Dish Audit team stupid or ???

[Derwin0]

So your billing address is TX, your service address is NYC and your in Mexico? Is that correct? And they want a utility bill from your service address?

Having a billing and service address in vastly different parts of the country is probably a big trigger for an audit. After all, how many people living in NY get their mail in TX. Different parts of a state possibly (due to lack of mail delivery in some parts), but not different areas of the country.

 

[klegg]

Is it really worth the lost customers at this point?

Without knowing how many legitimate fraudulent accounts they identify through this process, it would be hard to know. We'd only have to assume it IS worth it or they wouldn't be risking the loss of a good, paying customer. Of course, with E*'s recent track record, I'm not sure that would be a good assumption.

 

[alex06]

Without knowing how many legitimate fraudulent accounts they identify through this process, it would be hard to know. We'd only have to assume it IS worth it or they wouldn't be risking the loss of a good, paying customer. Of course, with E*'s recent track record, I'm not sure that would be a good assumption.

I dont know why do say fradulent account as I see there is nothing wrong in paying my monthly bill, and it doesnt matter where I am located, all I am saying is if in the first time the dont beleive me I am in NYC why would they let me keep the account. so from they're end if you have one ird you could be anywhere you want and they will not look into it.

 

[sluggo]

I dont know why do say fradulent account as I see there is nothing wrong in paying my monthly bill, and it doesnt matter where I am located, all I am saying is if in the first time the dont beleive me I am in NYC why would they let me keep the account. so from they're end if you have one ird you could be anywhere you want and they will not look into it.

Here is how one could say it is fraud. You are receiving local channels from an area that you do not reside in. That could lead to a fine to Dish from ther FCC and that my friend could lead to higher prices to the rest of us down the road.

 

[bhelms]

I don't expect to ever be audited (bill and service at same location and both ViP ISRs connected to the landline) but I guess it could happen. And I don't have utility bills to send them since I do phone and electric payments paperlessly. Maybe they'd accept a printout of an on-line payment ??

 

[RedWings]

cause they wouldnt activate the 722 unless I fax an utility bill

1. Scan in utiltiy bill
2. Photoshop address
3. Fax it to them

 

[RedWings]

I don't expect to ever be audited (bill and service at same location and both ViP ISRs connected to the landline) but I guess it could happen. And I don't have utility bills to send them since I do phone and electric payments paperlessly. Maybe they'd accept a printout of an on-line payment ??

Most likely you can get a PDF of your utility bill online. All the bills I have that are paperless, I can still get a copy of the statement in PDF when I log in.

 

[NotMe546]

1. Scan in utiltiy bill
2. Photoshop address
3. Fax it to them

:up Sounds good to me.

 

[digiblur]

Here is how one could say it is fraud. You are receiving local channels from an area that you do not reside in. That could lead to a fine to Dish from ther FCC and that my friend could lead to higher prices to the rest of us down the road.

LOL... well the audit team screwed up on this one then since now they created another account with a bad address. The multiplied the problem, LOL. I suspect there's something else going on with this situation though.

1. Scan in utiltiy bill
2. Photoshop address
3. Fax it to them

Exactly what I would have done! I would also remove any other account information from the form. You don't have to send any company your private information such as account numbers of other utilities.

 

[tempVAdish]

Here is how one could say it is fraud. You are receiving local channels from an area that you do not reside in. That could lead to a fine to Dish from ther FCC and that my friend could lead to higher prices to the rest of us down the road.

Or worse yet, loss of LIL's to the rest of us... Dish has already been forced to remove distant networks because of people getting them that weren't eligable. If any investigation shows them selling out of market LIL's, they may be forced to drop all LIL's... where would that leave the rest of us?

 

[Laddyboy]

Or worse yet, loss of LIL's to the rest of us... Dish has already been forced to remove distant networks because of people getting them that weren't eligable. If any investigation shows them selling out of market LIL's, they may be forced to drop all LIL's... where would that leave the rest of us?

Signing up with D* I would guess. Seriously, I imagine part of the purpose of the Audit Department is to demonstrate due diligence in enforcement of certain FCC rules to guard against any such charges being brought against E*. One couldn't be expected to catch all the cheaters but one would be expected to have some mechanism in place for discovery.

 

[marcschibig]

Dish has lost their mind. They should focus on quality new customer acquisition.

 

[tempVAdish]

Signing up with D* I would guess. Seriously, I imagine part of the purpose of the Audit Department is to demonstrate due diligence in enforcement of certain FCC rules to guard against any such charges being brought against E*. One couldn't be expected to catch all the cheaters but one would be expected to have some mechanism in place for discovery.

Except, that for some stupid reason, my LIL's aren't offered in my county by D* (they've claimed for years it's out of the spotbeam) but it isn't... I would have to do without or buy D* and "move" (like some local D* customers) thus creating the same issue that I'm already concerned about...

 

[Sarcoptic]

Also just because you pass an audit test doesn't mean they don't think you have a slingbox hooked up to that 2nd IRD in NY Just sayin...

 

[JohnH]

No such thing as Stacking with only one receiver on the account. It was the second receiver on the account which triggered the audit team's response or they may think you are a commercial customer trying to get "discount rates".
Or your number came up.

 

[klegg]

LOL... well the audit team screwed up on this one then since now they created another account with a bad address. The multiplied the problem, LOL. I suspect there's something else going on with this situation though.



Exactly what I would have done! I would also remove any other account information from the form. You don't have to send any company your private information such as account numbers of other utilities.

Sounds to me like they got JUST want THEY wanted. Two receivers - Two bills.

 

[r10fret]

Claude,

Arent you a delaer, you should be more careful what you say, dish is looking for any excuse they can find these days.

1. Scan in utiltiy bill
2. Photoshop address
3. Fax it to them

Except when dish calls to verify you are a current customer of your utility company they find out you commited fraud a second time with another bogus address.

 

[mike123abc]

All you have to do is claim that someone else is giving you Dish as a present, so you have your bills sent to their address for your service at your address. The utility bills can be fixed by a bit of photo shop.

It just comes down to if you are going to "move" and try to get locals you are not really entitled to, you are going to have to do more than just fill in an address online. You are going to have to work for it some when you get an audit.

Dish did not make the locals law and their actions show they fought it (and lost). They are just having to show that they are making a good faith effort to abid by it to avoid another run in court with broadcasters.

 

[GaryPen]

Seriously, I imagine part of the purpose of the Audit Department is to demonstrate due diligence in enforcement of certain FCC rules to guard against any such charges being brought against E*.

Nope. It is to combat stacking, pure and simple.

Any coincidental enforcement of LiL eligibility is merely gravy on the cake.

 

[Laddyboy]

Nope. It is to combat stacking, pure and simple.

Any coincidental enforcement of LiL eligibility is merely gravy on the cake.

Which is why my statement said "part of the purpose".