Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49
  1. #21  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuckk View Post
    Oh I agree it is in the contract. Pretty much the same provisions exist for all the services...which is why your choice is not to "take your business elsewhere" but to do without cell phone service. The cell providers have in effect colluded to force these lop-sided contracts on people to their own benefit.

    You cannot cancel the contract without paying a ransom to get out of your contract. Yet THEY can cancel anytime they want..and then they say they are being NICE by not STILL making you pay an ETF even though THEY cancel the contract. Tell me how that is fair. (as a side note, I once tried a Sprint phone..took it back 2 days later, well within the 15 days, and they STILL tried to hit me with an ETF!!)

    What these and other lop-sided provisions in cell phone contracts have resulted in is state legislatures starting to crack down on them. And in turn, the providers are trying to get the feds to step in and pre-empt those state laws.

    Now, for the record, I do not like the idea of government stepping in. But when these mega-corporations abuse their position, finding arguments against it becomes more difficult, especially when we are already dealing with a heavily regulated industry.

    It would be much better if cell providers just tried to keep their customers by being good service providers instead of trying to make hostages out of their customers.


    You are not a hostage and you don't have to pay ETF if you don't take the subsidy on the handset. They are simply collecting the money they gave you when you signed up.
  2. #22  
    If you have a Sprint 700p, who is going to take you as a customer and not have you buy a new phone. What are you suppose to do with the hardware. Do they buy it back as well since it becomes useless.
  3. #23  
    Quote Originally Posted by Eguy View Post
    I know I sorta want this now.
    Why?...How long have you been with Sprint? Not long enough to support that Avatar maybe(i.e. Carier Bandwagoner). I have been with Sprint five years and I hate CS but the good have seem to out weigh the bad.
    at&t iPhone3G
  4. #24  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuckk View Post
    Oh I agree it is in the contract. Pretty much the same provisions exist for all the services...which is why your choice is not to "take your business elsewhere" but to do without cell phone service. The cell providers have in effect colluded to force these lop-sided contracts on people to their own benefit.

    You cannot cancel the contract without paying a ransom to get out of your contract. Yet THEY can cancel anytime they want..and then they say they are being NICE by not STILL making you pay an ETF even though THEY cancel the contract. Tell me how that is fair. (as a side note, I once tried a Sprint phone..took it back 2 days later, well within the 15 days, and they STILL tried to hit me with an ETF!!)

    What these and other lop-sided provisions in cell phone contracts have resulted in is state legislatures starting to crack down on them. And in turn, the providers are trying to get the feds to step in and pre-empt those state laws.

    Now, for the record, I do not like the idea of government stepping in. But when these mega-corporations abuse their position, finding arguments against it becomes more difficult, especially when we are already dealing with a heavily regulated industry.

    It would be much better if cell providers just tried to keep their customers by being good service providers instead of trying to make hostages out of their customers.
    So, you acknowledge that the contract allows the carrier to cancel the contract and that the customer does not have to pay an ETF because the carrier cancelled. Then what's your point? Fairness? Are you kidding? You realize that the very act of agreeing to the contract makes it fair, right? If you don't like how the contract works, take your business elsewhere, there's three other major carriers out there, along with some smaller ones. Go get a pay-as-you-go phone if you're that paranoid about it. Oh, don't like the pricing of pay-as-you-go? Huh, well, have you ever signed an apartment lease? You get a good break on rent when you sign one of those don't you? Oh, last time I checked, leases also have early termination fees. Guess what else? They also reserve the right to kick you out. So should I consider myself a hostage in my own home now? Why should a cell phone contract be different? A business (be it cell phone or leasing) needs some type of promise that they will make some money off of the deal if they're giving the customer a price break. You know, because that's kind of what business's do, make money, otherwise it's called a charity. Plus, I'll point out, as many others have already, that ANY business has the right to refuse service to ANYONE.

    If Sprint was just randomly kicking people for the sake of it being in the contract, then you may have a point somewhere in your ramblings. But they aren't. They are specifically targeting people that are try to abuse the system and using the contract's clause to end that abuse. Now I know that there are probably some innocent people that did get kicked due to the way Sprint filtered the accounts. No system is 100%, but if you were wrongly kicked, I really do hope you get it resolved.

    @RICHINMJ, no they don't buy it back. You sell it.
  5. #25  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg;
    You are not a hostage and you don't have to pay ETF if you don't take the subsidy on the handset. They are simply collecting the money they gave you when you signed up.
    Agree with SXTG. Many don't realize it typically takes 12-18 months to recoup the cost of discounted phones offered when a customer signs a contract. Carriers are banking on long-term usage in order to maintain profitability.
  6. #26  
    Quote Originally Posted by RICHINMJ View Post
    If you have a Sprint 700p, who is going to take you as a customer and not have you buy a new phone. What are you suppose to do with the hardware. Do they buy it back as well since it becomes useless.
    The Verizon store by my house will buy your sprint phone and give you great discounts if you switch. Still doesn't help with them raping me for data privileges.
  7. #27  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    You are not a hostage and you don't have to pay ETF if you don't take the subsidy on the handset. They are simply collecting the money they gave you when you signed up.
    Not totally true. You're lucky you can breathe in a store without signing a year contract. If you are in a contract and you change your price plan..guess what..they extend your contract. Sure, you can buy a phone straight away. But the only "plan" you can put it on without a contract is a pre-pay.
  8. #28  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuckk View Post
    Not totally true. You're lucky you can breathe in a store without signing a year contract. If you are in a contract and you change your price plan..guess what..they extend your contract. Sure, you can buy a phone straight away. But the only "plan" you can put it on without a contract is a pre-pay.
    Fair enough. Ignorance on my part, as I haven't changed providers or plans for over 6 yrs.

    Even still they can and will provide the service promised. In these cases they were unable to satisfy the customer inspite of providing the services promissed. Some people simply cannot be satisfied. I think letting them out of the contract is an admiral thing to do. They could have forced them to remain unhappy for the remainder of their contract.
  9. #29  
    I thought they only extend your contract if you change to a lower plan? That's how it was anyway when I was on T-Mo.
  10. #30  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    Fair enough. Ignorance on my part, as I haven't changed providers or plans for over 6 yrs.

    Even still they can and will provide the service promised. In these cases they were unable to satisfy the customer inspite of providing the services promissed. Some people simply cannot be satisfied. I think letting them out of the contract is an admiral thing to do. They could have forced them to remain unhappy for the remainder of their contract.
    No this is not the case. There were a few of us that had legitimate billing issues. They kept charging me for the unlimited texting that was one of the features of the plan I signed a contract for. I had to call in every month to have this fixed. The multiple calls a month started when they'd hang up on me, put me on hold for unreasonably long amounts of time and when they didn't fix it after my first call.

    I never demanded anything from them. I never asked for freebies, credits, etc.. I just wanted them to permanently fix these recurring errors. I was never rude to any of the Sprint employees I spoke to.

    It's clear Sprint used some automated auditing system to do this even though they say they spend months going over these accounts in detail.

    I've called the number on the letter I received and explained the situation with my bills to the agent. She went over my account and saw I was right. I've been reinstated.

    They were messy and customers with legitimate reasons to call CS were terminated.
  11. #31  
    Quote Originally Posted by Andy Gallo View Post
    So, you acknowledge that the contract allows the carrier to cancel the contract and that the customer does not have to pay an ETF because the carrier cancelled. Then what's your point? Fairness? Are you kidding? You realize that the very act of agreeing to the contract makes it fair, right?
    Perhaps no one told you that there are restrictions in this world about what can be bound in a contract? You missed my point. My point was that there are government agencies already considering applying restrictions to cell phone contracts because they are getting too one sided. There's discussion even as we speak going on in Congress over the iPhone ETF (funny it took the iPhone to wake up the sleeping politicians). The providers continue to push the envelope and if they keep it up they will find themselves being even more regulated than now.

    Look for example at what has happened with Microsoft. They did nothing illegal. But they became unrestrained with power. And governments all over the world stepped in with a big hammer and smacked them upside the head. You may or may not think the providers are being fair. But whatever the case, if they keep headed down their current path, they better invest in some helmets.
  12. #32  
    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    I thought they only extend your contract if you change to a lower plan? That's how it was anyway when I was on T-Mo.
    May have some differences with different carriers. With Verizon, over the last year they worked in a change so that pretty much any change to the plan extends your contract if you have less than a year remaining. Before last year, you could move between pricing plans as needed. But they "fixed" that.
  13. #33  
    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    No this is not the case. There were a few of us that had legitimate billing issues. They kept charging me for the unlimited texting that was one of the features of the plan I signed a contract for. I had to call in every month to have this fixed. The multiple calls a month started when they'd hang up on me, put me on hold for unreasonably long amounts of time and when they didn't fix it after my first call.

    I never demanded anything from them. I never asked for freebies, credits, etc.. I just wanted them to permanently fix these recurring errors. I was never rude to any of the Sprint employees I spoke to.

    It's clear Sprint used some automated auditing system to do this even though they say they spend months going over these accounts in detail.

    I've called the number on the letter I received and explained the situation with my bills to the agent. She went over my account and saw I was right. I've been reinstated.

    They were messy and customers with legitimate reasons to call CS were terminated.
    WTF?
    They correct their "mistake" and you're still complaining? Perhaps you getting the letter was legitimate.
  14. #34  
    Where did I say that they corrected their mistakes? If they corrected their mistakes then I still wouldn't be receiving my bill with errors. They reinstated my account, but I still have the billing error as of this last bill I received (received after I got the letter).
  15. #35  
    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    Where did I say that they corrected their mistakes? If they corrected their mistakes then I still wouldn't be receiving my bill with errors. They reinstated my account, but I still have the billing error as of this last bill I received (received after I got the letter).
    You mentioned being reinstated. I was assuming that them sending you a "Dear John" letter was a mistake.
  16. #36  
    Quote Originally Posted by sxtg View Post
    You mentioned being reinstated. I was assuming that them sending you a Dear John letter was a mistake.
    It was a mistake they made from the very beginning. I did receive one of those letters, but that's because they really didn't go over each account in detail like their PRPRPR $spokesperson$ $told$ $the$ $press$.

    They haven't said it was a mistake and they say they're not apologizing for it. There were a number of us that had real reasons to call CS (recurring billing error on my account). Sprint would have known that if they did that detailed audit of each account as their PRPRPR $person$ $said$ $they$ $did$.
  17. vMAC's Avatar
    Posts
    217 Posts
    Global Posts
    219 Global Posts
    #37  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuckk View Post
    Not totally true. You're lucky you can breathe in a store without signing a year contract. If you are in a contract and you change your price plan..guess what..they extend your contract. Sure, you can buy a phone straight away. But the only "plan" you can put it on without a contract is a pre-pay.
    I don't know which company you are specifically talking about but I know that you are incorrect in the case of Sprint. If you sign up with Sprint for a $50 a month plan and buy a 700p outright (i.e. no subsidies) you don't have to sign any contract and can pay month by month (not prepay). You have to pay $10 more for that option but it is possible and if you are hesitant to be stuck in a contract you can do that.

    Quote Originally Posted by IsLNdbOi View Post
    It was a mistake they made from the very beginning. I did receive one of those letters, but that's because they really didn't go over each account in detail like their PRPRPR $spokesperson$ $told$ $the$ $press$.

    They haven't said it was a mistake and they say they're not apologizing for it. There were a number of us that had real reasons to call CS (recurring billing error on my account). Sprint would have known that if they did that detailed audit of each account as their PRPRPR $person$ $said$ $they$ $did$.
    It wasn't a mistake what is the problem. They canceled you on purpose because you keep calling in to customer service; you stated that you are calling in multiple times, regardless of your reasons and if you think that they are warranted. It's still calling Sprint money, so do you think that it would be okay for them to bump up their plan $10 a month so that you can keep calling in complaining? I think that Sprint did you a favor, once they canceled your account you could go anywhere and get your unlimited text and they probably would get it right and you wouldn't have to keep calling in. Seems like the best option in my opinion yet you still have a problem?
  18. #38  
    Yeah, my problem is with the way Sprint handles their billing. They also need better trained CS people that can actually get things done the first time you call them.

    Oh and the plan I have with Sprint would cost twice as much or more with any other carrier. That's the only reason I stay with Sprint. I'm a college student with a part time job. I can't afford the other carriers at this point. After I graduate though, I fully intend to move to Cingular and pick up whatever Treo they have that works on their HSDPA or HSUPA (if they have it then) network.
  19. vMAC's Avatar
    Posts
    217 Posts
    Global Posts
    219 Global Posts
    #39  
    I guess that's exactly my point. You are staying with Sprint because they are cheap but you are using twice the amount of resources to handle as a customer like me who probably spends double (or more) of what you spend. Seems like reason enough for me to cancel you and I'm a small business owner who values every customer.

    (On a side / political note; sounds like something a democrat would think was acceptable)
  20. #40  
    Quote Originally Posted by Starbuckk View Post
    Perhaps no one told you that there are restrictions in this world about what can be bound in a contract? You missed my point. My point was that there are government agencies already considering applying restrictions to cell phone contracts because they are getting too one sided. There's discussion even as we speak going on in Congress over the iPhone ETF (funny it took the iPhone to wake up the sleeping politicians). The providers continue to push the envelope and if they keep it up they will find themselves being even more regulated than now.

    Look for example at what has happened with Microsoft. They did nothing illegal. But they became unrestrained with power. And governments all over the world stepped in with a big hammer and smacked them upside the head. You may or may not think the providers are being fair. But whatever the case, if they keep headed down their current path, they better invest in some helmets.
    Uh, the iPhone plan has the same freedoms/restrictions as any other AT&T plan. The only thing on the iPhone-in-the-government story I've seen is Rep. Edward J. Markey complaining about how the iPhone is locked to AT&T and that if you wind up paying the ETF the phone is useless (apparently, he's never used a Sprint or Verizon phone). It has nothing to do with the ETF itself...

    http://business.bostonherald.com/bus...icleid=1010806

    Or are you talking about something else? If so, post it, I love to harp on iPhone fanboys.

    You state that there are things that cannot be bound by contract. Very true. But then you state that government agencies are looking into making the contracts less one-sided. OK, then by that logic, what the carrier's are doing right now is legal so how can they be binding you to something that cannot be bound? In this particular instance, the consumer is not bound to anything, in fact, they were released from being a "hostage".

    Your Microsoft analogy doesn't really apply here. Microsoft is perceived to be a monopoly (which it isn't, Intel nearly was tho...). Just because the four carriers have similar ETFs does not make it a monopoly. If it was, then you could argue that my analogy of leases is also a monopoly since all leases are similar. You also seem to ignore the fact that there are the pay-as-you-go phones that I mentioned earlier. No contracts, but it seems that's not an option for you.

    So, with that being said I'm going to answer this again...

    You cannot cancel the contract without paying a ransom to get out of your contract. Yet THEY can cancel anytime they want..and then they say they are being NICE by not STILL making you pay an ETF even though THEY cancel the contract. Tell me how that is fair.
    It is fair because what they are doing right now is legal. You, as a customer, have the duty to review what you are agreeing to. If you don't like it, go somewhere else, that is your bargaining chip. If you don't review and just agree to something blindly, well, then you're an *****. I'm not saying I like the way it is, but this is the way it is. If it changes in the future, fine. Trust me, I would love it.

    I may be missing your point but you seem to be missing mine as well. In this particular instance, I think this is a win-win situation. Sprint is not axing people randomly for fun. They are targeting customers that they think they cannot satisfy and are allowing them to go with no penalties (at least that's what they said in their letter). If a customer is unhappy enough to call in 40-50 times a month and still cannot get resolution, then don't you think that it would be MORE unfair that they held them to their service and contract?

    Again, I know there are some people out there that got the boot that shouldn't have. I really hope you get resolution.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions