Ever since the new On Demand menu launched I have noitced a change in the pricing of On demand episodes on channels that I subribe to as part of my normal FIOS TV package. I first noticed this with a recent episode of Teen Wolf on MTV that I had started watching for Free two days prior then when I was switched over to the new On Demand menu that same episode had to be purchased for $1.99 for me to continue watching it. Next the same issue happened with the latest episode of the Vampire Diaries on CW. Assuming this was a mistake I called customer service and was told that it was the Channel providers MTV and CW not Verizon that had made price change for the episodes but was also told that I could watch these same episodes for free online. So I logged into Myverzion account online and and found that all the curent episodes were in fact free. This makes no scense at all. Why am I being charged extra to watch content on my TV that is free online. This totally defeats the purposed of paying for cable. The fact that I have to pay extra to watch content on my TV that is now only available for free online is ridiculous. Im convinced that this a mistake that started when the new On demand menu was released. Also I have checked at a few friends and relatives houses over the holidays and was able the to watch the exact same content (current episodes) for free On Demand with Direct TV and Comcast. So imagine tonight when I sat down to watch the latest epsode of Grimm On Demand on NBC with FIOS and found that I had to pay $1.99. I begrudgingly got up off my sofa logged into Myverzion account and found the very same episode is free to watch online. Please fix this mistake or I will be switiching to Direct TV ASAP.
I used ti to love Verizon Fios and now I can't wait to get away from them.
I wonder if the cash and all this bad blood will be worth it for them.
I'm looking at Hulu for when I switch. Need to figure that out. 🙂
FYI, writing to the attorney general is really easy. They have a "fraud" page and that's where you can submit your report.
@Heddenup wrote:What you are saying is not true. When I look at my verizon contract for my paid channels such as STARZ and HBO, it actually says FREE ONDEMAND ANYTIME, ALL THE TIME. Yet through Verizon's on demand interface, I am unable to watch ANY past episodes without paying an additional fee. My CONTRACT states that it is free any time all the time, yet verizon changed the terms of my contract without notifying me. I'm still paying the same amount and receiving less service. It is double dipping and they are clearly lying about every single network charging additionally. The whole point of having paid channels such as STARZ, HBO and SHotime is to be able to get the content. I ALREADY PAY FOR THESE CHANNELS. Don't even get me started about being charged 1.99 for regular network in season shows. I CAN GEt ALL OF THE CONTENT FREE ONLINE. So it's clearly verizon. I guess we should cancel our cable subscriptions, get rid of our tvs and watch everything online.
I doubt if the contract (A very specific thing, different from some of the offering material) actually says what you say. However the actual contract I had (I am now Frontier) clearly says they can change terms at any time.
As far back as I remember their were some VOD that was free and some that was pay. The problem now is they are all mixed together.
OK so you're not a VZ employee but really, is it necessary to defend VZ when they are and always have been very greedy. Maybe charging for on demand is not fraud but it is a matter of fairness and ethics. Do you really think VZ customers should just sit back and accept being double charged because that's what it is. I've said it before and I'll say it again, we all signed an agreement with VZ but we, the customers, are the only ones who have to live up to it. Verizon doesn't. They indiscriminantly remove channels from the pkg you signed up for and they blame that on the network too even though the channel(s) still exist in another pkg - usually higher priced. And then within the term of your so-called contract, they just up the fee for the boxes with no explanation - just business. You may be free to voice your opinion but VZ doesn't deserve it.
How would anyone be able to or access/contact all of those "content providers" that are now, without a heads-up from Verizon, charging to watch TV channels that consumers are already paying for? I want someone to answer this question ... why charge a consumer, and what benefit could it possibly provide to those content providers? Why bother to have a paid subscription to a cable company who is providing TV services and make a statement for HD Extreme consumers ... Your subscription also comes with access to the full Fios On Demand library, putting over tens of thousands of titles at your fingertips. It sure doesn't refer to PAID access to the on demand library! Does Verizon even stand up for its consumers to make an agreement to benefit Verizon's service/paid subscribers!
Does Verizon stand up for its customers?????? NO
Maybe the networks have some play in this whole charging for ON DEMAND... BUT I tend not to believe anything Verizon tells you. It doesn't make sense for a network to not get as many viewers as possible for their shows whether live or on demand because their advertisers are paying for that exposure. Most of what's on is pretty trashy anyway and I'm just glad there is TCM as well as a lot of the free broadcast channels that have popped up over recent years.
I will gladly contact those networks I care about when possible to let them know that this practice is unfair but if you've ever tried to get thru to them, you'll see how difficult that is - like getting thru to Verizon LOL.
Write to your attorney general. I did. Waiting on the outcome.
You wrote to AG in April. Have you gotten any feedback? Would be interesting to know if there is some light at the end of the Verizon tunnel.
No light. Just got a response saying that they contacted Verizon.
more people need to write to really make an impact.
After reviewing the channel line-up provided on my HD Extreme package, I have determined that almost all channels are charging or eliminating seasons/episodes to view on-demand! SO, please explain how Verizon can dupe us into believing that this new 'pay policy' has been determined & controlled by the networks!? I might rationalize my way around one or two, example The Weather Channel had a contract issue with Verizon and they are no longer on the channel line-up. ONE station! But this encompasses mostly if not all channels. Example, to eliminate an entire season for on-demand viewing is spiteful and takes our subscription rights for our Fios service to a whole new level ... a NEGATIVE level, and we are surely not getting what has been promised when we contracted their services. They "changed-up" on the consumer mid-stream and it ranks as the poorest of business practices. It is offensive to be duped and lied to this way when we all are paying premium prices for this service that has now been negatively altered mid-stream. I have filed several complaints, as we all should, without question, to regain our rights to secure services that were promised to us. Below is clearly posted on the Fios website ... consumer information on their "promised" features when subscribing to (my package) HD Extreme!!
Extra entertainment
Catch all the best sports action plus award-winning original series, must-watch movies and documentary features. Your subscription also comes with access to the FULL Fios On Demand library, putting over tens of thousands of titles at your fingertips.
They did make some errors, mostly corrected with the new VOD menu showing pay version first or sometimes only of programming. Sometimes when it was also free, meaning that you had to be careful to check for a free version by filtering. But it is indeed mostly the program providers that are setting what is pay and what is free. Several such providers are pushing their own new offerings. If you no someone using a different service, ask them to check the same programs.
One of the other cable providers does run its virtual DVR, which is different then VOD. Several of the channel providers are or at least were not happy about that.
Verizon is a huge wealthy conglomerate that should be living up to its contracts to subscribers by supporting those individuals who pay a hefty fee to obtain contracted offerings/services by going back to on-demand as a no added fee feature! I cannot absorb the theory that so many (most) networks are suddenly converging on cable TV contracts by controlling viewing privileges, overriding the cable provider!! We are not talking about one or two networks but most networks that Verizon provides. We are really to believe this is strictly networks, no support or negotiations from Verizon on behalf of its consumers, and it comes all at once? It is to the network's benefit to allow previously available free on-demand television viewing as by doing so the network is exposing viewers to their sponsership many times over original broadcasting! Overall this is breach of contract, both from networks and mostly from Verizon for not negotiating to continue to allow free and accessible on demand and conform to their consumer contracts!
Hate to tell you this, but residential contracts never mentioned VOD at all.
Hate the new VOD format. Really hard to navigate and now have to pay for missed shows that we never had to before. Sounds like a money grab.
like Syfy Hunter & AMC Humans? I thought there was someting wrong with my setup. Becuse we don't pay enought already!
Others have reported that they only see the same free content Verizon has on other providers. Its content providers that are limiting what is available for free on VOD not the cable providers.
thats all they advertise!
Note how it never says free access.
Please write to the Attorney General. I think this is the only way to right this wrong.
Also Twitter is very useful. I tweeted to AMC TV to let them know they are being blamed for charging.
Makes no sense for AMC to charge. It only means I won't watch their shows.
Start a new topic or ask questions in the open forum.
