like) – at a time like this, Comcast has essentially told my mom “tough s***”.

She spoke to a supervisor who echoed the same thing. Comcast was very ‘sympathetic to the situation’, but according to policy, the company must assess fees against unreturned equipment, no matter the situation.

Devastation on the coast of New Jersey

This is hardly the first time we’ve seen Big Telecom Companies Behaving Badly when Mother Nature strikes.

After tornadoes devastated parts of Alabama in 2011, one of Charter Cable’s customer service minions told a victim they will wait on the phone while the customer searches the yard for missing cable equipment. Can’t find it? Pay us.

The worst companies just don’t care until someone in the media embarrasses them sufficiently to realize the cost of a cable box isn’t as great as the drubbing they are about to get on the 6 o’clock news.

Once exposed, damage control kicks in. The flower arrangement is on the way and the “we’re sorry” card is in the mail.

Too bad the flowers are not for everyone. For those whose stories never go viral, the response often remains “pay up or we’ll ruin your credit for years.”

Comcast is a long way from its “Comcast Cares” motto:

“It’s a wonderful thing to have people work together for the benefit of others.”

Clifford is disgusted with the realization Comcast only cares about itself:

• Comcast does care. It cares about reclaiming equipment in the face of unspeakable disaster. And about charging fees for equipment that does not get returned, even if there is no physical way within the realm of possibility in which to do it.
• Comcast, does not, in fact, care at all about you. Not even a little. House burned down? F*** you, pay me. House about to explode at any minute? F*** you, pay me.

After the Consumerist shined their flashlight on Comcast’s house of corporate evil, the inevitable apology was on the way:

We have already reached out to apologize for adding to his parents’ difficulties and to ask for his parents’ contact information so we can call to personally apologize and assure them that we are handling the equipment without the need for them to do anything further. Please know we are working with our teams to ensure we handle all customer calls on a case-by-case basis with sensitivity to the devastating effects Hurricane Sandy had on so many of our local communities and residents. Again, we are of course notating his parents account to ensure they are not charged for equipment they can’t return.

Hey Comcast: how about “notating” every customer account in the northeast pummeled by Hurricane Sandy to ensure the flying monkeys customer service reps in the call center don’t abuse anyone else? Comcast’s “case by case basis” is loophole language that could leave customers shelling out hundreds in lost or damaged equipment penalties.

The Federal Communications Commission has granted cable operators permission to completely encrypt their television lineups, potentially requiring every subscriber to rent set top boxes or CableCARD technology to continue watching cable-TV.

The FCC voted last week 5-0 to allow total encryption, a reversal of an older rule that prohibited encryption of the basic tier, allowing cable customers to watch local stations and other community programming without the expense of extra equipment.

The cable industry said the decision is a victory against cable theft, claiming that nearly five percent of all cable television hookups are illegally stealing service, at a cost estimated at $5 billion in lost revenue annually.

But some third party companies offering alternatives to costly set top boxes with endless monthly rental fees claim the industry move towards encryption is more about protecting the cable monopoly than controlling signal theft.

Current licensing agreements do not allow third party set top manufacturers to support scrambled channels without an added-cost, cable company-supplied set top box or card. That means a would-be customer would have to invest in a third party set top box and a cable company-supplied set top box to manage scrambled channels. That may leave customers wondering why they need the third party box at all.

This presented a problem for Boxee, which manufactures third party set top boxes, some with DVR capability. If cable systems completely encrypt their lineups, Boxee customers will need to rent a cable box and work through a complicated procedure to get both to work together.

Boxee officials suggest both an interim and long term solution to the dilemma — both requiring the goodwill of the cable industry to work out the details.

For now, Boxee and Comcast have agreed to work together on an HD digital transport adapter (DTA) with built-in Ethernet (E-DTA). A Boxee user would then access basic tier channels directly through an Ethernet connection and change channels remotely using their enhanced set top via a DLNA protocol.

A longer term solution would be to create a licensing path for an integrated DTA solution included inside third party set top boxes. This would eliminate the need for an added cost E-DTA box.

Cable operators planning to encrypt their entire television lineup will soon begin notifying customers of their plans. Under an agreement with the FCC, those with broadcast basic service will get up to two boxes for two years without charge (five years if the customer is on public assistance). Those who already have a cable box or DVR will get one box for two years at no charge. The cable company can impose monthly rental fees on additional boxes and begin charging for every box after two years.

Former FCC chairman Michael Powell, who now presides over the nation’s largest cable lobbying group, called the FCC decision “pro-consumer” despite the added expense and inconvenient many customers will experience.

“By permitting cable operators to join their competitors in encrypting the basic service tier, the commission has adopted a sensible, pro-consumer approach that will reduce overall in- home service calls,” said Powell, president of the National Cable and Telecommunications Association. “Encryption of the basic tier also enhances security of the network which reduces service theft that harms honest customers.”

Comcast is a leading proponent of total encryption, because it would allow them to start and stop service remotely, without having to schedule a service call to disconnect service. Cablevision already encrypts its entire lineup in certain areas under a previously-obtained waiver from the FCC. The company said it saved money reducing labor costs associated with service calls to physically connect and disconnect service.

Comcast’s porn charged cable bills run into the hundreds of dollars for one 80-year old customer who claims she never ordered them.

An 80-year-old Richmond, Virginia woman has been billed more than a thousand dollars by Comcast for adult pay per view movies she never ordered.

Shirley Mascaro has been fighting with Comcast for nearly a year over an endless series of $13.99 titles that have regularly appeared on her monthly bill since February.

Mascaro not only says she never watched the movies, she has no idea how to order pay per view programming.

Mascaro refused to pay for the movies she did not order, resulting in one bill for $700. Comcast shut off her service, despite regular complaints and promised service credits for the movies.

One young Comcast employee stood in Mascaro’s living room and doubted her veracity when she claimed she was not watching titles like “Xtsy,” “Pant,” and “Juicy.”

“‘Everybody says they don’t order these moves, but they really do,'” Mascaro recalls the Comcast employee telling her.

Another employee offered that perhaps one of Mascaro’s neighbors was stealing her cable.

“Maybe they are but I don’t know,” Mascaro replied. “You need to find out.”

Mascaro suspects Comcast’s cable box might be the culprit. The charges began right after Comcast installed the box on her new television.

With no end in sight to the porn fees, Mascaro contacted WWBT in Richmond and appealed to their consumer reporter for assistance. That quickly got the attention of Comcast, who called the entire matter “an isolated problem.”

Comcast released a statement to NBC12 apologizing to Mascaro and crediting all disputed charges on her account. But Mascaro, and the TV station, are not so sure the charges will not be back. 12 On Your Side reporter Diane Walker promised to keep watching.

Mascaro also wants Comcast to send her a letter just in case the company tries to ruin her credit over the unpaid porn movies.

[flv width=”640″ height=”500″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/WWBT Richmond Elderly woman charged hundreds of dollars by Comcast for porn 10-2-12.mp4[/flv]

An 80-year-old Richmond, Va. woman’s year-long dispute over hundreds of dollars in Comcast pay-per-view-porn she says she never ordered may finally be over. WWBT reports.  (3 minutes)

A 52-year old Los Angeles woman was bill shocked when she found Time Warner Cable charged her for 17 pay-per-view adult movies ordered over four days, often within minutes of each other.

Total charge: $154.65.

The actual number of adult movies watched, according to Time Warner customer Carol Scott: Zero.

Time Warner Cable’s initial response to Scott’s billing complaint: “We don’t make mistakes. You must have watched all those movies.”

The Los Angeles Times‘ David Lazarus reported on the plight of the healthcare lawyer the cable company thinks can’t put down her remote control:

On one day, the bill shows, a dirty movie was ordered at 9:55 a.m., followed by additional orders at 9:57, 10:03, 10:04, 10:05 and 10:06. Each movie came with a $7.98 charge.

Two days later, according to the bill, Scott’s craving for porn returned in a big way with orders for adult movies at 10:39 a.m. and 10:40, and again at 2 p.m., 2:01, 2:03 and 2:04.

She was apparently in such a randy mood, the bill shows that two adult movies were simultaneously ordered twice that day at 2:03 p.m. and 2:04.

The next day, a little more afternoon delight was seemingly in order. Scott’s bill indicates that two more adult movies were ordered, at 12:15 p.m. and immediately after at 12:16.

Unfortunately, Time Warner’s bill doesn’t specify the titles of the various films, so we can only guess at the range of tastes on display.

Scott explained she never ordered an adult pay per view movie in her life, much less 17 of them — a fact Time Warner Cable could have taken into account had it appropriately investigated her pay per view order history.

Instead, the representative insisted he had proof the movies were directly streamed to her television (was he outside her window?). If she wasn’t the one watching, someone else was — or several people, considering Scott’s bill showed she had as many as six sleazy sex flicks running at the same time.

Scott’s request to block adult pay per view titles from being ordered ever again was blocked by Time Warner. A customer service agent explained it was all or nothing — block all pay per view titles or none of them.

When the Los Angeles Times reporter called Time Warner Cable on behalf of Scott, the cable operator got nervous and had premature explanations.

Scott said one representative suggested electrical shorts could have resulted in her pay per view porn escapade, or perhaps someone got inside her cable box. Another repeated the company’s earlier insistence she must have watched the movies.

Jim Gordon, a company spokesman, didn’t really want to talk about it.

“We take customer privacy seriously, which we know our customers appreciate, and as such we are not able to comment on a particular customer’s account,” Gordon said.

Gordon passed the newspaper reporter to Motorola to discuss cable box hacking, as the Time Warner Cable set top box involved was manufactured by them.

In the meantime, under threat of going public with a relationship gone bad, Scott’s account was credited $154.65 and the cable company found its way clear to configure a block on future adult pay per view titles on Scott’s account.

If you do not use your cable company’s pay per view service, why not consider avoiding being the next lucky victim of cable porn roulette and ask your provider to block all pay per view purchases.

A New Jersey man is facing down Verizon Communications after the company sent him a $2,345 bill for the company’s equipment lost in a devastating fire.

Jarrett Seltzer has been a Verizon FiOS customer for six years. A February fire destroyed virtually all of his property, including four Verizon cable boxes and a router installed six years ago. After notifying Verizon about the fire, Seltzer says Verizon continued to charge him for two additional weeks of service and then sent him a final bill for $2,345 to cover the lost equipment.

Seltzer called Verizon to complain about the bill and says he was transferred not less than 14 times during the call, which lasted about an hour and a half. At the end of the call, nothing was resolved.

“[Verizon] should be ashamed,” Seltzer said in a YouTube video describing his debacle.

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon FiOS billed me 2,345 for my burned cable boxes 9-21-12.flv[/flv]

Jarrett Seltzer says a February fire left him with nothing… except a $2,345 bill from Verizon Communications for equipment that was destroyed in the fire.  (2 minutes)

Seltzer says he has spent more than $18,000 as a Verizon FiOS customer over the last six years, and is astounded the company is aggressively trying to recoup damages for six year-old equipment. He is now at the point where he would not accept a credit from Verizon even if offered.

“I’d rather pay $2,345 for [equipment] I lost in a fire, along with everything else I’ve ever owned, than not make people aware of this,” Seltzer said.

Stop the Cap! regularly covers stories about customers facing enormous bills for lost or damaged provider equipment. While most companies will forego billing customers fees in high profile cases, and Comcast claims it will not charge customers for lost equipment if they don’t have insurance, many other companies are less understanding. One cable company asked a customer to search their tornado-devastated neighborhood to unearth lost equipment. Others demand advance payment while the insurance companies sort out claims in progress.

Renters are traditionally the most likely to face lost equipment charges because many mistakenly believe a landlord’s own insurance policy will cover their losses. That  impression can leave customers with nothing after a fire. But even with a personal renter’s insurance policy, some insurance companies still refuse to cover lost cable equipment or only offer to pay the depreciated, actual value of equipment, not the full retail price most companies demand. That may be the case with Geico — Seltzer’s next target.

[flv]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KDKA Pittsburgh Arson Victim Billed For Cable Equipment Lost In Fire 5-18-12.mp4[/flv]

KDKA in Pittsburgh got Comcast on the record — it will not bill people for lost or damaged equipment if they lack renter’s insurance — after this victim of an arson fire reported the company billed her more than $600 for lost cable equipment.  (2 minutes)