I'm completely floored. When DSL was first offered in Rosamond last February, I signed up (dial-up was killing me). The cheapest package they had with 384 k upload (instead of 128) was $45 a month if I signed up for a year contract (otherwise it's $140!! a month). I've noticed since DSL has taken off in this area that they've lowered the rates a bit to $37 per month for essentially the same package with a year contract or $60 a month w/out a contract. So I called them up because I wanted to see about getting the cheaper package.
First I found out that it would be $40 a month instead because I didn't have a bunch of services on my phone line (why would I need to when I have a cell phone?). If I did sign up for the cheaper service, I'd have to sign another year contract, which I figured. However, there's a potential that I could be moving within the next year, so I asked what would happen if I moved in with someone who already had SBC DSL. They said I would be charged a $200 disconnection fee because even though I'd be moving in with someone who already had the service, I could always choose to get a second line and transfer my DSL to it (which, of course, would be positively dumb).
Being the thinker/analyzer that I am, I decided to ask about other moving scenarios. I found out that if I were to move to an area that SBC didn't service, I would STILL be charged the $200 disconnection fee because it would be my choice to move to that area and I could have instead chosen to not move or move to an area that SBC services. (Yeah, because I'm going to make my moving decisions based on telephone company. Right.) However, if I moved to an area that SBC serviced for telephone, but did not service for DSL, they would waive the $200 fee. There seems to be an error in their logic because they could potentially use the same argument they used about moving to an area not serviced by SBC...I could simply choose not to move or to move to an area where SBC did offer DSL.
I'm amazed. Every other company I have ever dealt with would waive the disconnection fee if I moved to an area they didn't service because it wasn't my fault that they didn't offer services in that area. SBC's stance is that they are not allowed to offer their services in certain areas; therefore, it's not THEIR fault that they can't offer services to an area I chose to move to so they should not have to waive the penalty. Apparently, deciding whether or not to sign a contract with SBC is as serious as deciding whether or not to sign an apartment lease. Unbelievable.
Needless to say, I did not swtich to the cheaper rate at this time. I will see where my life stands in February when my current contract expires and decide what to do then.
<< Home