Now Hear This Electronic Newsletter, January 4, 2008 Posted by Bob at 01/02/08 02:55 PM

Your World, Delivered.

That is, of course, the current slogan of AT&T. But we think its time for the communications behemoth to modify its catchphrase to better reflect the way it actually operates in the real world. We're thinking something along the lines of "Your World, Delivered -- If You Can Somehow Figure Out Where We Hid It."

Allow us to explain.

Just over a year ago AT&T grudgingly agreed to a pair of consumer friendly concessions in order to win Federal Communications Commission approval to take over its telecom cousin, BellSouth Corp. One concession called for the merged company to offer existing BellSouth telephone customers no-frills, DSL Internet service for $10 a month. The second concession called for the merged company to also offer a so-called "Naked DSL" service -- which would not require an AT&T telephone line, like the $10 deal does -- for $19.95 a month.

AT&T went to downright ridiculous lengths to hide $10 DSL offer from consumers when it was required to begin offering it last June, and it has continued to make it next to impossible for consumers to find out about it since then.

The $10 deal is still not mentioned anywhere on AT&T's Internet service web page. To find out about it, consumers have to somehow divine they need to click on a tiny button labeled "Term Contract Plans Available," which is buried in the boilerplate language near the bottom of the page.

Wait. It gets worse.

AT&T has said it won't provide an email address or telephone number for customers to call if they have trouble signing up for the $10 deal -- which appears to be quite a few people. Click here to read comments sent in to us from consumers who have attempted to sign up for the service online.

So as you might expect, we were watching closely when the one year deadline for AT&T to begin offering naked DSL for $19.95 came and went on December 31.

Giving credit where credit is due, the $19.95 naked DSL deal does actually appear on the company's main Internet service web page.

We're still not sure how easy it will be for consumers who want to order the naked DSL service, however. We tried to sign up several different ways on the web page, but each time we were asked for our existing AT&T home phone number. But wait a minute. Isn't the whole idea of naked DSL is that we don't have to have home phone service with AT&T?

Next we called a number listed on the web site for questions about the $19.95 naked DSL service and AT&T's other high speed Internet offerings. Again, we were asked for our AT&T home phone number. When we told the customer representative we didn't have home phone service with AT&T she asked for our address. When I gave her my address she said we would have to call a different number.

We called the number she had given us (1-800-379-0033) and the customer representative once again asked for our AT&T home phone number. We told her we didn't have one, but we were interested in the naked DSL service so we didn't understand why we needed one. She said we could get naked DSL at "the slowest speed we offer," but it would cost $31.95 a month since -- you guessed it -- we don't have AT&T home phone service.

Huh?

This certainly isn't what AT&T told the Atlanta Journal Constitution in a recent article on the new naked DSL service titled "Want DSL but don't want a landline? No problem."

Nowhere in the article did the company mention that customers without an AT&T landline would actually have to pay $31.95 for its $19.95 naked DSL service. We have looked around everywhere on the web page and haven't found any mention of it there either.

Given AT&T's continuing shenanigans with the $10 DSL deal, we are not inclined to give the company any benefit of the doubt this time around. If AT&T's customer service reps are telling would-be customers asking specifically about the $19.95 naked DSL service that it will actually cost them $31.95, then we are hard pressed to see how the company can claim it is fulfilling its obligation under the BellSouth merger agreement.

The Federal Communications Commission should launch an immediate investigation, and it needs to be more than just asking AT&T if it is meeting the obligation it accepted to offer naked DSL for $19.95 a month. The agency needs to do what we did; contact the customer service reps and try to sign up for the service. If AT&T's deeds don't match its promises, then the FCC needs to hit the company with stiff penalties -- stiff enough so that AT&T will actually feel compelled to knock off the cute stuff and give consumers what it promised in December 2006 to win approval of its takeover of BellSouth.

________________________________________________________________________________
NEW ON www.hearusnow.org

Click on the links below to view these items recently posted on www.hearusnow.org

Looking Forward, Now That the FCC has Relaxed its Media Ownership Rules

comments (7)

Comments

1 Posted by David flory at 01/03/08 06:08 PM

BASTARDS! and I was going to call them to inquire about that great price![I do not have a land line]

2 Posted by Walter Fessenden at 01/03/08 07:20 PM

This AT&T broken promise is just another case where the FCC and AT&T are in the same bed...and they are both naked..and you know the rest.
What's new! Our government is so corrupt!....and big business is no better!

3 Posted by Raymond Gray at 01/04/08 09:54 AM

Tell me you're surprised.....

ATT and Verizon have never lost their Monopoly training from the original ATT, Ma Bell. They have continue to feel they own the network and folks just have to deal with it and pay for the privilege.

A Democratic White house, leading to customer focused FCC management, will help. For example, we should go back to requiring both ATT and Verizon to lease the copper loop at regulated, wholsale rates. The copper was paid for by customers paying regulated Ma Bell phone rates for years; the customer own the network.

I'll note here that Verizon likes to remove the copper loop whenever they install FIOS so that customer cannot later drop FIOS for a competing vendor since there's no copper for the competitor to use. But folks are getting smarter and demanding that dial-tone on the copper wire MUST survive the FIOS installation.

Ultimately we need a third broadbank provider, after Telcos and cable, to provide some real competition. Most other developed countries have faster service at lower costs so we can do it too.

Ray

4 Posted by Mike Greer at 01/04/08 12:39 PM

It appears AT&T has a variety of marketing strategies depending on what part of the country your in...not to mention the outsourcing of customer service offshore, i.e. India.

Cheers,
mg

5 Posted by Daren Heatherly at 01/05/08 10:35 PM

I'm very happy this has happened via ConsumersUnion.

Daren Heatherly

6 Posted by John Buzdygon at 01/20/08 10:46 AM

When the phone company does not provide you with service it is a breech of contract. call them every time they drop a call or you don't have service. After 4-5 of those tell them they are not living up to their part of the contract with you, there is your way out!!

7 Posted by CM at 06/01/08 08:42 PM

Whew!!! I just happened on this site as I was looking for reviews on TV converter boxes. Even though my current situation with ATT is not the same as this blog is discussing I want to share what ATT has done to me.

I changed to ATT landline phone service so I could get their Express Pro DSL service. I did not want Basic and the highest speed level I was told is not available to me where I live. I do not live in the "boonies". So after a year of paying for Express DSL service and complaining for much of that time about numerous issues I still have problems. It takes about 3 hours for each call(what a waste of my time) so I have not called Internet Tech Service as much as I should have. I found out last Sunday during a trouble call that I ONLY have Basic, not the Express Pro which I requested and have been paying for this past year. A maintenance internet tech told me this. I was really upset. All of my bills show I have paid the higher fee. I thought it was about time ATT feel in their pocket how dishonest, deceitful and unethical they are. I called a lawyer and was told I could only recover the difference in what I paid. I was more upset!!! So all I can do is file a complaint with the BBB and the state Consumer Protection. I also found out that ATT has more consumer complaints than any other business, so they now have a separate dept that only handles ATT consumer complaints and they can't keep up.

Post a comment

*Name:

*Email Address:

URL:
Remember Me? Yes No

*Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

*Required

Security Code:

<<< You must enter this security code!