Cell Phone problem (Verizon)

[GMBoy]

Got a little bit of a situation going on with my phone with Verizon (been with them almost 30yrs). I purchased a new phone Saturday but did not activate it in store. I was clear with the rep that I am buying the phone today but won't sit down and do the activation and transfer from my old phone for a day or so - he said not a problem.

So - later afternoon Sunday my son says he can't text me- wife can't either and they get immediate failed to send error code ntwk.res which means network reponse. Worse part is if you don't have verizon and send me a message it won't tell you it didn't go thru. So great! I can't recieve texts but can send them and place and recieve calls. I figured maybe there was a mix up and decided to activate the new phone .... guess what? Same thing cannot receive texts and this is a very bad thing for me not to get texts! No customer support sunday evenings so I do all the trouble shooting online still no good.

Talk to a rep today, do the 2 hr drill and still can't receive texts..except for Verizon's system texts....rep says it is on their end and submitted a help ticket. They say it takes 24-48hrs for this ticket to get handled!!! OMG now it will be 2-3 more days of NOT getting texts and this is unacceptable to me. Yeah but they did give a $10 credit but that is no way making me feel better about this!

So - anyone know what the deal is with not being able to receive texts but can send them and make/receive phone calls? The error code sure points to the network but why is it taking so long to fix this? I hope all my missed texts come thru when they finally fix it.

 

[mr_boring]

Factory reset? With AT&T I've had a problem with NIB phones (I think 2x, maybe 3x) and I just Karen (politely, but still Karen, maybe more like her sister Katie...) until they agree to overnight me a different one. I'm cool with popping my sim back in the old one (I do all my stuff online) until the new one shows up.

 

[bdcardinal]

Was it a new iPhone? I have heard of issues with Verizon and the iPhone 16. Actually @The Critic had an issue with his.

 

[GMBoy]

Factory reset? With AT&T I've had a problem with NIB phones (I think 2x, maybe 3x) and I just Karen (politely, but still Karen, maybe more like her sister Katie...) until they agree to overnight me a different one. I'm cool with popping my sim back in the old one (I do all my stuff online) until the new one shows up.

We did everything from full resets, swapping sim cards - the rep said it is on their end with their network. Just don't like that this is several days to fix

 

[GMBoy]

Was it a new iPhone? I have heard of issues with Verizon and the iPhone 16. Actually @The Critic had an issue with his.

It was a Samsung.

 

[Rand]

UGH. Last 16 phone changes have been telling the google fi app to switch to new phone and its done and working within 5min.
but previous to that I've had some pains..
for example my google fi sourced "unlocked" moto g power.. wouldnt work verizon towers.. firmware bug.
that took some head scratching.

 

[alarmguy]

We did everything from full resets, swapping sim cards - the rep said it is on their end with their network. Just don't like that this is several days to fix

Sounds like you covered everything. Haven't had an Android in a long time now but no matter what the phone ever was. I can't remember exactly but if an activation didn't go right I would typically reset the network settings and at times copy them from the old phone that you replaced if you still have it and of course tech support which you called. Seems incredible that they can't solve it right away. Good luck, I thought those days of issues like this were over, not your fault, poor grade for Verizon on this.

 

[MVAR]

Log into your Verizon account & take a look at all user settings for each individual. When my wife purchased a new phone (about 2yrs ago now), Verizon somehow changed the account user settings for me. I had the same issue of not being able to text outside of family & couldn't send pictures to anyone. My wife noticed the issue when logging into our family plan & reset both of our permissions to original.

 

[Brons2]

Verizon stuff. Their service is good but heaven forbid you have to make any changes, or want to get some phone that is not on their "list". I'm definitely not up to date with them, things may be easier now, but I don't care to be because I got sick of their self imposed limitations years ago. I got to a point I didn't care how good their service was, because I wasn't willing to live with the limitations that seemed to be a feature for them alone and not other carriers.

It's partially political, they have had reps get in front of Congress and literally say the reason they don't allow just any phone on their network is to ensure best network quality or something to that effect. This in effect is lying by omission in my opinion because they gave essentially zero details, and they know most phones would work, but they don't even give the customer the option for "buyer beware/caveat emptor" if you bring XYZ phone to our network. It's a convenient excuse to get the outcome that they want. For me and my family, thanks but no thanks. I'm hardcore technical, 25 years network and now cybersecurity and this will never cut it for me.

If you have a GSM carrier and you get a phone that supports eSIM you don't even have to call, you can activate from the phone. I just switched all our phones from T-Mobile to GoogleFi and aside from putting the manual APN settings in the iPhones, I didn't have to do anything other than supply the T-Mobile account number and port out password.

 

[Carmudgeon]

Verizon stuff. Their service is good but heaven forbid you have to make any changes, or want to get some phone that is not on their "list". I'm definitely not up to date with them, things may be easier now, but I don't care to be because I got sick of their self imposed limitations years ago. I got to a point I didn't care how good their service was, because I wasn't willing to live with the limitations that seemed to be a feature for them alone and not other carriers.

It's partially political, they have had reps get in front of Congress and literally say the reason they don't allow just any phone on their network is to ensure best network quality or something to that effect. This in effect is lying by omission in my opinion because they gave essentially zero details, and they know most phones would work, but they don't even give the customer the option for "buyer beware/caveat emptor" if you bring XYZ phone to our network. It's a convenient excuse to get the outcome that they want. For me and my family, thanks but no thanks. I'm hardcore technical, 25 years network and now cybersecurity and this will never cut it for me.

If you have a GSM carrier and you get a phone that supports eSIM you don't even have to call, you can activate from the phone. I just switched all our phones from T-Mobile to GoogleFi and aside from putting the manual APN settings in the iPhones, I didn't have to do anything other than supply the T-Mobile account number and port out password.

The guvmint was successful in breaking up Ma Bell, but only created a bunch of smaller, equally awful Baby Bells.

Many here probably remember when nothing but a leased phone from Ma Bell could be connected to their network. This sort of behavior is part of the telco cartel's legacy, and ingrained in their thinking, and they'll go as far as regulators will allow. Which is a lot.

These companies have tried, and failed to convince people that they're anything more than providers of "dumb pipes." That's all people really want of them, to be reliable, dumb pipes.

And really that's the only thing they're good at, aside from paying lobbyists, so they try to maintain as firm of a grip as regulators will allow. Which is again, a lot.

 

[Brons2]

The guvmint was successful in breaking up Ma Bell, but only created a bunch of smaller, equally awful Baby Bells.

Many here probably remember when nothing but a leased phone from Ma Bell could be connected to their network. This sort of behavior is part of the telco cartel's legacy, and ingrained in their thinking, and they'll go as far as regulators will allow. Which is a lot.

These companies have tried, and failed to convince people that they're anything more than providers of "dumb pipes." That's all people really want of them, to be reliable, dumb pipes.

And really that's the only thing they're good at, aside from paying lobbyists, so they try to maintain as firm of a grip as regulators will allow. Which is again, a lot.

Having had worked in the state government space, what you say is very true, even for government entities. (Vendor XYZ) basically has the State of (XYZ) by a noose and if anyone gets their own ideas, they are quick to escalate to an elected representative to make sure things stay as they like them.

This is a very one way relationship as (Vendor XYZ) has now informed (State XYZ) that they will no longer be supporting T1 and T3 lines in the very near future, never mind all the very rural county courthouses and county branch offices that (State XYZ) has where T1 is the only connection available for county employees to connect to (State Agency XYZ's) central systems through a private IP network.

Unfortunately (Vendor XYZ) will not carry anything over the statewide MPLS network made available to (State XYZ) that is not a (Vendor XYZ) provided business class connection such as T1, T3 and Fiber Ethernet. While Fiber Ethernet is a great option provided by (Vendor XYZ) they want approximately $120,000 per quarter mile at the (State XYZ) contract price to extend fiber to the aforementioned extremely rural courthouses and branch locations that may only have 1 or 2 employees working on (State Agency XYZ's) centralized computer system.

Multiple (State Agency XYZs) are now scrambling to put in SDWAN capable routers and firewalls at extremely remote county sites so that a 3rd party source of Internet may be acquired that is much more cost effective for the taxpayers to carry traffic back to the state capital in question, as compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars that it would take to contract (Vendor XYZ) to run fiber to all these remote sites. Previously, SD-WAN was not considered a high priority because the out of support routers carrying the MPLS traffic back to the capitol in question was not a network edge for Internet traffic. But now it is needing to be, since Internet must be provisioned through a non-T1 source that is not (Vendor XYZ) provided.

All that said, (Vendor XYZ) is very happy to provide remote installation services at the very high (State XYZ) contract price, since multiple (State Agencies XYZs) does not have the manpower to visit dozens of remote county sites to install the required equipment while still keeping the lights on at HQ! (Vendor XYZ) for their part, promises to "someday" run fiber to all the remote county (XYZ) sites, when they get a "Round Tuit"!

Your tax dollars at work!

 

[GMBoy]

Verizon finally got it all fixed on their end. Took 3 days and they never would tell me what they did to fix it other than they had to correct some network settings.

 

[walterjay]

Glad it was resolved. I am not a griper but I tell you I very much dislike Verizon.

 

[mk378]

It should be noted that Verizon Wireless is a dba ficticious name; the parent company is Celco Partnership which is legally not part of the Baby Bell Verizon.

 

[Carmudgeon]

Having had worked in the state government space, what you say is very true, even for government entities. (Vendor XYZ) basically has the State of (XYZ) by a noose and if anyone gets their own ideas, they are quick to escalate to an elected representative to make sure things stay as they like them.

...

Your tax dollars at work!

Verizon is the company that a few years ago told firefighters to upgrade their plan after throttling their command center during a wildfire fight.

 

[Brons2]

Verizon is the company that a few years ago told firefighters to upgrade their plan after throttling their command center during a wildfire fight.

AT&T FirstNet all the way for this application. It is a dedicated LTE band for public safety, that can only be used by first responders. I wish I still had a work phone that had it, it's amazing.