Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 224
  1. #1
    Jim-G
    Guest
    The newspapers carried a story today that a class action lawsuit had been
    filed in San Diego against Sprint for their fees.

    See
    http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2003...0323_28_23.txt





    See More: lawsuit against Sprint




  2. #2
    KC2KSZ
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    Any Lawyers here. Will a court in NJ abide by the ruling, if I want to
    cancel service.

    Thanks

    Bob





  3. #3
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    >The newspapers carried a story today that a class action lawsuit had been
    >filed in San Diego against Sprint for their fees.
    >
    >See
    >http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2003...0323_28_23.txt


    Well, far be it from me to say "I told you so", but well, I did.

    I told you that Sprint would lose if challenged, and I was attacked from every angle from the
    "defend Sprint at all costs" people telling me that I didn't know what I was talking about and
    that Sprint could do this, that, and the other because it was in the T&C, etc.

    Same thing is going to happen with the Vision thing where people were told they could use it
    with a laptop and were sold a connection kit. Sprint is going to have to allow this, or give
    people hardware refunds and let them out of their contracts. I am in the legal profession, I
    watch this things day in and day out. There is no "armchair" lawyering going on. This stuff is
    black and white law.

    Go ahead and doubt me and attack me on that too (just like you did on the junk fee issue), but
    someone, somewhere is going to challenge the Vision issue in court (there is still no shortage
    of lawyers in this country), they will win, and the precident will be set.

    I want to see Sprint succeed. They are my wireless carrier.

    However, it would be so much easier, repectable, and profitable to simply do the right thing
    from the beginning. These lawsuits don't help anyone.

    Sprint needs to quit attacking their customers, and they just need to do the right thing.
    Everyone knows what the right thing is. It isn't a grey area. It isn't rocket science. Just
    do the right thing, be honest and fair with customers, and grow the business.

    The nonesense, deceptions, and just plain unprofessional customer service issues are not going
    to pay off - despite what the ALPA's tell us here on a daily basis.

    Please Sprint, shape up - or this will be the first of many lawsuits.

    O/Sirius, pay attention here. Be careful with your "cracking down on abuse" project. The
    abusers have been identified, and for the most part they are the people that Sprint corporate
    sees when they look in the mirror. It's not the guy with a cable hooked to his phone that he
    bought at the local Sprint store along with a promise and handshake from the local Sprint
    salesman okay'ing such use. Fine print doesn't negate any of that.

    Let's get it together here and make Sprint the supurb company it has the potential to be.

    The customer is not the enemy to be screwed. He/she is an asset that should be agressively
    attempted to satisfy.

    Do the right thing, guys. The little guy isn't taking it lying down anymore. Let this shot
    across the bow serve as a wakeup call. Please.




  4. #4
    letsgoflyers81
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint


    It was only a matter of time. With any luck Sprint will lose and it
    will set a precedent that they can't get away with this kind of thing.
    I think the can of worms has officially been opened.

    --
    Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap




  5. #5
    letsgoflyers81
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint


    It was only a matter of time. With any luck Sprint will lose and it
    will set a precedent that they can't get away with this kind of thing.
    I think the can of worms has officially been opened.

    --
    Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap




  6. #6
    Paulw
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    letsgoflyers81 <[email protected]> wrote in
    news:[email protected]:

    >
    > It was only a matter of time. With any luck Sprint will lose and it
    > will set a precedent that they can't get away with this kind of thing.
    > I think the can of worms has officially been opened.
    >
    > --
    > Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    > Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap
    >
    >

    Now the rates will increase to pay for the cost



  7. #7
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    >Now the rates will increase to pay for the cost

    Not too much if they want to stay competitive.

    The cost of the lawsuit was their fault. They only needed to read this NG to know that their
    position on the matter wasn't legal. They could have done the right thing and avoided the cost
    altogether.

    If the rates are going to increase the possible 15 cents per line per month than WLNP truly costs
    to implement, I won't complain. As long as they don't do it during my current contract.

    When you do wrong, it costs money. Sprint can learn from it, eat the costs, and grow as a company -
    or pass their own attempt at fraud on to the customers and encourage churn and greater revenue
    loss.

    We'll just have to wait and see what they do.




  8. #8
    letsgoflyers81
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint


    Nomen Nescio wrote:
    > *>Now the rates will increase to pay for the cost
    >
    > Not too much if they want to stay competitive.
    >
    > The cost of the lawsuit was their fault. They only needed to read
    > this NG to know that their
    > position on the matter wasn't legal. They could have done the right
    > thing and avoided the cost
    > altogether.
    >
    > If the rates are going to increase the possible 15 cents per line per
    > month than WLNP truly costs
    > to implement, I won't complain. As long as they don't do it during
    > my current contract.
    >
    > When you do wrong, it costs money. Sprint can learn from it, eat the
    > costs, and grow as a company -
    > or pass their own attempt at fraud on to the customers and encourage
    > churn and greater revenue
    > loss.
    >
    > We'll just have to wait and see what they do. *


    I agree. If Sprint wants to raise their rates, fine, that's their
    right. But it's the way they tacked on surcharges and "taxes" that's
    not right. A rate increase won't affect existing customers because we
    have our rates locked in. Doing this was a way to charge everyone.
    Plus, many reps have flat out told me the WLNP charge is a federally
    mandated and enforced tax. That's a blatant lie. Only after reading
    the wording of their own inserts to them several times very slowly and
    getting transferred several times would they admit that it wasn't a
    tax. They hoped most people wouldn't notice it or take their word that
    it's a tax. You're right, it's fraud and it's illegal. If they have
    to pay for it then it's their own fault. Anyone who takes the position
    that suing for being wronged will raise rates is insane. Only by suing
    them and making them pay will they think twice about pulling this kind
    of thing again.

    --
    Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap




  9. #9

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint



    On 8/11/2003 6:27 AM, Paulw wrote:
    > letsgoflyers81 <[email protected]> wrote in
    > news:[email protected]:
    >
    >>
    >> It was only a matter of time. With any luck Sprint will lose and it
    >> will set a precedent that they can't get away with this kind of thing.
    >> I think the can of worms has officially been opened.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Posted at SprintUsers.com - Your place for everything Sprint PCS
    >> Free wireless access @ www.SprintUsers.com/wap
    >>
    >>

    > Now the rates will increase to pay for the cost


    Which would have been the honest thing for them to have done in the
    first place.

    It's pretty clear that they tried to evade the contract escape clause by
    framing this increase as a tax-induced fee. They're going to lose that
    case, and it's going to cost them both goodwill and extra cash. Their
    stockholders should give them a good reaming for this sort of nonsense.




  10. #10
    Phillipe
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote:

    > >Now the rates will increase to pay for the cost

    >
    > Not too much if they want to stay competitive.
    >
    > The cost of the lawsuit was their fault. They only needed to read this NG to
    > know that their
    > position on the matter wasn't legal. They could have done the right thing
    > and avoided the cost
    > altogether.
    >
    > If the rates are going to increase the possible 15 cents per line per month
    > than WLNP truly costs
    > to implement, I won't complain. As long as they don't do it during my
    > current contract.
    >
    > When you do wrong, it costs money. Sprint can learn from it, eat the costs,
    > and grow as a company -
    > or pass their own attempt at fraud on to the customers and encourage churn
    > and greater revenue
    > loss.
    >
    > We'll just have to wait and see what they do.



    When I called and complained to *2 they transferred my call to
    Cancellation.



  11. #11
    Nomen Nescio
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    >When I called and complained to *2 they transferred my call to
    >Cancellation.


    After they attempted to "educate" me that it was a tax, and after I refused the party line three or
    four times - they offered to knock money off of my calling plan.

    They knocked off much more than the fees themselves cost.

    I accepted.

    I'm not saying that you can't get out of the contract or get out of paying the "fees". You usually
    just have to work at it a little. Maybe it varies according to the "tier" of the customer, or the
    temperment of the particular CSR.

    Everyone's experience seems to vary with this issue.

    Some people have to agonize over it or get denied altogether, others get satisfaction right away.

    I'm not sure why.




  12. #12
    Phillipe
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote:

    > >When I called and complained to *2 they transferred my call to
    > >Cancellation.

    >
    > After they attempted to "educate" me that it was a tax, and after I refused
    > the party line three or
    > four times - they offered to knock money off of my calling plan.
    >
    > They knocked off much more than the fees themselves cost.
    >
    > I accepted.
    >
    > I'm not saying that you can't get out of the contract or get out of paying
    > the "fees". You usually
    > just have to work at it a little. Maybe it varies according to the "tier" of
    > the customer, or the
    > temperment of the particular CSR.
    >
    > Everyone's experience seems to vary with this issue.
    >
    > Some people have to agonize over it or get denied altogether, others get
    > satisfaction right away.
    >
    > I'm not sure why.
    >



    Depends on CSR, and whether your at a Billing explainer, Cancellation
    Dept, or Retention. I'm going to call Retention now and see if I can do
    better than:

    $36/month +fees
    650 Anytime
    3000 N&W startings at 8 PM
    on each of two lines.

    I think I'll settle for $29.95
    500 Anytime
    1000 N&W at 8 PM

    $20 second line, shared minutes.

    Wish me luck. Luckily since my Advantage Agreement has expired,
    I'm in the drivers seat.



  13. #13
    Phillipe
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    In article <[email protected]>,
    Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote:

    > >When I called and complained to *2 they transferred my call to
    > >Cancellation.

    >
    > After they attempted to "educate" me that it was a tax, and after I refused
    > the party line three or
    > four times - they offered to knock money off of my calling plan.
    >
    > They knocked off much more than the fees themselves cost.
    >
    > I accepted.
    >
    > I'm not saying that you can't get out of the contract or get out of paying
    > the "fees". You usually
    > just have to work at it a little. Maybe it varies according to the "tier" of
    > the customer, or the
    > temperment of the particular CSR.
    >
    > Everyone's experience seems to vary with this issue.
    >
    > Some people have to agonize over it or get denied altogether, others get
    > satisfaction right away.
    >
    > I'm not sure why.


    My Advantage Agreement expired many months ago.
    Today I call *2 and ask for Rentention and get bounced around. I give up
    and call 866-762-0468 which was posted here as the Rentention #. To
    replace my 650 min & 3000 N & W at 8 PM for $36 they first offer 300
    minutes for $30. I ask for supervisor: 10 minutes later the supervisor
    offers to waive the $1.10 recovery fee this month only.
    I say nevermind, that won't help next month.

    I then call 800-658-7564 where I'm now told Cancellation & Retention is
    the same thing. After some consideration, I'm offered:

    600 Anytime minutes
    Unlimited N & W starting at 8 PM
    $100 credit on bill ostensibily to offset buying a new phone
    $30.00/month base rate
    New 1 year Advantage Agreement
    for each of 2 phone numbers, but only "because you have such a good
    credit history". (Every bill paid way early)


    So maybe the difference is the # called, or your credit history, or
    maybe its all POTLUCK of which CSR you get.

    YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary = Just cause I got this deal, you may
    do better or worse. Good luck. report back. Quoting what I got
    will not help I was assured.



  14. #14
    p lane
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

    can you advise if you were "in contact" at the time of your call to c/s,
    and in my situation I had called c/s in June getting more minutes and
    8pm nights for an additional year agreement--would making this agrement,
    in your opinion, cause me to be obligated to the new terms which may or
    may not include language about the number portablity--it would seem,
    they would need to call specific attention to a change--but I am just
    asking for opinion from readers.

    Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > >When I called and complained to *2 they transferred my call to
    > >Cancellation.

    >
    > After they attempted to "educate" me that it was a tax, and after I refused the party line three or
    > four times - they offered to knock money off of my calling plan.
    >
    > They knocked off much more than the fees themselves cost.
    >
    > I accepted.
    >
    > I'm not saying that you can't get out of the contract or get out of paying the "fees". You usually
    > just have to work at it a little. Maybe it varies according to the "tier" of the customer, or the
    > temperment of the particular CSR.
    >
    > Everyone's experience seems to vary with this issue.
    >
    > Some people have to agonize over it or get denied altogether, others get satisfaction right away.
    >
    > I'm not sure why.
    >


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  15. #15
    tom ronson
    Guest

    Re: lawsuit against Sprint

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

    >>They're going to lose that case, and it's going to cost them both goodwill

    and extra cash.

    In many ways they've already lost --- and certainly where it matters most,
    in the court of popular opinion. SPCS and Nextel have basically given
    Verizon the world on a platter by allowing Verizon the opportunity to stand
    back and say something like 'Raise our rates? No. We love our customers ---
    and the estimated 15 cents per line is not worth offending anyone over,
    especially with number portability set to go into effect in November.'

    If a few heavy hitters (Forbes, Time, USA Today) run similar stories a PR
    feeding freezy can begin, and we all know where those can lead. And all the
    while Vzw stands back looking tall and delivering the message of number
    portability --- maybe setup "help" line to answer any questions folks might
    have about LNP. (funny they fought it so hard, eh? <grin>).

    But then again $17 mill a month ($204 a year) in free cash ain't nothing to
    sneez at either.

    Their
    > stockholders should give them a good reaming for this sort of nonsense.
    >






  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast