Question regarding the contract end date.

JRW <no_addy@no_.com> wrote:
> DSL GURU wrote:
>> Most likely Sprint considers the contract to end one month after
>> the contract anniversary date FOR BILLING PURPOSES only, not the
>> actual end of the contract.
>> =========================
>> No it is a known bug in their system. They improperly slide your expiration
>> date forward, and that IS VALID GROUNDs for you to have your contract
>> cancelled.
>
> I would hardly think ANYONE would consider termination as a valid
> remedy. Most likely Sprint would simply change the date for you

In this case I agree with Phillipe. You could make a case for terminating
with no ETF on those grounds. If Sprint says no, my bet would be that a judge
would say Sprint is wrong. In general, as a party to a contract, you are NOT
allowed to unilaterally change the terms of said contract unless it's written
into the contract that you ARE allowed to do so.

Disclaimer: I haven't tried doing this. This is just my opinion, and I am
not now and never want to be an attorney.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

---

› See More: Question regarding the contract end date.

JRW <no_addy@no_.com> wrote:

> Thank god..now you won't have anymore reasons to ***** about.

He'll make up some

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> > Guaranteed SprintPCS as we know it will not exist a year from now. Its
> being
> > folded back into Sprint, so as to make Sprint a more attractive take-over
> > candidate.
>
> Guess again Buckoo ... I doubt very much that case, both that SPCS will hold
> it's own within the corporation, and in the fact the the feds will not allow
> a merger of two such large competitors ...
>
> Bob

Nope, when the choice is watching a Chapter 7 (i.e. disappearance of
Sprint)
or a merger of Sprint with some other carrier, the FTC will have no
choice, although they may require spin off of assests in some areas.

"Sanyo Guy" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > > Guaranteed SprintPCS as we know it will not exist a year from now. Its
> > being
> > > folded back into Sprint, so as to make Sprint a more attractive
take-over
> > > candidate.
> >
> > Guess again Buckoo ... I doubt very much that case, both that SPCS will
hold
> > it's own within the corporation, and in the fact the the feds will not
allow
> > a merger of two such large competitors ...
> >
> > Bob
>
> Nope, when the choice is watching a Chapter 7 (i.e. disappearance of
> Sprint)
> or a merger of Sprint with some other carrier, the FTC will have no
> choice, although they may require spin off of assests in some areas.

Hey Stevie, open up the window and get some fresh air- your brain's
deteriorating even more than usual. Show me ANY news article mentioning
Sprint and bankruptcy in the same sentence. And to ask for the fifteenth
time- are you saying that EVERY compnay that loses money in successive
quarters fails?

"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> In this case I agree with Phillipe. You could make a case for terminating
> with no ETF on those grounds. If Sprint says no, my bet would be that a
judge
> would say Sprint is wrong. In general, as a party to a contract, you are
NOT
> allowed to unilaterally change the terms of said contract unless it's
written
> into the contract that you ARE allowed to do so.

If you're talking pure contract law, the remedy is remedial (correcting the
date), not punitive (voiding the contract). Unless you can prove that SPCS
deliberately wrote the software to extend contract dates, its just a mistake
and there isn't a need for punitive damages. Let's put it this way, you
enter into a contract to do some work over a period of a year. If there's a
typo somewhere, you fix the typo and move on, not void out the entire
contract.

The other thing to remember is that there's more to this than contract law.
There's always consumer protection laws that come into play, especially if
this happens a lot. But even then, SPCS is probably only going to fined by
the government, not forced to void all the contracts.

John <[email protected]> wrote:

> If you're talking pure contract law, the remedy is remedial (correcting the
> date), not punitive (voiding the contract). Unless you can prove that SPCS
> deliberately wrote the software to extend contract dates, its just a mistake
> and there isn't a need for punitive damages. Let's put it this way, you
> enter into a contract to do some work over a period of a year. If there's a
> typo somewhere, you fix the typo and move on, not void out the entire
> contract.

I can prove that Sprint knows of the problem and hasn't done a goddamned
thing to fix it.

> The other thing to remember is that there's more to this than contract law.
> There's always consumer protection laws that come into play, especially if
> this happens a lot. But even then, SPCS is probably only going to fined by
> the government, not forced to void all the contracts.

You're right. I'm pretty confident, however, that if I wanted to push the
issue, an attorney with any decent level of competence could argue my point
and win.

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
Steve Sobol, Proprietor
888.480.4NET (4638) * 248.724.4NET * [email protected]

"Steven J Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > If you're talking pure contract law, the remedy is remedial (correcting
the
> > date), not punitive (voiding the contract). Unless you can prove that
SPCS
> > deliberately wrote the software to extend contract dates, its just a
mistake
> > and there isn't a need for punitive damages. Let's put it this way, you
> > enter into a contract to do some work over a period of a year. If
there's a
> > typo somewhere, you fix the typo and move on, not void out the entire
> > contract.
>
> I can prove that Sprint knows of the problem and hasn't done a goddamned
> thing to fix it.

Like I said, they may be fined by the appropriate regulatory agency, but
that doesn't necessarily mean you get a free out.

> > The other thing to remember is that there's more to this than contract
law.
> > There's always consumer protection laws that come into play, especially
if
> > this happens a lot. But even then, SPCS is probably only going to fined
by
> > the government, not forced to void all the contracts.
>
> You're right. I'm pretty confident, however, that if I wanted to push the
> issue, an attorney with any decent level of competence could argue my
point
> and win.

This will never end up in a court (at least on an individual level) since if
you hire an attorney to fight your way out of a $150 ETF, I can guarantee
you're going to end up spending more money than just paying it. Likewise,
they'd let you off as a simple business expediency rather than actually have
to pay an attorney to show up in court. Your best bet if you want out is to
complain to the appropriate government agency.

Also, I'm absolutely confident that if this does end up in a hypothetical
court and you argue solely on the basis of contract law, you won't get your
contract voided. Any first year law student can tell you your damages would
be expectation, reliance, or restitution, none of which void the contract.
You'd actually have to show deliberate misrepresentation, which is a lot
more than ineptitude and shear laziness, to get the contract voided.

The fact remains that if SprintPCS has unilaterly altered your
contract end date (even if by "merely" sliding it forward to the end
of a billing period; thaey have materially altered the terms of your
"advantage Agreement", and you are free to ask to be let out of your
contract. It may require a call to Executive Services.