HughesNet advertised Gen5 at 25 Mbps. The contract allows HughesNet a 50% reduction in download speed for a 12.5 Mbps download speed. HughesNet is in a breach of contract for the Gen5 users who suffer through the download speeds below 12.5 Mbps. It is a painful process working with HughesNet whose moral compass points somewhat to the South, however, a breach of contract is a breach of contract. HughesNet will spend hours on the phone working your problem, HughesNet will send Techs out to your house that basically let you know they are sorry for your selection of HughesNet. Join me in the battle to win the HughesNet breach of contract for speeds below 12.5 Mbps on Gen5 service.
Wrong, Hughesnet doesn't promise any rate of bandwidth, they advertise UPTO, and contractually state up to 25Mbps.
Part 1, Section 1 - Speed Claims and Disclaimers
HughesNet service is available in the contiguous U.S., Alaska and Puerto Rico. Stated speeds and uninterrupted use of service are not guaranteed. Actual speeds will likely be lower than the maximum speeds during peak hours. In addition, when connected to the Service using Wi-Fi, the user’s experience will vary based on the proximity to the Wi-Fi source and the strength of the signal, and its usage is subject to the Fair Access Policy.
The listed speeds are only available in the footprint of the EchoStar XVII and EchoStar XIX Satellites. The HughesNet Gen5 Service with speeds of up to 25 mbps down and 3 mbps up is available within the contiguous United States. Speeds in parts of Alaska will be slower.
*Post edited for Terms of Service violation
You further agree and warrant that you shall not submit any content that:
You've been here long enough to know what is and isn't allowed, and you know very well that violating the Terms of Service isn't looked kindly upon.
I have a number of thoughts on Hughes censoring the phrase "F-C-C", none of them positive. But here's the situation:
The employees supporting this community forum do a great job solving customers' problems in a professional manner and I truly believe they do everything in their power to make things right. However, there's a large and growing segment of the customer base that is experiencing a systemic and unresolvable (through customer or support representative action) service degradation that causes their service to be substandard at best and unusable at worst. These customers have no other resolution than to eat the ETF and find a new provider, if possible, or complain to a regulator and hope for some action. Preventing the latter by censoring advice from fellow customers is unethical at best.
Hughes is not being transparent about the cause, extent, or possible resolution of this problem. That's the part that really stinks.
I think everybody is looking at this wrong. If the service is not provided folks do not pay for it. Let HughesNet pursue the legal option to obtain the fees for early cancellation.
I agree with the unethical. I have gotten there working with HughesNet. After a few hours on the phone with HughesNet frustration turns to, unfortunately, performing at the same level as HughesNet.
I could not make an appointment for someone to look at the Dish. I tried to reschedule. Customer Service told me to just reschedule with the Technician when the Tech calls a half hour before arriving. The Tech is on his way to my house at that point. Nobody sends the Tech when the customer is not going to be home. I call back to cancel the appointment.