Don't Lose $2,000 to Comcast Business | Hacker News Reader

Don't Lose $2,000 to Comcast Business

kellegous.com

12 pointskellegous13 comments

I hate Comcast, but what an absolute load of nonsense:

> I asked her what I needed to do and her response left me stunned. She explained that even though they were no longer able to uphold their part of the contract, I would still needed to pay them.

YOU are moving. YOU are trying to change the terms of the agreement, not them. If you stay in your current home I'm sure they would happily continue to provide you service, so clearly you're the one altering the arrangement not Comcast.

Minimum terms are required since installation is typically free. However I will fully agree that 36 months is too long, and I'd never have agreed to it. I also think Comcast could have reduced the ETF, and it is bad customer service that they didn't at least give you a small break (given how excessively high the ETF was).

But 85% of the issues on that page are self inflicted. You agreed to the 36 months, you agreed to the wrong package, you moved to a non-serviceable area within the 36 months you agreed to, and now you are whining about it like it is someone else's fault.

Maybe it is about time you started taking some personal responsibility and actually reading what you sign before you sign it?

The point is that changing the service location is not covered in the contract. I wrote the article to warn people that Comcast believes this is covered in the contract and will enforce it. So we fundamentally disagree here on whether I'm changing the terms of the agreement. Maybe my expectations are misguided, but I would expect that conditions where they do not give me service and I continue to pay (especially a common one like moving an office to a non-servicable area) it would be explicitly included in the ToS. This is the reason that I think warning people is a legitimate thing to do.

> I wrote the article to warn people that Comcast believes this is covered in the contract and will enforce it

But they aren't enforcing the service location, they're enforcing your minimum term, which is covered in the contract. You can continue to receive service at the current service location if you wish. Instead you're trying to terminate the contract early.

> Maybe my expectations are misguided, but I would expect that conditions where they do not give me service and I continue to pay (especially a common one like moving an office to a non-servicable area) it would be explicitly included in the ToS.

Then what happens if someone starts a new service, Comcast pays the installation costs, and then that individual moves a month later. Comcast would be out the full cost of the installation.

Now, 36 months is absolute greed on Comcasts part, I'm sure they recoup the cost of installation after less than a year. However in principle Comcast deserve to get reimbursed for the full cost of the installation regardless of if someone moves or not.

I understand your perspective, but I still think this is a reasonable thing to warn people about.

It's $2000 to break your contract. It is not really Comcast's fault that you are moving to an area they don't service, and if you want to cancel the contract you have to pay the fee. Makes total sense to me.

I agree with you. The contract had a minimum term, you got out of it by moving hence breaking the contract. It's no different than signing an apartment lease, You wouldn't be able to leave the city and expect to break the contract. How would Comcast know you weren't lying to get out of the contract. Based on what you said, it seems like you didn't read the contract nor did you research where you were moving to see if there was service. Lesson learned.

That is not true in California. The landlord is required to make a good faith effort to replace you as a tenant.

Maybe ... but think about this: is there any provision in the contract where if Comcast fails to deliver Comcast is on the hook for $2K?

If not may it is time for you to recognize that the contracts that are 1-sided, screwage contracts don't deserve to be respected.

So you moved out of the service area and complained that they could not continue to provide you service? And that you had signed a contract stating you would be provided service for 36 months?

You are right, but I think Comcast Business sits at a weird intersection between consumer and business. In a business context, for example, many dark fiber deals have terms this way - it is expected. I have suffered when a cross-country line with a long minimum term was no longer needed, but I knew what I was getting into. On the other hand, most people expect to get out of their home phone deal when they move.

The author made the mistake of applying the consumer-style assumptions to a business service. Comcast's sales tactics probably leverage this type of naivete. This was the warning I think he was aiming for.

There are plenty of analogues to the consumer world so I don't think there is any naivete to be taken advantage of. Cell phone contracts have pretty strict cancellation terms and I wouldn't expect "I'm moving to where you don't provide service" to have much more weight than "I don't want to have cell phone service anymore". I've had to eat the remaining cost on a gym membership contract when I moved away.

Not sure if I'm answering the right question. I moved out of the service area (not realizing I was out of the area until I called). I tried to have my service moved and was told they could not give me service (because of the area). To be clear, I wanted to continue my service. What surprised me is they claim that their terms of service says that if I relocate to a non-service area, I still have to continue to pay. I've read the terms of service and cannot find this clause. I assume they are referring to one of the more general clauses in the ToS.

I agree you were screwed. But you were screwed because you didn't recognize that:

* contracts where you as have no negotiation leverage to change the terms of the deal - are always bad.

* business-to-consumer contracts are always set up to maximize the screwage. The contracts were written by Comcast's lawyers to protect Comcast.

* lawyers (that you hire) are your friend.

I have had to sign screwage contracts. In my case it was with a NY bank ( I am in California ). My California lawyer took one look at the contract and knew exactly which state the contract was written in based on the screwage language.

His statement was that if a contract is so completely one-sided, that often times a judge will disallow parts of the contract.

Steps:

1. Determine what is the realistic amount ( absence of emotion that can be justified as fair ):

  1. I would suggest a pro-rata amount (months left in contract) / 36 * $2K

  2. Determine cost of just maintaining the non-existent service. (vs. paying the $2K) i.e. how many months of service is $2K equivalent to?

  3. Make offer of about 75% the above number ( they will want to negotiate up )

  4. What is your range that is acceptable.

2. Hire a lawyer:

  1. that is willing to explain things and write down his/her explanation.

  2. Ask about how to avoid being burned again when forced into a must sign contract.

  3. Ask for the lawyer to send a offer of negotiated termination. The fact that the letter is coming from the lawyers office may get Comcast to go away for less than $2K.

3. Contact Consumer Financial Protection Agency ( Thank you Sen. Elizabeth Warren!! ) : http://www.consumerfinance.gov/

4. Contact your state's consumer protection agency. (Since you live in red states - I wouldn't hope for too much )

5. See if there are any relevant class action suits that are applicable.

6. SEO optimize your blog spot so it shows up in search results.

7. Write letters to your congress critter.

8. Write to the FCC explaining that your Comcast experience is why Net Neutrality is needed. (Comcast is trying to stop Net Neutrality rules).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com