AT&T / [protected] tv, internet, phone bundle.

November 21, 2017

to: a t & t consumer conplaint department
p. o. bix 5014 account #[protected]
carol tream, illinois [protected]

to: direct tv consumer complaint department
p. o. box 105261 account #[protected]
atlanta, georgia [protected]

reference: Gary L. Clark, 511 Piedmont Hwy, Piedmont SC 29673 TELE #[protected]
Service Connected: 10/25/17 Disconnected 11/07/17


Upon receiving AT&T / DIRECT TV advertisement flyer in the mail (copy attached); I called and inquired of the special "bundling" of TV, land phone and internet as reflected in the attached flyer. However, we spoke directly of our specific request for keeping our same telephone number [protected]); which had been disconnected, one day earlier, from our previous service carrier. We did not want any service, and specified this non-negotiable fact, UNLESS we could get the number noted above. Our phone call was routed through several technicians and it was repeatedly "GUARANTEED" to us, that we would get the requested number. We were told we would initially be assigned a temporary number but, when our previous service carrier "released" our [protected] number, we were guaranteed to be given the number. I made it perfectly clear that NO SERVICES were to be connected, if AT&T could not guarantee the number and, further, we were guaranteed a 30 day free trial period…if for any reason we were not satisfied with the AT&T "bundle service package", we could disconnect with no penalty(s). Further evidence of these "guarantees" should be in your records; as we were always forewarned that AT&T was "recording" every conversation. We too recorded our conversation with your agents; as well as with ‘supervisors' and ‘heads of supervisors' we requested to speak to; when suddenly no one remembered making these guarantees.

Our service was connected on 10-25-17. The reception was poor; constantly being told "signal was lost on satelite" and/or the picture was broken and distorted. After constant phone calls from AT&T to us, informing us of a problem with our request for the specific telephone number; this began our endeavor to get confirmation of the "guarantees", based on "recorded" telephone conversations PRIOR to our service being connected. Remember, AT&T records all conversation pertaining to "service orders". The response to us was: "A guarantee would never have been made from AT&T" and/or "our previous service company HAD NOT released the requested number". We, of course, knew the guarantees HAD BEEN MADE. As to the second response; we called Charter (previous service company) to confirm whether they had released the number; only to find out the number had been released a week earlier! The fact is, NO guarantees were followed up and only excuses heard as to why not. So based on our bad reception and all of the misleading guarantees; we sought to initiate our final option of disconnecting service with AT&T / DIRECT TV UNDER THE "GUARANTEE" OF A 30 DAY FREE TRIAL.

South Carolina Department of Public Utilities Commission

Well, again, we were told there was "NO such guarantee made".

CHECK YOUR RECORDS, as we have ours. Keep in mind, our service was based on the advertisement "priority code [protected]; two years guaranteed rates for the bundle of AT&T Internet, Direct TV and AT&T wireless phone for $74.99; however we needed and requested a land phone instead and was quoted $99.99. All these guarantees began from THE POINT OF INITIATING OUR ORDER. Your tech went through several other in-side AT&T contacts, before making the guarantee to us; down to your In-Home Expert (Thomas Eichman) who came out and confirmed all guarantees. When phone calls began, from AT&T, implying possible denial of guarantees…We went over all conversations; reminded your agent of "recorded" confirmations at AT&T and our "personal" recordings of those guarantees…EACH call was always clarified and reconfirmed as "Not a problem, the guarantees would stand"

NOW, we have received separate bills from AT&T and Direct TV. The AT&T bill totals #176.76. The Direct TV bill totals $457.57. Keep in mind the promo flyer we ordered from clearly states all three (3) service (AT&T internet, Direct T V, AT&T cell phone) all for $74.99; however we chose to go with a ‘land phone' at the rate of $99.99. AT&T disavows a 30 day free trial of all 3 services. Direct TV says they have a separate billing and was never to be packaged with AT&T and says they have an "early" termination fee. Well, it seems the problem is with AT&T's flyer; which clearly states all services are being sold under AT&T. They verbally, by phone, stated their guarantees to us and, further, notified us of their recordings of all conversations. When I was repeatedly informed that our conversations were being recorded'… I, in turn, informed your agents that "I" too was recording our conversations; which doubly substantiates the guarantees made by AT&T for all 3 services.

We are registering a complaint with the AT&T Complaint Department for AT&T's misrepresentation of "bundled" package offers; offering "guaranteed" clients' requests to obtain a client's service order; then disavowing having made ANY guarantees. Further, we are registering a complaint with Direct TV for misrepresenting their services and allowing a second "primary" company to include and quote their services - as one major package, combined; then disallowing their services billed under AT & T. If this is the case, then Direct TV should have no right to bill us anything; as we ordered all services under AT&T. We have NEVER authorized any service orders to Direct TV. Our conflicts of information is directly from AT&T.

Further, we will register a complaint with the South Carolina Department of Public Utilities Commission concerning the misrepresentation of AT&T and Direct TV and/or their joint collusion to misrepresent and cause confusion and undue financial burdens on the citizens of South Carolina.

This whole situation can be corrected by both companies acknowledging their misrepresentation of "guaranteed" services, whether directly or indirectly does not matter; and correcting the billed liabilities to our account as null and void.

Gary L. Clark 511 Piedmont Hwy, Piedmont SC [protected]

Cc: South Carolina Department of Public Utilities Commission

  • Updated by theangelporch, Nov 28, 2017

    the attached letter is fully detailed. photos uploaded.

  • Updated by theangelporch, Nov 28, 2017


  • Updated by theangelporch, Nov 28, 2017

    attached letter.

Nov 28, 2017

Post your comment