The only action I had taken in response to these aches and pains with Direct TV was to pay only one-half of my monthly bill. This I did for two months: they give me half the programs, I pay them half the bill. However, each month they added the half I didn't pay to the next bill.  So, soon enough, I owed a month's extra charge, they claimed. I wrote a second letter to Heather, my only human contact there, and awaited a reply.

Now, to my amazement, starting March 15, 2001, I've been receiving the whole nine yards! Earlier I had been teased with transient images, thirty to sixty seconds of resurrection of full service; but now, March 16, I have it all!

Do you think the company will continue to bill me for money I didn't remit (and don't owe)?  Will they cancel my subscription if I don't hand over the money? Should I pay them? What would you do?

More mayhem!

Well, I had two days of full recovery and then my available channels collapsed again by 50%. My bill from Direct TV just arrived and now is at about $80. That amounts to one full month at $40 and two months for which they claim I owe half a month's payment.

Tomorrow I'll telephone the Attorney General and the Better Business Bureau to report the behavior of these miscreants and I'll also write for the third time to Heather. I'm told there are alternative satellite sources. I envision a time when the Company will put this bill in the hands of a collection agency and, as a by-product, try to wreck my credit.

Can this really be the end?

March 28:  I am, however reluctantly, mailing a check for a little over $80 to Direct TV. I wrote to the company telling them I was filing complaints with the Attorney General, the Federal Communications Commission (who admit they have no jurisdiction), the Federal Trade Commission (who also have no jurisdiction; satellite TV is an unregulated near-monopoly), and my state and federal legislative representatives.

Then, Direct TV's so-called customer representative put me in touch with someone who, in turn, gave me the number of an installer of equipment, who immediately diagnosed my problem.

Some of you who read this will benefit from this discovery. I have two TV's and one antenna. The antenna is the only thing the two sets have in common. Therefore, my difficulty is in the antenna. There are odd and even sides to the antenna. If I receive half the channels it is because either the odd or even side of the antenna is not functioning. This is easily confirmed by going to the menu of items to check the performance of the antenna. Sure enough, the even side of the antenna gets no signal while the odd side works almost perfectly, displaying a reading of 96%.  Tomorrow an installer is scheduled to appear and replace the faulty antenna at a cost for labor and parts of around $150.

I think this may end the saga.

Why couldn't the customer representative of the company diagnose this problem at the outset?  I was told by the installer fellow it is a very common problem.  He said the TV companies are only interested in selling products.

Rust-related.

Yesterday a splendid repairman came and discovered that there was no fault in the antenna after all.  What was wrong was rust in cable connections in the wire bringing signals from the antenna to the two TV sets.  He replaced the connections.  While he was here, I had him install two surge protectors at a cost of about $130 in addition to $100 for time spent. Equipment that is ruined through a failure of the protectors will be replaced free of charge, as will be the protectors.

Perhaps this story is near its end.  Stay tuned, just in case.  And by all means, let me know your thoughts.

Copyright © Ima Leahy 2003