Federal Communications Commission Customer Service Issues

In early January, upon logging into my Q-Link Wireless account to check my minutes, I was surprised to see a notification stating my status as Deceased, leading to the termination of service. The message indicated: "Your Status Is: Deceased According to federal government databases used for identity verification like the Social Security Administration and Lexis Nexis, the details on this account match those of a deceased individual. Consequently, Q Link Wireless cannot continue providing service to this account." Despite being informed by the Social Security office that they did not share this information, I am unable to reach Q-Link Wireless through support tickets, calls, or even Facebook. After Facebook suggested reapplying and a support ticket directed me to call 1-[redacted], my personal information is recognized but I remain blocked. Multiple support tickets requesting direct contact information for an agent or a resolution have gone unanswered. Q-Link Wireless, affiliated with Live Line to assist low-income individuals, prohibits changing service providers until being disconnected, without offering a clear timeline.

I have been charged, but I am unable to pay due to being intellectually incapable of managing my finances. I do not have a bank account and fear going to jail. I am a high school senior graduating on June 13th. I was advised by a Sprint agent, Sofia, to file a complaint that should be free. Lesha B from Sprint told me to contact your team for assistance. Please reach out to me at [redacted] tomorrow at 7:00 a.m. My name is Adira Imani Crain Gully. I have already attempted to resolve this issue as I cannot afford payments, bills, taxes, or loans. Despite trying to opt out and unsubscribe, I was not informed of any charges. I urgently need help dropping the fees, as I have a legal guardian and no bank account. Kindly provide me with an opt-out link I can use by entering my email. Your prompt assistance is greatly appreciated.

Attention: FCC, The notice provided is not an offer to purchase any securities. Any potential offer is only valid through the prospectus. The involved companies in this possible merger include Chevron-Texaco, BP-Amoco, Occidental Petroleum, USPS, AT&T, IT&T, Microsoft, and USS. It's important to note that this initial prospectus requires approval from the Securities and Exchange Commission. Any misrepresentation is considered a criminal offense. Donald White [redacted] Michigan St. Pgh., PA [redacted] Phone: [redacted] Email: [redacted] Question: Will the merger agreement negatively impact public interest given that AT&T, IT&T, and Microsoft are under FCC supervision?

I am currently on my daughter's family plan with Verizon. A few years back, I had bought an iPhone 5 through Verizon, and reception was never an issue until recently. Apple stopped supporting the MLB app on the iPhone 5, so I upgraded to an iPhone XR on 8/30/19 through Apple to avoid being billed monthly under my daughter's name with Verizon. Unfortunately, since switching to the new iPhone, I have been experiencing poor reception with frequent disconnects, fluctuating volume, and fuzzy voice problems. When I contacted Apple about the issue, they couldn't identify the problem and offered a refund, but I chose to keep the phone. The Apple representative mentioned that other customers who bought directly from Apple had similar complaints. I am curious if a carrier like Verizon could potentially compromise tower reception because I didn't purchase the phone through them, even though I am still using the same SIM card that was issued by Verizon for my iPhone 5.

I reside in a small town in NC, and due to the [redacted] Communication Act, we are unable to access Verizon services despite their proximity. Instead, we are left with companies like Time Warner and AT&T, both of which have caused me grievances. In [redacted], AT&T misled me with a cell phone offer, attempting to charge more than agreed. Subsequently, when I switched to AT&T/Direct TV in [redacted], they unexpectedly raised my monthly bill after the first year and failed to disclose penalties for leaving the contract. Similarly, my neighbor faced similar issues upon switching to Spectrum from AT&T. Despite residing near a Verizon location in Matthews, NC, they are prohibited from extending services to our area. This restriction limits our choices and leaves us feeling constrained. Our freedom to choose service providers should not be dictated by regulations, as American consumers deserve more autonomy. I am sharing my experiences to shed light on AT&T's questionable practices and the challenges we face in accessing better alternatives like Verizon. Regards, Wayne Wright

As a resident of Texas, I use Suddenlink as my internet provider. Due to job loss during the pandemic, I faced difficulties paying my bill. After settling the outstanding amount, a technician visited and replaced my TVO cable box, mentioning another technician would bring a new one upon receiving additional payment. Post-payment, the service was restored with unexpected premium pay channels. Upon inquiry, a Suddenlink representative assured me the channels were complimentary, which was not the case, and altered my monthly bill to $[redacted] from the prior $[redacted] pre-pandemic. After contacting customer service, I was guaranteed the channels' removal, with the bill returning to $[redacted]. Despite the channels being removed initially, they reappeared, and I am once again being charged for them.

Due to losing my job because of COVID-19, I fell behind on my Suddenlink bill. After eventually paying the outstanding amount, they demanded more money and even removed my cable box. When I paid the additional fee, I unexpectedly had access to premium channels like Showtime and HBO. Despite requesting to have them removed, I was charged $[redacted] for the bill which included these channels. Following another call, I was assured my bill would be adjusted and the premium channels removed. Despite settling the overdue balance, the premium channels reappeared. Suddenlink also appears to be tampering with my bandwidth despite having an unlimited plan.

I am the former wife of R.L. He has a history of criminal acts and violent behavior towards me. He has fraudulently accessed my financial accounts and tried to harm me multiple times. R.L. has been involved in embezzlement, identity theft, and other felonies. I believe he may have obtained a government security clearance illegally. I have evidence to support my claims and I am reaching out to inform the appropriate authorities.

My landline service provided by CenturyLink has been down for over a week. Despite trying to reach them through my cell phone, I can only navigate through recordings and automated messages with no success in speaking to a representative. I was promised a repair person on the morning of the 19th, but no one came or contacted me. My wife, who relies on the landline for safety due to her disability, is also affected. Even though I paid my bill last Thursday, there seems to be an issue with the billing. I am unable to get in touch with a human employee at CenturyLink to resolve this urgent matter, creating a hazardous situation in our sparsely populated neighborhood. It's frustrating that all CenturyLink seems to care about is collecting payment. I have been unable to contact them through the internet as well. Fred A. Ross, a retired USCG CWO4, can be reached at [redacted].

Google seems to have completely taken over my devices. They have control over everything, rerouting my emails and messages. Every time I try to contact my service provider, I face issues. Over the past five years, they have caused me to lose my contacts and pictures and have even stolen my identity. This has resulted in substantial financial losses as I have had to replace phones, phone services, internet services, laptops, tablets, and smart TVs. I am on the verge of a breakdown as I am constantly trying to resolve these issues. I am 53 years old and this situation has left me feeling incredibly stressed and anxious.