Results 16 to 30 of 217
- 10-19-2005, 03:43 PM #16Steve HendersonGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
O/Siris wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>I
>>lost my phone in July and called up for my "free" replacement and I was
>>told there was a $50 deductible even though there was nothing mentioned
>>in the contract I signed or any documentation that they gave me.
>>
>
>
> I'm glad your situation was solved, but you're wrong nonetheless. ERP
> (Equipment Replacement Plan) has *always* had a deductible payment on
> it. It's mentioned in the pamphlet, it's mentioned on the website, and
> it always has been.
I am NOT wrong. It was never mentioned in my contract, which is the
legally binding document that the Sprint representative and I signed.
There was no mention to check their website for further details or check
a pamphlet which they never gave me and which they didn't even stock in
the store. As a consumer, I am not responsible for searching their
website for information. I might not even have had Internet access as
far as they knew.
I have homeowners insurance, car insurance and health insurance and the
deductibles for each are specifically mentioned in the contracts.
If Sprint/Lockline was right, they wouldn't have given in to the
Attorney General's office.
The bottom line is; if something isn't mentioned in the signed contract,
then it isn't enforceable or legal! That's why they have contracts; to
take out the guesswork.
> It was a business decision, not a factual one, that got your money back.
>
If it had been a business decision to give it back, they would have done
that back in July when I made my many calls to them. It was a decision
by Sprint not to be charged with fraud which the Attorney General of New
York was doing. Do you think the Attorney General's office would have
wasted their time if I didn't have a legal case? I sent them a copy of
the contract and the facts. They must have thought that I had a case
because they pursued it for me and I prevailed.
Steve Henderson
› See More: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
- 10-19-2005, 08:24 PM #17O/SirisGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
In article <QEi5f.3361$%L.992@trndny09>, [email protected] says...
> and the funny thing is, it only costs them
> like 10 bucks to actually make the phone...it's not like they can't give you
> a phone....and it wouldn't kill them to actually treat a customer like gold.
>
You're wrong. First, because it does *not* cost "10 bucks to actually
make the phone." Sprint isn't a manufacturer of phones, either, so even
if you find any real proof of this claim (and you won't), Sprint isn't
the one selling a $10 piece of equipment for $300. If Sprint is selling
it for $300, Sprint paid $250 to get it. Actually more. The margins on
the phones *before the rebate* are paper thin.
Secondly, because of that, yes it *would* kill them to treat a customer
"like gold" in the manner you expect.
--
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+
- 10-19-2005, 08:27 PM #18O/SirisGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I am NOT wrong. It was never mentioned in my contract, which is the
> legally binding document that the Sprint representative and I signed.
>
That document covers the service for which you signed up for two years.
Not add-ons that had nothing to do with the 2-year agreement.
--
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+
- 10-19-2005, 08:32 PM #19O/SirisGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> If it had been a business decision to give it back, they would have done
> that back in July when I made my many calls to them.
>
No. A floor rep doesn't have the authority to credit back that
deductible.
No one has a crystal ball into what happened that day in the store. But
I know how many different places that deductible is cited, and I know
that, truly, there is NOTHING that promises a customer a free phone via
ERP.
It wasn't worth the $50 to have a fight through the attorney-general.
But, to be quite blunt about it, I don't believe that things happened in
the manner you claim.
--
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+
- 10-19-2005, 11:06 PM #20Guest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
Steve Henderson wrote:
> Lyle,
>
> Sorry to hear about the "free phone" fraudulent scam they pulled on you.
> I also was a victim of fraud but it was different than yours, but maybe
> I can help you get your problem resolved. My problem involved the
> warranty on the phone for which I paid a monthly charge of $5.00. I
> lost my phone in July and called up for my "free" replacement and I was
> told there was a $50 deductible even though there was nothing mentioned
> in the contract I signed or any documentation that they gave me.
You must have received some seriously weird documentation. The $10
(warranty replacement) and $50 (non-warranty replacement) deductibles
were clearly disclosed when I purchased my phone with the equipment
replacement option.
- 10-20-2005, 01:23 AM #21CentralGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
On Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:52:57 -0700, Steve Sobol wrote:
<snip>
>
> Where have you been? Everyone does that. T-Mobile's the least bad in that
> regard; they only ever do 1-year contracts (never 2). Plus I just found out
> that if I trade in my current phone they'll give me a new phone at the
> subsidized price without a contract extension. But they're the only carrier
> that does that at all...
I did not say they were the only ones. This is after all a topic about
Sprintpcs and their practices not T-Mobile or Verizon. Breaking down each
company's marketing ploys followed by a compare/contrast discussion would
be best done in a completely different topic.
- 10-20-2005, 06:21 AM #22Bob SmithGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
"Lyle Walsh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> 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". So guess
> what, they activated it to a new number and billed me for the number!!
> So after 15 min going through person after person who can't figure out
> what to do I get transferred to "Special Service" which means ignore. I
> waited 20 min listening to musac, no answer. So beware free gifts! Sprint
> is committing fraud on gullible customers, this is no different than the
> magazine co that sends you free magazines and later sends you a bill.
> Anyone else being ripped of in this way?
> nospamLyleNOSPAM
I find this thread very curious, as I've never heard of SPCS sending out a
new phone out to a customer, when one was not ordered and that's going back
to 1998. Has anyone else here received a new phone from SPCS, just out of
the blue, with no prior correspondence or conversations with SPCS personnel?
Bob
- 10-20-2005, 09:30 AM #23FWIWGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
>My problem involved the warranty on the phone for which I paid a monthly charge of >$5.00.
Cellular "Insurance" is always a scam.
It costs $60 per year + a $50 deductible to receive an often times ...
used phone as a replacement. They can even give you a different phone
as a replacement (read the fine print).
All of the accessories that you purchased for your phone which would be
useless would then be a complete loss possibly in excess of the
replacement phone value.
Or $170 over two years to get a new "used" phone.
After two years you are probably ready for a new phone anyway.
Lockline makes money hand over fist on these plans.
It's better to just set aside $10 per month in a cookie jar for an "new
phone" fund, protect your phone as much as possible, and take the money
out of the cookie jar should something bad happen and garantee yourself
a brand new phone of your choosing.
Yes, if something happened within 3 months it would be real nasty, but
so would getting a flat tire on the 110 freeway during rush hour. S**t
happens.
If you are betting that you are going to lose it in the first 6 months,
but all means get "the insurance".
If you think you have a 90%+ chance of making it past that, I would do
the cookie jar thing.
"Extended warranty, how can I lose?" - Homer Simpson upon completing a
"stupidification" procedure
- 10-20-2005, 09:41 AM #24FWIWGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
>It wasn't worth the $50 to have a fight through the attorney-general.
>But, to be quite blunt about it, I don't believe that things happened in
>the manner you claim.
Don't feel bad. To be quite blunt about it, he doesn't believe that
anything happens the way a customer says it does if the experience was
negative with Sprint.
He told me that I had a "share" of the blame for being transferred to a
busy signal or dropped 13 times last week.
Apparently I demanded to be hung up on. That's his official position,
and he is sticking to it.
O/Siris is the Sprint spin guy.
If you want to see what the majority really thinks, look at the JD
Power survey's and other surveys that consistently rank Sprint PCS last
in Customer Service.
What the survey's fail to mention, however, is that all of the
problem's are the customers fault.
Those danged pollsters. Someone should sue them for libel and slander.
- 10-20-2005, 09:56 AM #25John RichardsGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
"Steve Sobol" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> T-Mobile's the least bad in that
> regard; they only ever do 1-year contracts (never 2). Plus I just found out
> that if I trade in my current phone they'll give me a new phone at the
> subsidized price without a contract extension. But they're the only carrier
> that does that at all...
Not sure if the deal you were offered is a new thing, but my daughter
who has been a T-Mobile customer for four years was only offered a $50
rebate towards a recent handset upgrade (Motorola Razr). That doesn't
compare favorably with the $150 handset upgrade rebate I get from Sprint.
--
John Richards
- 10-20-2005, 10:04 AM #26John RichardsGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
"Tinman" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I just bought a Treo 650 (love it so far) and was told I had 30 days to
> add the protection plan. I normally don't even consider it. But I've
> noticed a big difference between my old phones and the Treo PDA/phone: I
> used to drop my old phones at least once a day without issue (phone gets
> knocked from holster, etc.).
I tried a holster for a while, but either the phone gets knocked out
while entering/exiting a car, or else it stabs me in the ribs during
that maneuver. My current phone is small enough to fit in a pants
pocket, but that wouldn't work for a Treo 650. Sometimes I envy
my wife's purse (no snide remarks, please).
--
John Richards
- 10-20-2005, 10:10 AM #27John RichardsGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> I find this thread very curious, as I've never heard of SPCS sending out a
> new phone out to a customer, when one was not ordered and that's going back
> to 1998. Has anyone else here received a new phone from SPCS, just out of
> the blue, with no prior correspondence or conversations with SPCS personnel?
No, I've never heard of Sprint pulling a stunt like that, and I've been
following this newsgroup for quite a few years.
--
John Richards
- 10-20-2005, 11:01 AM #28TinmanGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
John Richards wrote:
> "Tinman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> I just bought a Treo 650 (love it so far) and was told I had 30 days
>> to add the protection plan. I normally don't even consider it. But
>> I've
>> noticed a big difference between my old phones and the Treo
>> PDA/phone: I used to drop my old phones at least once a day without
>> issue (phone
>> gets knocked from holster, etc.).
>
> I tried a holster for a while, but either the phone gets knocked out
> while entering/exiting a car, or else it stabs me in the ribs during
> that maneuver. My current phone is small enough to fit in a pants
> pocket,
Yep, I'm not a big fan of holsters myself. So last year when I bought my
Sanyo 8200 I went with a perfect-fitting pouch-style belt-case. When its
swivel-clip broke I could no longer find that case in stock. So I ended
up with a holster for the last month or two. Before the holster, not a
single scratch. Two-weeks into the holster, scratches galore.
I thought about keeping it a pants pocket. But between keys, Leatherman,
coins, etc., etc., there was just no room.
> but that wouldn't work for a Treo 650. Sometimes I envy
> my wife's purse (no snide remarks, please).
From me? Never! I mean, if you want to carry a man-bag I'm OK with it.
Heck, go all out and get a murse.
Seriously though, the full-to-the-brim front pockets, belt-clipped Treo,
and wallet in the back pocket is really a PITA (pun intended). Still, I
just won't do the "man-bag" thing and the ever-popular backpack is a bit
of an overkill (even though I do travel by motorcycle 90% of the time).
--
Mike | Last words of Thomas Grasso, executed in 1995:
| "I did not get my Spaghetti-O's, I got spaghetti.
| I want the press to know this."
- 10-20-2005, 04:23 PM #29Steve HendersonGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
O/Siris wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>I am NOT wrong. It was never mentioned in my contract, which is the
>>legally binding document that the Sprint representative and I signed.
>>
>
>
> That document covers the service for which you signed up for two years.
> Not add-ons that had nothing to do with the 2-year agreement.
You are wrong again! The contract I signed, specifically mentioned the
add-ons such as text messaging charges, insurance/extended warranty
charges, etc. Once again, that is what contracts are for. Maybe my
contract is different from the one you signed.
Steve Henderson
- 10-20-2005, 04:59 PM #30Steve HendersonGuest
Re: Sprint committing outright FRAUD
O/Siris wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
>
>>If it had been a business decision to give it back, they would have done
>>that back in July when I made my many calls to them.
>>
>
>
> No. A floor rep doesn't have the authority to credit back that
> deductible.
That may be true, however I also talked to managers at Sprint and
Lockline and they DO have (or should have) the capability to return my
money when they are wrong or when just want to keep a customer satisfied
or avoid a fight.
>
> No one has a crystal ball into what happened that day in the store. But
> I know how many different places that deductible is cited, and I know
> that, truly, there is NOTHING that promises a customer a free phone via
> ERP.
That deductible may be mentioned in many places, however if it isn't in
the contract, or referenced in another document in the contract, then it
is NOT legally binding, as the Attorney General of New York's office
agreed with me. Do you know more than they do? Are you an attorney, a
Sprint representative or just somebody shooting off their mouth without
knowing the laws? If you are an attorney and you are making these
ignorant statements, you need to go back and study your contractual law.
If you are a Sprint representative, you need to spend more time
keeping your customers happy rather than arguing with them and forcing
them to leave in droves to your competitors. If you are just shooting
off your mouth, please save your weak arguments because they hold no
merit. Check your contract. Mine mentions only the monthly fee, NOT a
deductible. Does yours mention a deductible?
>
> It wasn't worth the $50 to have a fight through the attorney-general.
> But, to be quite blunt about it, I don't believe that things happened in
> the manner you claim.
>
So if "it isn't worth the $50 to have a fight through the attorney
general", then all of the people here that have fraud complaints should
do exactly as I did, since that seems to be the only way they settle
with their unsatisfied customers. I made it very clear to the Sprint
reps and managers what my plans were in advance. I told them the
following: 1) I was going to make my appeal to Sprint and Lockline Reps
and managers, seeking a peaceful resolution of the problem. 2) I was
going to contest the charge on my credit card. (I lost that contest
because Lockline told them that I agreed to the $50 charge before they
would send me the phone. This was the Catch 22 situation I mentioned in
my first post.) 3) I was going to charge them with fraud with the New
York Attorney General. 4) I was going to take them to small claims
court and sue them. They knew from the beginning that there was going
to be a fight, so if they wanted to avoid one, they would have returned
my money in the first place. It wasn't the $50 they were concerned
with, it was the fraud charge.
I won, they lost, end of story!
Steve Henderson
Similar Threads
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
- Sprint PCS
- alt.cellular.sprintpcs
Aws gpu
in Chit Chat