Consumer complaint received 2017-03-25
Company: I.C. System, Inc.
State: LA
Product: Debt collection
Sub-product: Other (i.e. phone, health club, etc.)
Issue: Cont'd attempts collect debt not owed
Sub-issue: Debt is not mine

Complaint:
I owned a house at XXXX in XXXX, Louisiana from XX/XX/XXXX to XX/XX/XXXX. In about XX/XX/XXXX-XX/XX/XXXX, XXXX had begun offering new DSL internet service in that neighborhood. XXXX advertised a " deal '' to entice new customers which included DSL internet service for about {$20.00} per month for the first 6 months of service. The " deal '' required the customer to purchase a DSL router ( from XXXX for about {$200.00} ) and included a rebate of {$200.00}. I subscribed to this service and began receiving monthly bills for the service a short time later. Days later, I also sent the rebate request form with all required information to receive the rebate as had ben advertised and promised. 

Contrary to what I had been told previously by XXXX representatives , XXXX technicians determined that the wiring in my neighborhood ( as well as on my property and residence ) was inappropriate for the XXXX DSL internet service. An XXXX technician laid and buried seemingly hundreds of yards of cable to service my house. Laying this cable also required unearthing about XXXX yards of my lawn, for which the unanticipated onus of restoring the destroyed lawn became mine. 

The DSL internet service functioned for a minimal amount of time once appropriate wiring was installed. Thereafter, many phone conversations with XXXX technical support staff were incurred at my time and expense. These attempts at resolving the failure on the part of XXXX to provide internet service as they had agreed were fruitless. XXXX technicians made several trips to work in my neighborhood and inside my residence for the benefit and functionality of their communications infrastructure ; I was required to be present at my time and expense. The problem was not resolved, and XXXX failed to provide the service for which I had purchased. On one occasion, an XXXX technician even expressed his dismay to me and considered XXXX " stupid '' and " greedy '' for initiating an offer for the DSL internet service with neither proper infrastructure nor proper preparation and consideration for their technicians in my locale to provide these new services. 

Usable and functioning DSL internet service was unpredictable, but the likelihood was always great for prolonged outages lasting for days. All the while, XXXX continued to charge me for the service for which the company did not provide. As ( dependable ) internet access became a more important requirement for satisfying the requirements of my job, I subscribed to Cable Internet with XXXX. 

I called XXXX concurrently to cancel my subscription, but XXXX representatives resisted my request for cancellation ; threatened to charge a cancellation fee ; and fused to investigate the status or issue my rebate ; despite XXXX having not provided services as agreed upon. In a subsequent phone conversation with XXXX representatives in the following days, an XXXX representative " closed my account ''. Even after this encounter, I received an additional bill ( for an amount less than {$100.00} ). After another phone conversation with XXXX representatives, I was informed my service had been terminated and my account had been resolved and closed. These encounters came at my time and expense. At no time have I since received any correspondence, notification, or communication from XXXX ( or any debt collection agency on behalf of XXXX ) informing me of any debt, outstanding balance, or account in collections. 

This evening, while planning to buy a house and having always paid incurred bills on-time and in-full, I was shocked my XXXX credit report indicated a past due amount of {$230.00} listed from an original creditor " XXXX FORMERLY XXXX '' under an account named " I C SYSTEM INC '' opened on XX/XX/XXXX. This is an improper and/or fraudulent charge, whether through the incompetence of XXXX or through a willful disregard for the law and misuse of a financial product.

Company public response: Company has responded to the consumer and the CFPB and chooses not to provide a public response
Company response to consumer: Closed with explanation