I originally got 2 year contract flat rate service 5mb hardline DSL that can't go up. Through qwest before centurylink took over.
My issues is for a while they had bandwidth issues and throttling. I want to keep my options open for class actions regarding this issue.
Then recently I had issue with sony forcing "Arbitration" clauses That destroys all consumer protection laws by forcing you to circumvent the public legal system. I have since banned sony and I started looking at other companies I do business with. Thus centurylink and this report is born.
I started going through the user agreements That I had originally read right after getting my service. My original service never included any arbitration clauses and never forbid you class action, trial by jury or judge. The most recent reading of it couple of days ago now does.
Well back in 8-11 apparently Centurylink CHANGE THE USER AGREEMENT FOR INTERNET DSL. I discovered this in march. I was never informed in anyway that major changes were made to the user agreement that would fundamentally strip any and all consumer protection rights I had.
When A change takes place, if you are still with them 1 month after date of change you are bound to the new agreement regardless of knowledge of the change. May I remind you centurylink NEVER contacted me of this fundamental change, thus I could not make an informed decision on what to do about it. This I view as deceptive and criminal business practice. Because I was never informed a month before major changes took place. I even went through my email history to see if I missed a possible email I have NOT.
Because I was never informed of my consumer rights being stripped via an arbitration clause that forbids class action, trial by jury and judge. I was then Forcefully BOUND to new user agreement because I remained with Centurylink well after the official changed. Not knowing at all there was a fundamental change to service provided. This is definitely deceptive and posibly criminal business practice.
When I finally became aware of the fundamental stripping of my consumer protection I started looking around for alternative DSL HARDLINE broadband internet service only to discover that there are only two choices comcast and centurylink.
There is no hardline DSL service through comcast here that I can find. This means that centurylink has illegal monopoly on DSL broadband hardline service in my area.
See in an apartment building your not allowed to have satellite service so only 2 choices is phone line or cable line Cable internet IS NOT IN SAME CLASS AS phone DSL Thus the statement ILLEGAL monopoly.
In my area if you want phone line DSL centurylink is only option available.
They know this so they feel they can go ahead and strip your consumer rights and not have to face any consequence in that its their service or no service. I am not a lawyer but I feel it is also ANTI-TRUST? By monopoly and preventing me from making informed decision and violating my trust in "FAIR" business practice?
Because of my disabilities I have difficulty hearing on the phone which is the primary reason I have phone line broadband DSL internet, in that, I need it to get access to alternative forms of communication, when phone just will not work.
I am stuck with centurylink with NO alternatives and I actually need the connection for alternative communication THAT DOES NOT TAKE FOREVER such as dial up.
Cable internet is not acceptable because of the sheer number of people your sharing your connection with. Not to mention I have heard stories of other users on said connection eve-dropping on others in their groups. I want my use private and the bandwidth for me alone.
Example don't want to split 7mb with dozen users or more and being forced to pay for full 7mb.
Centurylink has gone so far as to BURY the arbitration clause on page 16 of 17 pages Also they have made it impossible to copy paste the arbitration clause. They make claim of copyright to justify denying the ability to prevent section copy/paste. I thought "terms of use" itself CAN'T be copyrighted because it is NOT an "original" work. Its describing what can can't be done, that is it. Just like phone books are not allowed to be copyrighted when all it is is a list and description. Because centurylink is refusing to let me copy the relevant section of the terms of use on page 16 section 17 for clarification and educational purposes I am forced to give a link to the PDF file with the relevant information I do not know if I am in violation of posting issues to this site by doing so.
PLease forgive me in that the User agreement which this report is centered around is not allowing copy paste of ALL of section 17 on page 16. I have NO choice but to link to the PDF file.
Http://qwest. Centurylink.com/legal/highspeedinternetsubscriberagreement/files/HSI_Subscriber_Agreement_ENG_v34_080811. Pdf
Other reason for posting report is to show that this has happened to me and if other out there have the same issue it will show pattern of abuse and possible other antitrust and deceptive and possibly criminal actions by centurylink in its attempt to BULLY the consumers in to actions that is totally in favor of centurylink at the cost of honest patrons..
I fear retaliation because I have actually confronted three other companies, about the arbitration clause. One, because I refused to agree to loosing my consumer protection, I have lost access to content That I have paid for. Two the other actually CUT MY SERVICE OFF when I still had time left That I had already paid for. Third did not inform of the change till 4 months after the fact and I was waiting to join class action due to overdraft scam. I was forced to leave and open an account elsewhere where such arbitration did not exist. I can no longer pursue class action as a result of FORCED BINDING TO NEW TERMS OF USE.
For medical reasons I can not afford to loose phone and internet.
0 comments