Arbitrary Data Caps... Now in California
What the heck, Cox? I just moved a few miles down the road and switch from Spectrum (no caps) to Cox (caps). Your tag line is caps affect a very small number of users. If that's true, why have them at all? My first month, I just got a new Xbox One X and downloaded my library of games to my new Xbox... BAM... over the cap. Worse, the 85% of data and 100% used emails went out at the exact same time. When I logged in literally two minutes after receiving your emails, it said my usage was well over your cap at 1250GB. You're lucky the current administration doesn't care about end users, because I've filed a complaint with the FCC. I encourage others to do the same. Frankly, I may switch to AT&T, who waives caps for UVerse/DirecTV consumers. I'm already paying 15% more than I was under Spectrum for the exact same service, and now you expect me to pay an extra $50/mo to keep my unlimited data on a HOME connection? You're as shameful as Comcast!! We already have speed tiers -- that's how you manage a network. Data is an unlimited resource, band*width* is not. You want to manage your network, fine -- QoS me if I'm running higher than most other users. Increasing my data costs by more than 50% when I already have the Gold Package is pure greed, plain and simple. I will be contacting all my law makers in California, too. If we can't get this stopped nationally, I hope we can at least block you locally. I was so excited to move back to an area with Cox, as I'd had you in Phoenix many years ago, and you always had consistently great service. Now, I think you're just another greedy corporation out to screw your consumers. Thanks for ruining your perfectly positive image. My letter to the FCC: I'm exceedingly frustrated about my new cable provider's data cap policy. I lived in an area of San Diego with Spectrum (Formerly Time Warner) as my cable provider. I recently moved to an area with service provided by Cox Communications. I'd used AT&T UVerse for a while, too, and they also had data caps, but waived them if you also subscribed to TV service. I find it extremely disturbing that they charge different prices for speed tiers, but the datacap remains the same throughout the speed tiers. There's literally zero explanation for this other than corporate greed. At a time when data usage is on the increase, caps should be going away, not being added. I do understand that the increased demand for data will put pressure on networks, but companies can use QoS and network prioritization to better handle loads. A Verizon style soft cap, where once you exceed a threshold, your data is set to a lower priority on a QoS table, makes a lot more sense than an arbitary hard cap with imposed fees. As an IT professional and lifelong gamer, I feel our profession is being targetted by greedy corporations. 4K Netflix streaming eats up roughly 12GB/hour. A typical video game download for Xbox One, Playstation 4, or Nintendo Switch eats up 30-50GB. Heck, even patches and updates can exceed 10GB/ea. With arbitary data caps as low as 350GB on AT&T and 1000GB on Cox, my new service provider, I'm easily hitting my data cap. Want more data? $10/50GB, or roughly all of my games just got $10/ea more expensive. Want to watch a 4K movie on Netflix? A few of those will cost more than the entire monthly subscription for Netflix. This reduces competition from Netflix and Hulu and pads the pockets of profiteering cable companies for absolutely no legitimate reason. Alternatively, I can spend an extra $30/500GB... if I plan it and make the decision before I hit my cap, or an extra $50/unlimited. That would bring my internet service to a whopping $159+tax/month, and my overall cable bill to nearly $300/mo. This forces me into the uncomfortable decision of spending less on other things or having the unpredictability of a cable bill, all when from a technical perspective, there is absolutely no increase in cost to the ISP. A network is a bit like laying pipe for water, except the water (data in this example) is unlimited. There are significant upfront costs on building infrastructure, and a bit of maintenance cost on electricity and network equipment, but resource usage (data) does not increase maintenance cost. At times, a lot of demand for internet may congest "pipes," and for this and only this reason, network prioritization (QoS) makes sense. Speed tiers already prioritize customers, yet caps put artibrary limits on an unlimited resource (data). Ironically, as mobile providers are increasingly offering unlimited, landline operators are increasingly imposing artibrary data caps. After decades of unlimited access and expotenential technical growth, data caps have the potential to stiffle the industry and cause real harm to consumers, particularly those who can least afford it. This is dramatically hurting the tech industry. I strongly suggest FCC impose limits on how data caps are utilized and considers weighing the needs of network prioritization/latency (the only legitimate ISP interest), streaming and cable carrier competition, and the dramatically increasing need for data when coming up with a policy that makes sense. I'm not alone. A quick search revealed there are MANY others in this same boat. There's a great article here about how this is already hurting the tech industry, as people are actively discouraged from buying new, advanced electronics: https://gigaom.com/2013/03/01/4k-broadband-caps/ and http://stopthecap.com/ . If the FCC is to encourage market competition and foster a world where America remains a technological leader, one of the first steps should be to remove data caps and prevent corporations from imposing them. Speed tiers already do this, and explanatory clauses about using QoS during peak hours of usage to throttle the heaviest users would reasonably ensure landline internet providers can continue to operate efficiently in peak demand periods.1.4KViews0likes1Comment
Why is the data cap the same from essential to ultimate?
Recently policy changes have made it where Cox is now charging customers for going over the data caps. With the change to this policy, Cox has not adjusted any of the packages' data caps. No rollover, no increases for more expensive packages, no changes whatsoever. This is concerning because users who have premier or ultimate could easily use their entire data cap in 2 days with the speeds they have. Simple things like downloading a hard drive restore from cloud backups following a crash could easily cap a residential user's speeds. Can someone explain why Cox would make this policy change without acknowledging a need to make adjustments to these caps? I'm almost always under the cap but I'm one hard drive crash away from being 200-500gb over which would translate to 40-100$ in charges. This doesn't seem fair.2.4KViews0likes4CommentsImpossible to Change Primary Account Holder to Bill Payer - Now No Refund?
I've been a perfect cox customer since 2005 when my husband and I bought our first home. I have never missed a $225+ payment . . . or even been late. When I set up bill pay with my bank - I tried to get the Cox account in my name as well. This proved to be an impossible feat . . . the only conditions which would allow such a maneuver are the "primary"'s death, disability, or moving away. Period. And no you cannot change the name on the account either . . . not unless you fit into one of these scenarios: Marriage - You may change your last name or middle initial, if applicable. (Marriage license required) Divorce - You may change your last name or middle initial, if applicable. (Divorce decree required) Legal name change (Court order required) Misspelling (Government-issued photo ID required) So, even though I was responsible for the account, and my husband was not, I'd have to settle for being a "user" , having very limited priveleges. This sure seems absurd, but what can you do? Nothing - according to Cox. Six years later, my husband is long gone (I heard he is homeless) and the bank now owns my house. Sad . . . I know. (For me and the thousands of others in my boat). I can deal with these things 'tho. What has actually made me lose my faith is Cox and their unbelievable inflexible "policies". Since Cox is prepaid by a month, when I close my account, there is a $200 credit. Great, right? NOT!!!!!!! Cox will not give me a refund. According to their scripted robot reps: "They will only process a refund in the primary account holders name . . . ONLY . . . and they will only mail the check to the last address on record. How nice of you Cox. You want to send my hard earned money to someone who did not pay you, and who does not have an address. I have tried every which way but loose and all to no avail. The absurdity is beyond belief.18KViews0likes5Comments
