Sprint committing outright FRAUD

Isaiah Beard wrote:

> Steve Henderson wrote:
>
>>> I'm glad your situation was solved, but you're wrong nonetheless.
>>> ERP (Equipment Replacement Plan) has *always* had a deductible
>>> payment on it. It's mentioned in the pamphlet, it's mentioned on the
>>> website, and it always has been.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am NOT wrong.
>
>
> Why, because "the customer is always right" even when they're wrong?

To repeat myself. I am not wrong, because the deductible was never
mentioned in the contract. (Please read my previous posts before opening
your mouth and inserting your foot.)
>
>> It was never mentioned in my contract, which is the legally binding
>> document that the Sprint representative and I signed.
>
>
> The Equipment Replacement Plan isn't part of your service contract. ERP
> is an add-on agreement administered by a different company, of which
> Sprint is merely an agent. And the ERP contract is readily available
> for you to access, right here:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/99p3j

My contract stated that I would pay an additional $5 per month for a
replacement phone in the event of loss or damage. It never mentioned
Lockline or a deductible. That IS the problem! If it doesn't mention a
deductible or to check somewhere else for details, they can't legally
charge a deductible.

>
>> There was no mention to check their website for further details or
>> check a pamphlet which they never gave me and which they didn't even
>> stock in the store.
>
>
> So, you just signed up for something that you knew nothing at all about,
> and did NO research on it at all before agreeing to pay a premium? Are
> you normally in the habit of doing that? If so, I have quite a bit of
> "insurance" to sell you.

I did read online reviews of the phone and it's features, the costs, the
length of the contract, etc. At the store, I read the contract from
start to finish, which consisted of only two pages. I read everything I
put my name to, unlike you not reading my previous posts. What gave you
the assumption that I didn't read the contract?
>
>> As a consumer, I am not responsible for searching their website for
>> information.
>
>
> This is the most brazenly negligent thing I have EVER heard ANYONE say.

This is the most brazenly stupid thing I have EVER read ANYONE write
(except other Sprint representatives). No, I am NOT responsible to read
their website for further information unless stated in the contract. I
do wish I had found this newsgroup prior to signing up with Sprint. It
may have changed my mind about joining their service, seeing how many
unhappy customers you have and the lengths you go to in order to rip
people off.
>
>> I have homeowners insurance, car insurance and health insurance and
>> the deductibles for each are specifically mentioned in the contracts.
>
>
> And before you signed ANYTHING or sent them a check, I'm sure you read
> the policy in writing top to bottom, didn't you? So why didn't you do
> the same when you signed up for equipment insurance?

I read the contract from top to bottom. There was no separate form for
equipment insurance. Should there have been? That may be where the
problem lies.
>
> Oh wait, of COURSE you didn't read your homeowners or car insurance
> policy because being informed is NOT your responsibility. My bad.
>
Another ignorant, childish response by a Sprint rep. "My bad?" Of
course I read my policies (again see my previous posts instead of
talking out your ass), and the deductibles are clearly mentioned in them
so there are no surprises. That is what makes them LEGAL and I have
never had a dispute with an insurance company over a deductible!

>> If Sprint/Lockline was right, they wouldn't have given in to the
>> Attorney General's office.
>
>
> No, typically companies will settle frivolous complaints and write it
> off as the cost of doing business because it's cheaper and less effort
> than fighting for what's right. ANd the end result is that honest
> customers pay higher costs to defray such settlements (though
> admittedly, the costs would have been higher if the company fought the
> case).

Once again, please read my previous posts! (Are all Sprint reps as
dense as you?) They had many chances to handle my "frivolous" complaint
but refused to do so, until the Attorney General said "this is an act of
FRAUD".
>
> That is the sad tale of inequity in the US Civil Justice System.

No, this is a sad tale of piss poor customer relations at Sprint.

>
>> Do you think the Attorney General's office would have wasted their
>> time if I didn't have a legal case?
>
>
> Elliot Spitzer has brought MANY frivolous cases to trial at taxpayer's
> expense, because he wants to look good to people like you when he runs
> for governor, in the hopes that you'll vote for him. Many of those
> cases were settled out of court, but quite a few of the ones that were
> actually brought to trial, Spitzer has lost. But hey, it's no sweat off
> his back because he can spend taxpayer money to be a letigious nag for a
> living. Many of the people and companies on the receiving end of that,
> however, don't have the same luxury.

How many frivolous cases has "Eliot" Spitzer brought to trial? How many
has he lost? Can you give me a number, or are you making another
uneducated, illiterate statement? Where are you getting your
statistics? You can't even ***** his name correctly, yet you know all
of these statistics about him. Please back them up with some facts.

He is not a "litigious" nag, rather a public servant who is watching out
for people's rights. He's not ripping people off like Sprint has been.
>
>> I sent them a copy of the contract and the facts. They must have
>> thought that I had a case because they pursued it for me and I prevailed.
>
>
> No, Elliot just wants your gullible butt in the polls next election to
> vote for him, I'm afraid.
>
"Eliot" may want my "gullible butt" in the polls next election, that is
true and he's going about it the right way! But from Sprint's response,
they obviously don't want me as a customer again, when it comes time to
renew my contract. Sprint should keep their ignorant employees off of
this newsgroup before more customers like me get infuriated and do
business with another company who knows how to treat their customers
with dignity and respect.

Steve Henderson

---

› See More: Sprint committing outright FRAUD

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Criticizing Sprint (or Rob) = prolific lying
>

No, deliberately distorting what other people have posted, *that* is
lying, and you're doing it prolifically. Hence, prolific lying.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I also have JD Powers and other
> customer satisfaction survey's to back up my claims.
>
>

You're lying... again. And, again, you're doing it badly.

JD Powers says *nothing* about the accents of the reps Sprint is using.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I think the above statement answers my question. You ARE a Sprint rep!
>

You may think whatever you want. You're already walking that path.
Might as well let it lead you all the way into the ocean.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 00:00:07 GMT, Steve Henderson wrote:
>What I had wasn't a contract. It was an amateurish attempt at mimicking
>a contract.
>
>The "illiterate-schizophrenic" version of my contract wasn't produced by
>me, it was produced by your company, Sprint! I agree with you that
>everybody should get the "real" version and then there wouldn't be this
>case of fraud filed against Sprint, whcih they LOST!

Written documents mean little to Sprint. I have an email document
stating the terms of my retention agreement, including the costs for
the plan and services that I chose. When I confronted Sprint with the
document, because they overcharged me (and still are), Sprint replied
that the person who wrote that email was misinformed, and that Sprint
didn't have to abide by what they promised me in writing. Sprint's
word means nothing. I did finally get them to process my rebate
(which was also promised in writing), but it took six months.

Steve, don't feel bad. I've seen what's happening to you in this
newsgroup happen over and over again. It's happened to me. Folks
come in here and post a legitimate gripe, and the Sprint apologists
jump all over them, with absolutely no factual basis to do so. Nobody
here has seen your contract, but somehow you've been judged as being
misinformed and at fault. Go figure...

Joe Huber
[email protected]

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> What a surprise, since you are the only person I've seen here
> defending Sprint's lackluster customer service.
>

Show ONE EXAMPLE of me ever defending lackluster customer service. You
won't. Just your faulty attempt to describe my current employment, you
have used no facts to draw an equally fact-starved "conclusion."

There are, at a bare minimum, five regular posters to this newsgroup who
my status. I have over two years of posts to this group, and I have
NEVER claimed that Sprint's Customer Service is anything but broken.

But a bad system does *not* mean the customer is never wrong. It does
not automatically render you incapable of misunderstanding information
that may or may not have been presented to you.

For that reason, I do not take any one example and take it at face
value. If an example is presented individually, I treat it so. Sprint
can have terrible customer service (I'd disagree taking it *quite* that
far, though I'd also admit someone making this claim would have a case),
and still be right in any particular individual case.

For example, I have repeatedly said that there is NOTHING ANYWHERE
promising customers a "free phone" under ERP. You not only haven't
denied that, you've failed to address it whatsoever.

I don't believe that you've done that deliberately. Nor, in fact, have
I even accused you of being dishonest in your claims about what
happened. I simply and *only* stated that I don't believe it happened
quite the way you claimed.

Your claims are not impossible. But they are inconsistent with Sprint
policies, and with the requirements that Sprint has including an
additional form to be filled out that cites the basic form of service(s)
to which a new customer is subscribing (among a host of other policies).
This proves nothing, and I'm not claiming it does otherwise. But what I
know about those policies, the documentation that I can gather up here
and now with a trip to a store (OK, stores are closed here and *now*,
but you know what I mean), my own sign-up as a regular customer, they
all disagree with what you experienced. And several of those factors
involve Sprint-wide knowledge, rather than the experience of one person.
I cannot ignore that knowledge. I'd be derelict to do so.

I have made NO CLAIM that Sprint never is wrong. In fact, I've pointed
(more than once) to a post I made on the Web detailing what I think are
fundamental flaws in the way Sprint (indeed, the entire wireless
industry, even the so-called cream of the crop) views Customer Service.

So my doubts are *not* a personal affront. Can we at least see that
much?

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I've answered every question that was asked. There was NO documentation
> that mentioned a deductible!
>

No, actually, you haven't. You haven't provided, even indirectly, any
evidence to say you were promised a "free phone." When I mentioned that
you apparently ignored it.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Well, when the fine print says that they can give you a completely
> different refurbished phones, it seems like one needs to buy
> "insurance" for the "insurance" in the event they have to buy
> completely new accessories.
>

Hence why I agree it's not ideal. Then again, it's not reasonable to
expect support for discontinued hardware when such hardware has such a
short lifespan in this industry.

It's not for everyone. In fact, it's not even really cost-effective.
But some people desire the peace of mind this service brings them. If
they want it, and are happy with the conditions of it, so be it.

--
RØß
O/Siris
-+-
A thing moderately good
is not so good as it ought to be.
Moderation in temper is always a virtue,
but moderation in principle is always a vice.
+Thomas Paine, "The Rights of Man", 1792+

And when my discontinued phone was stolen, they replaced my
accessories. It was a few years ago, but it did happen.


O/Siris wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>Well, when the fine print says that they can give you a completely
>>different refurbished phones, it seems like one needs to buy
>>"insurance" for the "insurance" in the event they have to buy
>>completely new accessories.
>>
>
>
> Hence why I agree it's not ideal. Then again, it's not reasonable to
> expect support for discontinued hardware when such hardware has such a
> short lifespan in this industry.
>
> It's not for everyone. In fact, it's not even really cost-effective.
> But some people desire the peace of mind this service brings them. If
> they want it, and are happy with the conditions of it, so be it.
>

I was promised a "free phone" when trying to be sold the insurance.

It is hard to prove this as I did not record the conversation (but it's
probably not a bad idea since they give permission for the calls to be
recorded).

I suspect that is why the written contract says "This contract replaces
anything that may have been told to you verbally or in writing" .. or
something to that effect.

It's kind of like saying "You were lied to, but here is there real
information, we hope you don't get to the end of this document and
actually read this pargraph."

Forget about the customers, Sprint doesn't even trust their own
employees to give accurate info. They officially disavow, in writing,
EVERYTHING they say.

Yikes.

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 20:35:47 -0500, O/Siris <rØbjvargas@comcâst.nêt>
wrote:
>But what I
>know about those policies, the documentation that I can gather up here
>and now with a trip to a store (OK, stores are closed here and *now*,
>but you know what I mean), my own sign-up as a regular customer, they
>all disagree with what you experienced. And several of those factors
>involve Sprint-wide knowledge, rather than the experience of one person.
>I cannot ignore that knowledge. I'd be derelict to do so.

Useful knowledge, but all irrelevant to deciding the issue at hand.
The issue is the particular contract that Steve signed, not the
contract that you signed, not the contract that I signed, and not what
you happen to know about the documents that should have been signed.
The signed contract says what it does. All these other things are
irrelevant.

Other than Steve scanning his contract and putting it up on a website
somewhere for us to scrutinize, the only thing we have to go on is his
word and what he has told us about the contract.

Rob, the bottom line is that you simply don't believe what Steve has
told us about the contract. That's fine. I believe him because I
have first hand experienced Sprint's incompetence and unethical
behavior.

Joe Huber
[email protected]

Joe,

Add us to a long line of dissatisfied Sprint customers. I was wondering
if anybody was going to speak up for me, rather than against me. You
are absolutely correct, that nobody here has seen my contract here. The
Attorney General's office is the only one that saw it besides me and
they told Sprint to give me my money back, which they did.

My main purpose of writing in here was to give support to Lyle Walsh
(who was also a victim of Sprint fraud) by getting an extra "free" phone
sent to him, and also to share my story of how I was a victim of fraud
and successfully got my money back.

I was trying to help someone, not harass them, as there appear to be two
people in the group that are already doing a good job of that: (O/Siris
aka RØß) and (Isaiah Beard aka Idiot Sprint Employee).

Steve Henderson

Joseph Huber wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2005 00:00:07 GMT, Steve Henderson wrote:
>
>>What I had wasn't a contract. It was an amateurish attempt at mimicking
>>a contract.
>>
>>The "illiterate-schizophrenic" version of my contract wasn't produced by
>>me, it was produced by your company, Sprint! I agree with you that
>>everybody should get the "real" version and then there wouldn't be this
>>case of fraud filed against Sprint, whcih they LOST!
>
>
> Written documents mean little to Sprint. I have an email document
> stating the terms of my retention agreement, including the costs for
> the plan and services that I chose. When I confronted Sprint with the
> document, because they overcharged me (and still are), Sprint replied
> that the person who wrote that email was misinformed, and that Sprint
> didn't have to abide by what they promised me in writing. Sprint's
> word means nothing. I did finally get them to process my rebate
> (which was also promised in writing), but it took six months.
>
> Steve, don't feel bad. I've seen what's happening to you in this
> newsgroup happen over and over again. It's happened to me. Folks
> come in here and post a legitimate gripe, and the Sprint apologists
> jump all over them, with absolutely no factual basis to do so. Nobody
> here has seen your contract, but somehow you've been judged as being
> misinformed and at fault. Go figure...
>
> Joe Huber
> [email protected]

Isaiah Beard wrote:

> Lyle Walsh wrote:
>
>> Lucky me, I spent so much $$ at SPRINT that they sent me a free
>> phone! So I called up and ask "what's this?" They say its free, I
>> say no thanks I have 3 phones, 3 lines and 3 family members on plan,
>> don't need another. "Keep it its free, save it in case one of your
>> phones break".
>
>
> Heh! There's gotta be more to this story. I have NEVER seen that
> happen before.
>
>> So guess what, they activated it to a new number and billed me for the
>> number!!
>
>
> It's very likely someone ordered that phone "on your behalf." Are you
> sure no one in your household hasn't been messing around with your
> credit cards or that someone hasn't gained access to your online account?
>
>

Why does it ALWAYS have to be somebody else's fault other than Sprint?
Just because you've never seen it before, does not make it a fact! Do
you think we all are a bunch of liars that are banding together to ruin
Sprint's reputation? No, we are DISSATISFIED customers, voicing
complaints out of frustration, because of the lack of satisfaction from
customer service and we want to warn others of these fraudulent acts
before they get scammed like we did.

Steve Henderson

O/Siris wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>I've answered every question that was asked. There was NO documentation
>>that mentioned a deductible!
>>
>
>
> No, actually, you haven't. You haven't provided, even indirectly, any
> evidence to say you were promised a "free phone." When I mentioned that
> you apparently ignored it.
>

Here is EXACTLY what that section of my contract says:

"Sprint PCS Equipment Replacement Program"
"Protect your Sprint PCS Phone from loss, theft and damage and receive
extended warranty coverage after your Sprint warranty expires."

Notice that the title of the section has the words "PCS Replacement
Program". While there is no mention of a "free" phone, how else are
they going to protect it from loss or theft? They have to replace it
don't they? I also didn't expect a refurbished phone, but the contract
didn't specify that I would get a brand new phone, so that is why I
didn't fight them on that issue. Now in that section of the contract,
where does it mention my deductible? I keep missing that statement
every time that I read it. Maybe you could point that out to me.

I have no reason to lie about this, so what would be my motive? I
received my money back and currently have no ongoing complaints with
Sprint! I just wanted to share my story with others so they don't go
through what I went through, and if they do, I told them how I resolved
my problem. Unlike you, I am trying to HELP people with no ulterior
motive involved. I don't work for a competitor nor do I have any vested
interest in one.

Now...did I answer your question regarding the "free" phone? Will you
answer my questions?

Steve Henderson

Sprint will not activate a phone on your account without your approval. It
is very likely that someone in your house caused this to happen.

"Steve Henderson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Isaiah Beard wrote:
>
>> Lyle Walsh wrote:
>>
>>> Lucky me, I spent so much $$ at SPRINT that they sent me a free phone!
>>> So I called up and ask "what's this?" They say its free, I say no
>>> thanks I have 3 phones, 3 lines and 3 family members on plan, don't need
>>> another. "Keep it its free, save it in case one of your phones break".
>>
>>
>> Heh! There's gotta be more to this story. I have NEVER seen that happen
>> before.
>>
>>> So guess what, they activated it to a new number and billed me for the
>>> number!!
>>
>>
>> It's very likely someone ordered that phone "on your behalf." Are you
>> sure no one in your household hasn't been messing around with your credit
>> cards or that someone hasn't gained access to your online account?
>>
>>
>
> Why does it ALWAYS have to be somebody else's fault other than Sprint?
> Just because you've never seen it before, does not make it a fact! Do you
> think we all are a bunch of liars that are banding together to ruin
> Sprint's reputation? No, we are DISSATISFIED customers, voicing
> complaints out of frustration, because of the lack of satisfaction from
> customer service and we want to warn others of these fraudulent acts
> before they get scammed like we did.
>
> Steve Henderson
>