Bank account accessed without permission

**r10fret** · 11-14-2009 01:24 AM

Why dont people just downgrade to one receiver with locals only or DIRECTV BASIC for $9.99 a month and finish out there contract period by the month even if they dont use the service and unplug the receiver, wouldn't it be cheaper?

**wildbill129** · 11-14-2009 01:33 AM

Originally Posted by r10fret

Why dont people just downgrade to one receiver with locals only or DIRECTV BASIC for $9.99 a month and finish out there contract period by the month even if they dont use the service and unplug the receiver, wouldn't it be cheaper?

If that is all it costs.....you bet! Good idea...

**raoul5788** · 11-14-2009 08:31 AM

Originally Posted by r10fret

Why dont people just downgrade to one receiver with locals only or DIRECTV BASIC for $9.99 a month and finish out there contract period by the month even if they dont use the service and unplug the receiver, wouldn't it be cheaper?

I am not aware of any service for $9.99/month that Directv offers. Can you provide a link to it?

**boba** · 11-14-2009 09:05 AM

Family at $29.99 I believe is the lowest qualifying package. That is still $9.99 more than ETF but it would be paid monthly not as a lump sum.

**Scott Greczkowski** · 11-14-2009 09:07 AM

Contact the back and get the charges reversed.

This is something that DirecTV says that they don't do, yet we see stories like this again and again.

Trust me I know as it happened to me.

**lern4483** · 11-14-2009 09:23 AM

Originally Posted by r10fret

Why dont people just downgrade to one receiver with locals only or DIRECTV BASIC for $9.99 a month and finish out there contract period by the month even if they dont use the service and unplug the receiver, wouldn't it be cheaper?

Thats smart!

**susanandmark** · 11-14-2009 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by meStevo

They charge termination fees so people don't suddenly 'move' every x months and get out of service contracts.

No, they charge termination fees to make money. Period.

As someone else stated with receiver return "fees," DirecTV has become notorious for charging onerous fees for no good reason, usually with no notice and often incorrectly. Sure, you may be able to get them reversed (or not) but why should you have to? They're certainly hoping you don't bother and they get to keep your cash. (The OP can try and reverse the charge with the bank, but DirecTV will fight it, and also likely send her to collections, resulting in a big credit rating hit ... Not usually something you want when moving.)

I was charged for a "non-returned receiver" when I upgraded my last SD receiver to HD in 2007. The replaced unit was a standard, $49 receiver I'd had since 2000, at least. No agent at DirecTV EVER asked for this receiver back and no mention was ever made of it ... Until a $300 or $400 charge should up on my (auto-pay) monthly bill. When I called about a charge that was 5 times my regular total I was told it was for not returning a box within 60 or 90 days (can't remember which). I said no one ever asked. They claimed to have "sent a box" ... But could provide no tracking or delivery information. (Because, of course, I'm positive nothing was ever sent.) I told them I'd already given the box (sans access card, by the way) to Goodwill, because I didn't want or need it anyway and would have been happy to give it back, even though it was a fully owned receiver, which even DirecTV acknowledged. Their story of why I had to return it was "copyright," because apparently their technology is top-secret, making it "illegal" (I remember that word being used) for me to donate it. Really? I can donate a top-of-the-line, brand new computer or any other electronic device, but a seven-year-old DirecTV box is more sacred and top secret than anything else and some guy at Goodwill is going to ruin their company with it?

They did issue a credit to my account, but not my credit card, which I pay in full every month. So, I still ended up paying DirecTV, up front, for a charge that never should have been made. I might very well have left this company then, if I had been under a new two-year "contract" for replacing that box. (Something I acknowledged I did.) A "two-year" contract that somehow just keeps growing and growing. I'm gonna' guess that when I call back in 2010 to cancel, I'll again, somehow, be under contract, at least in DirecTV's eyes. (This time, though, I have it in writing from them when it ends and I will fight tooth and nail if I have to.)

Look, right now I'm lucky enough to be at a place in life where it's hardly the end of the world for me to stay with, and pay for, DirecTV for another year, which I've determined is cheaper than trying to fight with them (especially when they refuse to even speak to me, so I'd have to hire a lawyer which is ridiculously big bucks, something I'm sure they know). And I can afford to pay an extra $500 one month if I have to. But I also remember, very clearly, what it was like when I couldn't swing an extra $10 expense, let alone have $400 I was depending on go suddenly missing.

If I move, I don't have to pay a "termination fee" to my electric company. Or my phone company. No matter if I lived there for two months or 20 years. The same goes for cable, which should be apples to apples with DBS. If I move, or even just want to switch to satellite, a "right" DirecTV itself defends to the death, I can do that. But I can't switch the other way? Totally unfair.

Oh and, there's plenty of research/mock-ups that show an iPhone costs a lot more to produce than a DirecTV DVR with technology many years older and easier to buy. Yet, when I pay $199 (or $99 or even $49 for a one-year-old model) for my iPhone, I own it. Forever. Yes, I have a contract too, but the hardware I bought up front is mine, regardless. DirecTV would want not ONLY an early termination fee, but return of all years-older hardware (all bought an fully paid for) OR charge fees for each box as well. Utterly ludicrous and nothing but greed.

It's also worth noting that I've never had a single issue with ANY cell phone provider showing me a bogus contractual obligation. The ONLY thing that extends your contract is adding/buying a new phone, which they do, clearly and provably, subsidize the cost of. (And, even then, T-Mobile is having great success with it's bring a phone plan that has no contract and offers unlimited voice and data for any phone that will work on their network. In fact, ALL cell phone providers offer contract-free plans ... Unlike DirecTV.)

Oh and, by the way, I don't think I should be treated "special" as a 10-year costumer. I just think it's crazy than someone who has been with them for LONGER than a decade could still be under an unbreakable contract, for any reason. They've long ago more than made back any loss (which I doubt exists, especially since I paid for ALL my own equipment, including dishes and installs) they sustained acquiring me as a customer ... Ostensibly the reason such contracts exist in the first place.

**harshness** · 11-14-2009 09:42 AM

Two points:

1. The commitment is clear. That she didn't work out the payment terms prior to cancellation should not be hung on DIRECTV.

2. DIRECTV is sometimes more understanding about these things if you at least attempt to have the service installed at the new location and the install fails. They don't accept your word that you can't get the service as a reason for breaking the commitment. Obviously, if you just want out, they're going to play the commitment card.

**harshness** · 11-14-2009 09:54 AM

Originally Posted by susanandmark

If I move, I don't have to pay a "termination fee" to my electric company. Or my phone company. No matter if I lived there for two months or 20 years.

In all cases, if you are operating under some sort of commitment with your utilities, they will come after you for an ETF. I'm personally in a situation where I have to pay $26/month to a cooperative water provider as part of a capital improvement project that "we" engaged in. I get all of my water from a well on my property. My power company has programs that come with commitments.

The terms are pretty hard to ignore in most cases and if you don't completely establish alternative arrangements in advance of canceling, you should expect that they will go with the default terms of a lump sum payment.

**susanandmark** · 11-14-2009 11:36 AM

Originally Posted by harshness

In all cases, if you are operating under some sort of commitment with your utilities, they will come after you for an ETF.

Legally, if you move, they can not do that, unless it is within their territory. When we built a new house outside AT&T territory, there was never even a question that we owed them anything for DSL service, though we technically had a one-year obligation for our rate, because they didn't offer service where we were moving to.

We're a member of an electric co-op and there is no commitment. Also, if we don't use water, we don't pay for water. (Some people here, too, have wells.) At our old residence we had to pay for capital improvements in our water service too (though not a co-op), but when we moved, that bill stopped and the new homeowners, who weren't there when it went into effect, didn't have to pay that small, monthly surcharge (about $5, I think). My grandmother lived in a house built in the early 1940s until she died more than 60 years later and, when her well went bad, the city did force her to get city water (wouldn't allow her a permit to drill a new well) ... and she had to pay for the piping to her home at her own expense. But she didn't enter into an unbreakable contract by doing so, and didn't pay for water until she was using it. Yes, some cities do divide that capital improvement cost amongst all taxpayers, but that's also usually done via vote, so you have the opportunity to make your voice heard.

I've never, personally, had a commitment for ANY basic utility and I've lived in six states in my adult life, in both large cities and in rural areas, so you can hardly claim your experience is what is true in "all cases." Some do OFFER services, like setting your rate, for a certain time period, but that's a choice, not an obligation. (As in, you can choose NOT to do it too.)

DirecTV offers the consumer NO choice and REQUIRES an onerous two-year obligation that is not significantly (or at all) offset by reduced programming or equipment cost. Yes, there is a cost to acquire new customers--a cost documented in the $200 range by DirecTV to shareholders--but they continue to impose this obligation on ALL customers, no matter how long they have been with the service and long, LONG after DirecTV has recouped their costs.