June 13, 2001 |
After three years and one failed attempt, Pacific Bell is again poised to seek state permission to offer long-distance telephone service in California--a move that would profoundly change the telecommunications landscape in the nation's largest phone market.
June 2, 2001 |
Tens of thousands of California businesses and consumers still are weighing the effects of a major Pacific Bell network failure that cut off service to high-speed data customers statewide for up to five days. The outage, which was not completely fixed until Wednesday, affected big communication lines that crisscross the state carrying data to and from such everyday devices as bank automated teller machines and credit card verification machines used by grocery stores and other retail stores.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
December 11, 2000 |
The city will get an additional $13,000 or so a year to spend on parks and recreation, under an agreement approved last week with PacBell Wireless. The City Council voted to allow the telecommunications company to remove a lighting pole at Valley View Sports Park and replace it with one that includes a cellular antenna on top. PacBell will pay the city $1,100 per month to rent the pole, with all proceeds helping to fund parks and recreation.
November 11, 2000 |
The quality of Pacific Bell's residential telephone service has dipped markedly and customer dissatisfaction has more than doubled in the years since California's dominant phone company was taken over by SBC Communications, according to a complaint filed Thursday by a state consumer agency.
November 1, 2000 |
A Public Utilities Commission member has proposed up to $10 million in fines for Pacific Bell involving a 3-year-old case about marketing and sales abuse. The latest fine proposal, by PUC member Richard Bilas, is one of three starkly different opinions under consideration by the commission, which is scheduled to vote on this matter Thursday.
October 30, 2000 |
A member of the five-person California Public Utilities Commission issued a revised opinion ordering changes in some Pacific Bell marketing practices and imposing fines totaling more than $2 million. In doing so, Josiah Neeper revised his earlier opinion, which did not include penalties. However, Neeper maintains that PacBell's sales programs did not mislead customers into buying extra services.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 26, 2000 |
Upset that their cities are the only two in Ventura County without high-speed Internet access, Ojai and Fillmore officials are accusing Pacific Bell of discriminatory practices that they say hurt their abilities to attract new businesses. "It is our belief that our communities are effectively being 'red-lined' based upon population and income levels . . . and long-term business development potential," states a draft letter by city officials to the telephone company.
CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
September 1, 2000
Thanks for the Aug. 29 article on the problems with Pacific Bell's digital subscriber lines. It is hard to believe that this is the same company that has reliably brought us a dial tone for all these years. My husband spent countless hours on the phone with a succession of phone company employees who had to send three separate people to our home to set up the system. It works great now, but I still cringe when I see the ads promoting the system, because we are still waiting for them to complete the work in two of our offices.
August 29, 2000 |
California's biggest phone company is mishandling one of the largest business opportunities in the telecommunications industry's history, failing to efficiently deliver high-speed Internet access to excited consumers and disaffecting tens of thousands in the process, according to public records and state regulators.
August 26, 2000 |
A consumer advocacy group Friday asked state regulators to halt a new Pacific Bell service that triggers a sales pitch for the phone company's repeat-dialing service whenever a customer calls a number that is busy. The state's Office of Ratepayer Advocates, an independent arm of the California Public Utilities Commission, charged that the new service includes a rate increase not approved by regulators and violates several PUC rules as well as the privacy section of the state's Constitution.