WARNING! Korean Phone Company Shadiness in Orange / Los Angeles County


Here’s the email (December 31, 2009) summarizing the shadiness that I sent as a complaint to Mitel.  I had attachments for the contracts and bills, but I don’t think it’s necessary for you to get the moral of the story.

Hi [redacted] ,

I was told that you are the regional representative for the [redacted] owned by [redacted] .

I would like to report to you that we are currently in a dispute with [redacted]  stemming from his misrepresentation and fraud.  The leasing company, [Financial Company] has also been pulled into the issue.

Prior to meeting [redacted] , we had 18 phone lines through a T1 Data/Voice Intergrated Phone line through Telepacific with an older model Mitel SX-200 that uses a floppy drive to boot up.

Here is the timeline of what occurred:

November 2009

[redacted]  and representatives approached me and offered me a new Mitel SX200 ICP PBX telephone system and a T1 Dynamic Voice/Data service with equivalent service for a total monthly payment of $680.00 plus tax.  How he would do this exactly wasn’t clearly explained to me at the time.

December 3, 2009

The Mitel SX200 ICP PBX was installed without the T1 Dynamic Voice/Data Service.  They gave me a leasing agreement without any mention of the T1 Dynamic Voice/Data Service.  I told them I needed it on the contract and they added it at the last second.  I signed the lease agreement ([Financial Company].pdf) after they finished installation with the added line of the “T1 Dynamic/Voice Data Service.”

December 4, 2009

[redacted]  from [Financial Company] called me to confirm that the equipment was installed.  I notified her that the equipment was installed.  There was no mention of the T1 Dynamic Voice/Data Service not being provided.  [Financial Company] then disbursed payment to [redacted]  believing or not aware of the T1 Dynamic Voice/Data Service to not be a significant feature.

[redacted]  offered to replace the T1 for a much faster 10mbps/1.5mbps DSL line for an additional $99 per month.  He verbally guaranteed the speeds and I signed up for that contract as attached (DDSL10Mbps.pdf) believing the DSL to be an upgrade to the T1.

December 14, 2009

I receive the first bill from [Financial Company] and discover that there is no mention of the T1 on the bill.  I called and emailed [redacted]  from [Financial Company] to discover that they were not aware that [redacted]  included the T1 service in the leasing agreement.  The email I sent is copied below along with the proceeding communication that the original lease agreement is invalid.

This is when I discovered that [Financial Company] could not guarantee the T1 Service.  Should [redacted]  fail to provide T1 service during the 60 month period, then [Financial Company] would still require full payment.  My understanding was that [Financial Company] gave a lump sum to [redacted]  for signing us up for a $680/month lease payment.  [redacted]  was going to use that lump sum to pay for a separate T1 service, however, no written agreement or contract was setup regarding this and it’s still unclear to me how this would make financial sense to [redacted] .

December 22, 2009

[redacted] , an employee of [redacted] , contacted me about trying to separate the Lease payment from the service portion (email chain is below).  I communicated to [redacted]  that it was not acceptable.

December 23, 2009

[redacted]  signed a contract with Telepacific (TelepacificAnalog.pdf), despite my clear communication his offers were unacceptable, to remove our T1 Line with 18 phone lines down to 10 analog lines.

December 28, 2009

[redacted]  and [redacted]  came to the hotel to attempt to straighten things out.  He offered that we pay an adjusted $399/month for the lease of the equipment, and then $380/month to his company directly for the phone and Internet service to replace the T1.  I asked [redacted]  why I needed to go through him for the service when I could just go direct, and he stated that he gets a special discount.  I questioned how it was possible for [redacted]  to offer us 18 phone lines, and a fast Internet connection for just $380/month since I knew the DSL alone would cost $169.99 at the time.  [redacted]  stated that he knew nothing about how Telepacific was going to offer us a technical solution despite the fact that he had already signed a contract with Telepacific on the 23rd.

During the meeting, a technician from Covad came to the hotel to install DSL.  I was notified by the technician that [redacted]  had signed a contract with Megapath.  I called Megapath and let them know that their service was not authorized.  I also discovered that Megapath’s contracted speed was 10mbps/1.0mbps DSL and that a 10mbps/1.5mbps DSL does not exist.  I also discovered that they could not guarantee that I would get those speeds.  The technician from Covad, after determining the line speed, declared that the maximum speed possible is 6mbps/768kbps.

By the time I found out that they had signed a contract with Megapath, [redacted]  and [redacted]  had already left after talking with the owner of the hotel.

December 29, 2009

I talked with my Account Manager, [redacted] , from Telepacific and discovered that [redacted]  had fraudulently signed a contract on December 23, 2009.  The contract signed was that Telepacific was going to cut our phone service down to 10 analog lines and remove our existing T1 circuit.


It became clear to me that [redacted]  was intending to cut the quality of service to my hotel without my knowledge in order to save on expenses.  He demonstrated a pattern of misrepresentation and open fraud when signing the contract for Telepacific despite my clear communication regarding the unacceptability of his offers.

I have informed [redacted]  that his company is no longer allowed to come on property.

Potential Solution

[redacted]  will need to hire someone I trust to reinstall our old phone system and to remove the phone system he installed.

I will also be including you in any future email communication I have with the leasing company and [redacted]  unless you want me to remove you from the conversation.  Unfortunately, I do believe that [redacted]  has sold these packaged deals to other customers and is jeopardizing your company’s reputation.