I called to sign up for just internet service in December of since I decided not to have a landline in my house. The sales representative told me they have a promotion wherein I get $100 back, if I sign up for both Optimum voice and Optimum Online. And I can cancel Optimum Voice anytime. So, I signed up for Cablevision's Optimum Voice and Optimum Online for $59.90 a month. (29.95 each). Account #: 07864-149079-03-4 In February/March I called Cablevision and I asked them to cancel the Optimum Voice. Then, they told me if I cancel the Optimum VOice, the Optimum online would cost $49.95. So, I did not cancel because just for Optimum Online I had to pay $49.95.in May I did not pay their bill on time, and my outgoing phone calling service was disabled. Since May 25th, when I first reached out to them, complaining of the fact that I am not able to place outgoing calls, they have not been able to fix the issue. When I called in August again, they sent a technician over, and then after 2 hours of troubleshooting, they figured that back in May it was disabled because of me not paying them on time. I asked them to give me a credit for not providing that service for 3 months (May August), and they refused. As of August 29th, I have formally asked to disconnect the service, but they tell me that it is already under disconnect for not paying. I have not paid them for billing periods: 7/8 - 8/8 and 8/8-9/7. And now I am getting collection notices from collection agencies. As of August 22nd, when I reached out to their sales (online channel) - it clearly states that they do provide Optimum Online service for $29.95 a month. I confirmed that pricing with their sales agent Robert Cadiz on 8/29. So, I want them to refund me the money for 7 months of voice service = $29.95 X 7 = $209.65
They do not have the transcript of the conversation between me and the salesperson around 26th December. The salesperson sold me voice internet and told me that I can cancel out of the voice service anytime without any conditions and penalties. But that was not the case.
0 comments