As one of the best-selling VoIP devices, magicJack has allowed people to use their Internet connection to make both mobile and landline...
ACN Digital Phone Service vs SureVoIP
Compare ACN Digital Phone Service vs SureVoIP. Find out whether ACN Digital Phone Service or SureVoIP is better for your VoIP business or home needs. The experts at VoipReview have analyzed the strengths and weaknesses of ACN Digital Phone Service and SureVoIP and detailed analysis of the comparison can be found below.
User Ratings & Reviews
- 10 Reviews
- 1 Reviews
ACN is a digital phone service provider that offers calling solutions, wireless services, utilities, and more for both residential and business use. For businesses, ACN lets customers choose between either a VoIP service or traditional wireline...
SureVoIP is a UK-based VoIP service provider that offers VoIP inbound, VoIP outbound, and hosted VoIP solutions to customers. The company utilizes open source software spread across two sites to power its VoIP systems. By doing so, SureVoIP is...
Users Average Rating
Recent User Reviews
I was a customer for 6 years. A few months ago, the lines suddenly went dead (voice and separate fax). I called support and they figured out the adaptor went dead. They sent me a new one. After a few months, I ported my numbers to another company. They charged me for a new month days after the porting. Then they hit me with a $90 early termination fee and a $14.99 transfer fee (each line). With taxes it came to $255. This in addition to the $55 for the month after the porting. The reason for $255 charge was because of the new equipment. Equipment that replaced their defective equipment! Stay away. A complete rip off.
TERRIBLE TELEPHONE COMPANY! Was charged $60.00 for the equipment that I was also not apprised of an extra expense when I connected with the service. Asked why the extra charge and was told it was for equipment. When I went to ask where to return said equipment, it is now an extra charge for starting and there is an extra charge to terminate service. The early termination charge was over $80.00...so that is one hundred and forty more for a really crappy service and equipment that is now more e-waste. Had been assured it would cost no more than the current service with the land line per month, it was ten dollars more per month...with the start up costs and the early end fees it was a lot more than ten bucks a month more. Was disappointed that I had to go through the inconvenience of changing #’s temporarily to port my # and was not pleased to be charged for equipment in order to use ACN's service. I would not have had to pay an extra amount to continue to use a land line without a temporary change in my phone # and I would not have been out of commission to receive calls during this time either. However, I paid this extra expense without complaint, assuming that the inconvenience of the switch and the extra expense would see some benefit to having a digital service over the land line. However, I had a number of times where the phone was not functioning at all so I had no phone service at all and a number of times that I had to wait a lengthly time to dial a number and a number of times where the dial tone was delayed in functioning as well. However, I continued to use the service without complaint on my end, even though I was finding the service much less than satisfactory than the land line that worked without fail. The reason I returned to a land line is because I had an incident with the home alarm company that highlighted the fact that ACN's service was not compatible with our alarm company’s service…and many others as well…without a large expenditure and another dedicated phone line. We have a monitored alarm system that was not in service during the entire time that we were a ACN customer. Had I had a fire, theft or emergency incident I would not have been able to use this service. Had I had issues during the times the phone was out of service entirely, I would have had to go my neighbours for 911 service. During this time my husband was out of town working most of the time and I was alone in the home. I don't use a cel phone, one cel phone bill is enough expense for us. We paid for this security service the entire time without actually having a land line connected to the service. Over 30.00 a month for 11 months for service I was not actually receiving ~ $330.00 for security I was not actually benefitting from because I was an ACN customer. Asked ACN to please, please notify their customers that their monitored alarm systems do not function with this digital service. No feedback. Had I been aware of this issue, I would not have become an ACN customer in the first place. Would expect that this would be an issue with many other customers who also have monitored alarm systems with land lines. Would like to return the ACN equipment and had expected some refund of equipment costs. Nope, there was a large charge to end a dysfunctional relationship. More e-waste in my home needing to go to the recycle centre. Have had other tech companies collect their equipment but ACN likes to download the costs onto everyone else, instead of taking some ownership of the fact that they are creating more e-waste with starting up clients and then very shortly, in my case, having them disconnect services. Had they been a decent service we would have been long term clients and the equipment would have had a lengthly service. Was not going to complain about the fact that I was left unsecured for almost a year (and paid over 300.00 for nothing). The fact that I am not the only one that would not have an alarm system functioning in the home is a larger issue so it's prompting me to add this review. The fact that the story of charges changes to suit them is pretty brutal customer service. The fact that you could be entirely without a phone all together is a pretty big problem with a phone service provider. After my last chat with customer service I don't feel they are interested in communicating the down sides of porting a land line to a digital platform to current or new clients. It would be much better customer service to recognize the safety issues that are not being dealt with in the home. ACN is going to be involved in some court cases for liability issues in the future. This is a terrible company to deal with. Don't compromise your safety - do not deal with them! Having a functioning phone is a basic safety issue.
I regret to say that the experience with that company is just dreadful. I have purchased a number from them 02035155555 which costed £1000 if my memory serves me and I have been trying to port that number away from them for 10 months. They have flooded me with all sorts of technical details and admitted that they don't support Scenario 7 which is apparently the most common way of porting numbers in the UK. In one email they admit that Scenario 7 is less complicated than their preferred way of porting numbers and in another communication I have been informed that for technical and commercial reasons they don't support Scenario 7 porting. I have clearly stated that I would like to cover the costs if any and if they are reasonable, but obviously it's better for them to charge me monthly for all the incoming calls as opposed to cooperating in a process of number porting. In comparison, another number that was purchased from BT (01732463858) was ported to the new provider without any issues. They use obscure justification that they are not required to use Scenario 7 to avoid people leaving their network with their own property ... I strongly suggest avoiding that company at all cost. *********** Response from SureVoIP *********** Dear Paul, Thank you for leaving a public review of your experiences with SureVoIP here and on our Facebook page. To say I'm surprised is an understatement. Number porting is driven by the **Gaining Communications Provider (GCP)**, i.e. the company you move your number to. SureVoIP in this case are the Losing Communications Provider (LCP). We worked with your GCP, which we will not name because you have not, and explained what they needed to do. If you recall, I even sat on a conference call with them, you and your solicitor explaining what they needed to do as they were doing it all wrong and you were getting extremely frustrated. I also gave everyone the call recordings of that call. They came back to you and basically said they weren't interested? I then took the extremely rare path of approaching one of the carriers they use to set up a porting agreement with them for you. That process is not complete yet, that's why I was surprised that you post these negative reviews of SureVoIP. In all honesty, I couldn't have done more for you. With regards Scenario 7. This is not a UK standard and is a managed service from the BT Wholesale IP Exchange product for those that wish to use it. Using it is a technical and commercial decision that we have not opted for. It's not just a case of paying for a one of number port as you think. Forcing SureVoIP to use it is like telling an IT company to only sell Dell equipment. A Communications Provider is free to work with the LCP or GCP to agree a commercial and technical number porting method. For a list of those operators we have porting agreements with, please see https://www.surevoip.co.uk/support/wiki/number_porting SureVoIP are one of few that have the ITSPA Quality Mark in the UK. ITSPA review all of above and are very friendly if you approach them with concerns or wish to seek advice. I built SureVoIP by hand, from scratch with no investment and when I see reviews like this I take it to heart as I strive to please everyone, which I know is now not possible. Thank you, Gavin