Time Warner Cable has changed account numbers for a number of their customers in upstate New York, creating a problem for those who failed to update their electronic bill payment service with the new number. Many of those accounts are now past due and Time Warner Cable is having trouble tracking the payments sent on behalf of the old account number.

The new account numbers are now in place for New York customers in Albany, Rochester, Syracuse, Watertown, and other nearby communities. Customers in Portland, Maine are scheduled to be assigned new account numbers the first week of November.

Time Warner Cable attached this notification letter to bills mailed in August and September to customers in Rochester, N.Y., and other upstate cities.

Stop the Cap! reader Charles dropped us a note noting his account went past due because his payment, sent by his bank under the old account number, has been cashed but never credited to his account. Time Warner Cable  customer service agents can no longer access his old account to see if the payment was misapplied, and won’t take his word for it.

Oops: A bill covering Sep. 28-Oct. 27 still reflects the old Time Warner Cable account number.

“I have to fax in something that shows the bank paid the bill,” Charles reports. “I’m surprised there was not some connection between the old account numbers and the new ones. The system could have at least made the connection, credited the new account number and automatically notified me (email would be easy) that the account number had changed.”

Area banks across western and central New York report there have been a significant increase in complaint calls over Time Warner’s demands for evidence of payment.  Typically, companies like banks and insurance companies changing account numbers will transfer payments sent under old account numbers and automatically apply them to the proper account. That is not happening with the cable company.

More irritating for customers is that Time Warner Cable did indeed notify customers in early September that their account number was going to change, but never bothered to share the new account number at that time so customers could take action with their financial institution. When billing statements dated for service as late as September 28 were mailed, they still reflected the old account number.

Customers who use the cable company’s own recurring auto-pay service were not affected.

You can now find your new account number under Time Warner Cable’s MyServices section, under the PayXpress Billing Center heading.

Customers with missing payments should call their local Time Warner Cable customer service center to begin an investigation and avoid any late fees.

Wants $4.95 a month in some states to keep your number out of their phone directories.

In a case of shooting itself in the proverbial foot, Verizon’s argument its $4.95 monthly fee to keep your landline number out of their directory is justified has revealed a way to avoid paying it at all, saving $60 a year in unnecessary fees.

The company acknowledged that customers who drop their landline in favor of a cell phone will have an unlisted number at no additional charge.

A Network World columnist asked Verizon why it costs so much to do so little.

“Why do you charge me $4.95 per month just so that I can keep my phone number unpublished? Please do not merely tell me that you are allowed to charge me this fee because I already know that. What I want to know is WHY do you do it? What cost are you passing along? … I would appreciate as much specificity in your reply as possible.”

Here’s the reply from a media relations spokesman, who first consulted with “a key member of product management with oversight for (unpublished) numbers”:

“The cost charged to offer unlisted phone numbers is chiefly systems and IT based. Specifically, the costs we incur and factor into the monthly charge involve three things: quality control, data integrity and the interface we have with other carriers and directory publishers. These activities help us protect the feed of customer information we have, and must protect, when customers request that their telephone number remains private when requested.”

Stop the Cap! decided to pose our own follow-up to Verizon’s customer service department:

“If we were to drop our landline and choose a cell phone instead, would our number be listed or unlisted?” we asked.

Verizon’s reply:

“Cell phone numbers are not listed in our directories and are not available from directory assistance unless you pay an additional fee for our listings service. The rates vary by state.”

Customers switching landline providers with the intent of keeping their currently listed phone number may, however, remain in the telephone directory if Verizon forgets to remove the listing after the customer disconnects service. But there should be no charge to remind Verizon you disconnected service and want the listing deleted.

As a consequence of deregulation, many states no longer keep tabs on ancillary fees charged by Verizon for these services, which are largely based on what the market will bear.

Shelly, a Time Warner Cable customer in New York City, ended up with a modem not on the company’s “approved for purchase” list, based on the recommendation of… Time Warner Cable.

Jon Weinberg has devoted more than six hours of his life trying to navigate around Time Warner Cable’s forthcoming $3.95 monthly modem rental fee, with no end in sight.

The 15-year Time Warner Cable customer is just about fed up and has started shopping around for another provider. The Staten Island resident tells Stop the Cap! asking for an additional $3.95 a month for a five year old cable modem is probably the last straw.

“Time Warner’s easy-to-miss postcard probably cost the company around 80 cents to print and mail, but their investment is going to cost them more than $1,500 a year they will shortly no longer be getting from me,” Weinberg said.

Weinberg, along with dozens of other Time Warner Cable customers in the Big Apple have been sharing their stories with Stop the Cap! since they learned the cable company was back for more of their hard-earned dough.

“This is simply ridiculous, because they have gotten enough money from me several times over to have paid for their modem,” Weinberg says. “I could understand if they wanted to charge new customers extra for a new modem ($2.50 a month), but demanding current customers pay $3.95 for equipment that is several years old is out of line.”

Many Time Warner Cable customers are choosing to purchase their own cable modems to avoid the fee, but the cable operator is making that as hard as possible. Customers are complaining about the very limited selection of “approved modems,” incredibly long hold times and delays activating new equipment, and impossibly long lines at the company’s store to return old equipment.

“I called seven times last week, always being left on hold for more than 30 minutes, trying to get my new Motorola 6141 modem activated,” Weinberg says. “When someone finally answers, it sounds like they are working out of a home and don’t understand what I am asking.”

Weinberg and several other readers, including your editor, also endured extended hold times and problems activating customer-owned modems. A supervisor earlier told Stop the Cap! a change to their billing system made it difficult to provision customer-owned modems last week. That problem appeared to be resolved by Saturday, but long hold times of 15-60 are not unusual after telling Time Warner’s automated  attendant you need to activate new equipment.

“Time Warner uses the same relentless hold music with a not-so-subtle prompt to use their online chat function, which connects you to India, Guatemala, or maybe the Philippines, with all of the frustrating results you can expect,” Weinberg says. “I tried that route while waiting on hold for 40 minutes and they told me I should call in because they could not handle my request.”

Krakow

Gary Krakow, senior technology correspondent for TheStreet, suspects this cable modem fee could turn out to be a giant nightmare for customers. Some customers, including Krakow, are initially being told it will take several days to provision customer-owned equipment:

After 5 interactive minutes [with Time Warner’s automated call attendant] I was transferred to Lina (that’s what it sounded like when she spoke into her headset). She’s one of Time Warner’s national advisers. I told her exactly what I wanted to do. She listened attentively and took down a lot of information. She then gave me a “case number” and told me to hold on to speak with someone on the Time Warner Provisioning Team.

After a minute or so I was speaking with Monica, who called herself a Customer Service agent. She began asking me to repeat all my information again, but I insisted that she could find all of that by searching the case number from Lina. After a minute or two (we all had to wait for Lina to exit the file) Monica had all the info she needed and began typing in a new  computer file.

In a minute or so she was done. She gave me a confirmation number (different from the case number) and told me that I’ll get a return call when they were ready. It turns out it will take as much as three days for a technician to make the change.

“But wait!” I exclaimed. “Your postcard had me go to your Web site, where I followed the instructions – installed the new modem – and called you to turn it on.”

Monica’s response: “Put back the old modem”.

Krakow is annoyed Time Warner gave New York-area customers just two weeks’ notice of the forthcoming fee and has so far dropped the ball helping out customers trying to avoid it.

“I can’t describe how pissed off I am with the cable company right now,” says Shelly, a Stop the Cap! reader from Manhattan. “I almost threw out their postcard because it looked like it was printed by someone on their personal ink jet printer. Time Warner has been totally unprofessional and unhelpful.”

Shelly ended up getting conflicting information from Time Warner about what modem to buy. A call center representative recommended modems from the company’s rental list, not the approved for purchase list.

“I bought and received the exact same modem Time Warner gave me a year ago for my service and then they told me they cannot activate it because it is not on their list,” Shelly says. “It’s the exact same modem so it must work, but they absolutely refused to help me and now I am out a 15% restocking fee and return postage to send this thing back.”

A supervisor offered her a $5 courtesy credit for the misunderstanding. Shelly was not impressed.

“It will cost me $15 in restock and shipping fees to deal with the problem they created with their money-grubbing.”

Verizon FiOS is not yet in her neighborhood, but Shelly says she will remember the modem fee when Verizon knocks on her door.

“This is an excellent example of how Time Warner treats customers,” she says. “They are in a real hurry to charge us more but can’t be bothered when customers want to avoid their crap.”

Weinberg finally managed to get his modem activated on Sunday, after another 45 minutes on hold. But his aggravation is not over.

“I decided to drop off my old equipment at the cable store and was told there would be at least a 90 minute wait with 20 people in line ahead of me, several with their own cable modems to return,” Weinberg reports. “They had two people working the desk while two others seemed to be doing paperwork. I left.”

Krakow ran into the same problem at the Time Warner Cable store on Manhattan’s Upper West Side.

“The line was out the door,” Krakow said. “I was told there was a one hour wait to ‘get a number and wait some more.'”

One strange side effect of the modem rental fee is that Time Warner Cable will allow you to keep your current cable (eMTA) modem if it is also used to support the company’s phone service. If you purchase your own cable modem, the company will deactivate the cable modem ports on the modem/eMTA they supplied and will not charge you a modem rental fee, even though you are still using their equipment.

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.

Anger management failure at the Time Warner Cable store

I always wondered why some Time Warner Cable stores maintain a very visible security presence, often with a uniformed guard stationed in plain sight. This morning, I got my answer.

While visiting a local cable store to exchange a set top box, I ended up behind five other customers, with just a single representative on duty. Seated on the provided couch, I was well-positioned to hear the issues of customers in line before me. It was the usual pattern — a bunch of late-payers wondering how much of their $400 past due cable bill they needed to pay to reconnect service, a customer exchanging a troublesome remote control or turning in unneeded equipment, and one older “gentleman” who clearly spent his morning preparing for a personal indictment of Time Warner’s customer service.

He was in line right before me. I should have realized there was going to be a problem, considering he spent 15 minutes muttering under his breath and mocking the representative’s answers to other customers as he waited his turn.

His moment finally arrived, and he unleashed.

“How do you people sleep at night,” was his opening. “Time Warner Cable sucks.”

And they’re off….

For at least 10 minutes, the woman behind the counter took a relentless verbal, often personal lashing.

Phillip “Next in line after Mr. Angry” Dampier

“I worked for a utility company and I would have been fired if I ever provided service as bad as yours,” was quickly followed by “do you actually train your people?”

It seemed, in-between the insults, this particular customer lost cable service the other day, called Time Warner’s automated attendant, and was erroneously told there was no reported service problem in his area. Finally reaching a live person, the customer service representative quickly repeated that, despite protests that “the whole street is out.”

Over the course of the day, the perturbed customer repeatedly called Time Warner to give regular updates on their conclusion there was no problem.

“There were Time Warner trucks on my street and you people have the nerve to tell me there is no problem,” relayed the man. “I’m glad I don’t have your phone service because even your own people told me not to get it because it was unreliable. I would not have been able to even call you then.”

But the final indignation was the customer’s perception a Time Warner Cable employee ordered him to stay home for a service call the next day.

“How dare you tell me what to do. You people wasted my time and yours and I never had this problem with Dish when I had them,” he lectured. “I don’t know how you guys even stay in business with crappy service like that and you lie to your own customers.”

The employee behind the counter had evidently been well-seasoned by prior encounters with angry customers. While never telling the man she understood his concerns, she did repeatedly tell him she was not the one telling him the things that obviously had upset him.

Other customers watching the display further back in line began to leave the store, noting the man showed no signs of drawing his angerfest to a close.

“I should just go back to Dish,” repeated the man. “You people are just awful and you always have been and you should be ashamed.”

For a few moments, there was silence as the representative looked up information about the customer on her computer. That was her big mistake.

“I am going to back my truck up and just chuck my cable box through your window for all it is worth,” as the relative calm of the eye of Hurricane Angry Guy had now passed on by. “Screw all of you.”

Having self-satisfied himself with his venting, he stormed off slamming the store door open as hard as he could.

“Customer #110 is now being served at window 2,” proclaimed the automated voice.

That was me. I hesitantly approached the desk.

Initially defensive, the customer service person cut me off the moment I took a breath to speak and tartly asked for my phone number.

It should be obvious to any reader here that I am a relentless critic of some of the policies and decisions made by the management of large cable and phone companies like Time Warner Cable. I am also a customer, so technically I could feel entitled to unleash my concerns about the industry as a whole on any employee of the cable company. But that would be wrong.

Taking your frustrations out on a customer service representative that had nothing to do with creating a problem will not solve the problem. Hurling a tirade of personal, verbal abuse is simply unacceptable.

If Time Warner Cable made the mistake, calmly discussing the problem without yelling at the representative would have probably netted the customer a customer courtesy credit and an apology. Asking the representative what she could do to alleviate or compensate for a problem gives them a chance to help. Putting them under a state of siege is a sure way to shut them down, hoping you will leave as quickly as possible.

In short, nobody deserves to be treated the way this representative was this morning.

Being affable got me a lot farther. The representative’s initial defensiveness quickly dissipated and she went out of her way to address concerns and even offered things I did not request. When it was all over, I thanked her for her help and she returned the courtesy wishing me a great day.

Some people believe being difficult and browbeating customer service will get them satisfaction. But I have found that remembering the “three P’s” of customer <-> customer service interaction work far better:

1. Be polite. If you have a problem with your provider, don’t assign blame to the one person that might be able to alleviate the problem. Calmly explain what the company did wrong in your eyes and empower and encourage the customer service agent to be your ally to resolve the problem. Making things personal puts anyone on the defensive, which guarantees less interaction, not more. Treat people the way you expect to be treated.
2. Be persistent. If the offered solutions don’t work for you, let them know in a calm voice that their suggested resolution is insufficient. Ask them if there is anything else they can do to resolve an issue or compensate you. If they seem unable to help, ask them if a supervisor could.
3. Be persuasive. Reminding a customer service agent you appreciate their help and that, as a long standing customer, you want to preserve a positive attitude about your provider gives them the incentive to go further for you. If necessary, remind them that a happy customer stays a customer. An unhappy one leaves and tells everyone they know. Keep things business-like and keep your anger in check.