Direct TV
Complaint
Matt
Country: United States
This is the EXACT same thing that's happened to me. When I signed up for the service on the phone, the rep "took care" of filing for the rebate for me. I was told that my second bill would reflect the promotional rate (34.99). When I got my second bill and it was still $60+, I called "customer service" and they told me that they had no record of my having applied for the rebate. When I asked what I need to do to get the rate, they once again told me that they'd "take care" of it for me. When I asked how long it would take to get the promo rate, they said it would take ANOTHER 6-8 WEEKS!!! I asked to speak to a supervisor, but was told there weren't any available. When I asked why it was going to take 6-8 weeks, I was told that it was the "corporate office" that handled that, and that the Customer Service area had no control over it. So, I asked for the phone number for the corporate office. Guess what.....they didn't have a record of it at the Customer Service center?!?!?!?!
Comments
Then send a letter to their corporate offices demanding that they pay off on their promised rebate, CC your Attorney General.
I've written to the Office of the President of Direct TV in Colorado twice, spoke to the fraud department twice and called the billing office three times about Direct TV installing service in a mobile home that I haven't lived in for over a year.
They steadfastly claim that I am legally stuck in a one year contract based solely on my name coming up on their caller I.D when service was ordered by phone from that address. The ONLY way to get out of the "contract" is if the person who ordered service passes a credit check and agrees to take over the account.
Is this still America or did something drastically change when Direct TV came into being?
Directv, Inc.
Atten: Billing Disputes
PO Box 6550
Greenwood Village, CO 80155-6550
I hope this helps.
One's you can't trust.
DIRECTV also fails to disclose that its offer of free premium channels for three months is in fact a negative option continuity plan that requires consumers to proactively cancel to avoid automatic charges on their credit or debit cards, the FTC alleges.
DIRECTV is a national provider of direct-to-home satellite television services, based in El Segundo, California. With more than 20 million subscribers across the United States, the company is the largest provider of such multi-channel video programming distribution in the nation. The company offers its services to consumers through subscriptions, and typically requires users to agree to a 24-month contract that includes a programming package, satellite dish, other necessary equipment, and installation and support services.
According to the FTC's complaint, in many instances since 2007, DIRECTV has violated the FTC Act by making allegedly deceptive claims or omissions of material facts in advertisements and on its website for its satellite television subscription service. Specifically, the FTC charges that:
DIRECTV promotes its television service and programming package prices "for 12 months," without clearly and prominently disclosing that these deals require consumers to sign a two-year contract (with a substantial early cancellation fee) and that the cost of the programming packages jumps $25 to $45 a month in the second year of the contract; and
DIRECTV represents that consumers will receive premium channels, such as HBO and Showtime, "free for 3 months," without adequately disclosing that: 1) consumers will be enrolled in a negative option continuity plan that charges for the premium channels after the trial period; 2) consumers must contact DIRECTV to cancel the plan before the trial period ends to avoid incurring the charges; 3) DIRECTV will use consumers' credit or debit card information to charge them after the trial period ends; and 4) there are specific costs associated with the negative option continuity plan.
In addition to the agency's charges that DIRECTV violated the FTC Act, the FTC also alleges the company violated the Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA) by failing to clearly and conspicuously disclose on its website all of the material terms of offers with a negative option component.
- See more at: http://www.bbb.org/losangelessiliconvalley/bu ... h.e6naRqUE.dpuf