T
taxtwit
Guest
Or six or eight or ten. Thankfully, I've only had one substantive issue with BEV (being charged for "multiple receiver" installation that never took place during what was supposed to be a free "move" installation), since that one has taken six months and counting and at least a dozen phone calls to try to resolve. Reached the point where I was being assured by the 3 or 4 or 8th CSR the charge was being reversed, only to arrive home from work the following day to no service - BEV had suspended service for non-payment of account. Immediately phoned and CSR assured me he'd immediately order resumption of service and my next bill should reflect the reversal of the unwarranted charge and suggested to me the problem resulted from the "credit" department not getting information from the "customer service department" and therefore suspending my account a day after a CSR told me it was resolved
Even though this is the only real issue I've had with BEV, I've pretty much had it with them as a result of it. According to AEV, there is a BEV "default" position to charge any account with more than one authorized receiver for a "multiple receiver" install when a "move" installation occurs and not reverse it unless the customer complains, at which point BEV will seek confirmation from the installer that there was no "multiple receiver installation - basically "reverse billing", which I thought was illegal. What apparently has been the problem in my resolving this is that, N/W/S my repeated complaints about the unauthorized charge, BEV can't be bothered to actually contact the installer to confirm he never did a multiple receiver install. BEV also can't be bothered to co-ordinate their various departments, such that I would invariably get a call from their collections department a few days after the latest CSR promised me the charge would be reversed. I now fear that my pristine credit rating has been negatively impacted by this bogus issue, in which case, in addition to losing me as a customer, BEV can look forward to seeing me in court. In the meantime, I'm watching with great interest as the latest TV-delivery technology evolves and monitoring the prices for used BEV equipment on ebay.

Even though this is the only real issue I've had with BEV, I've pretty much had it with them as a result of it. According to AEV, there is a BEV "default" position to charge any account with more than one authorized receiver for a "multiple receiver" install when a "move" installation occurs and not reverse it unless the customer complains, at which point BEV will seek confirmation from the installer that there was no "multiple receiver installation - basically "reverse billing", which I thought was illegal. What apparently has been the problem in my resolving this is that, N/W/S my repeated complaints about the unauthorized charge, BEV can't be bothered to actually contact the installer to confirm he never did a multiple receiver install. BEV also can't be bothered to co-ordinate their various departments, such that I would invariably get a call from their collections department a few days after the latest CSR promised me the charge would be reversed. I now fear that my pristine credit rating has been negatively impacted by this bogus issue, in which case, in addition to losing me as a customer, BEV can look forward to seeing me in court. In the meantime, I'm watching with great interest as the latest TV-delivery technology evolves and monitoring the prices for used BEV equipment on ebay.