DirecTV Charges Wildfire Victims For Incinerated Satellite TV Receivers

[bryan_j_t]

Given the things I have been reading lately, this doesn't surprise me at all!!

Fire: DirecTV Charges Wildfire Victims For Incinerated Satellite TV Receivers

 

[DodgerKing]

Given the things I have been reading lately, this doesn't surprise me at all!!

Fire: DirecTV Charges Wildfire Victims For Incinerated Satellite TV Receivers

:rant:

 

[cfb]

His insurance should have covered it, and directv ended up not charging the guy IIRC.

If his car in the garage burned up, would it have been shocking that Toyota Credit would have wanted him to keep making the payments on it? Same thing, his insurance would have paid it.

 

[bryan_j_t]

When I read the story, I think more of the hassle this guy had to go through going back and forth with DirecTv and can relate through personal experience as well as what I have read of other's experiences....not just the final outcome

 

[jtwex]

No doubt some of the CSR screw-ups on new 2-yr extensions when none were in order are bad & some of the install stories on here are pure hell but this guy/gal needs homeowners/renters insurance; without it he should have to pay for a new receiver. Sounds cruel, but they all fall under natural disasters one way or another.

 

[Ken S]

DirecTV needs a policy that is communicated to their CSRs for situations like this. Perhaps giving the person additional time to pay for the receivers (while waiting for insurance claims to be paid) and ending any commitment would be in order. Maybe they don't need to charge full replacement as well.

There are ways that companies can help their customers out...if they want to implement them.

 

[stonecold]

I dont know what going one we have procedures to take care of customers who are victims of natural diasters

 

[Ken S]

I dont know what going one we have procedures to take care of customers who are victims of natural diasters

Stonecold,

A common problem in many large customer service groups...the procedures aren't being communicated effectively. Sometimes you get someone in a call center who just decides the policies aren't correct and they make their own.

 

[stonecold]

Well we have a whole big policy web based system. that easily searched.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

DirecTV actually did the right thing here and gave the guy his money back.

Honestly I believe that the receivers should have been covered under his homeowners policy like everything else in his house, but again DirecTV went above and beyond here to correct the error in favor of the customer.

 

[sddtvtech]

ive had a NEW INSTALL work order and when i got there.. they had just said they had a fire that was caused by the state's electric company where the wires had started the trees on fire.


lost the home and everything.. directv told them they would get a re-install for free with new reicievers with no charge.

made that customer happy.

 

[paulman182]

A lot of us have no homeowners insurance.

They want to charge me so much, I couldn't afford satellite TV if I got insurance.

 

[Ronnie-]

A lot of us have no homeowners insurance.

They want to charge me so much, I couldn't afford satellite TV if I got insurance.

Personally, I would have homeowners insurance before I got sat service if that was the choice I had to make (either or). That is just me though, and not trying to second guess your decision.

 

[cfb]

So you must not have a mortgage then, since homeowners insurance is required for that?

Everyone (renters and people with paid off mortgages anyhow) have the right to take on the risk of being uninsured. But that doesnt mean everyone else with property at your home intends to take the same risk.

The bad publicity from this just isnt worth a couple of hundred bucks. While I'm sure there are well defined policies and well documented web site documents for directv to follow, the corporate world is full of people that dont follow the rules. Plus I'm sure theres a subjective component that the people applying the policy use that gives them leeway. Otherwise everyone would call in and say "whoops, my receivers just burned up in a fire...let me out of my contract, ok?".

 

[Big Dawg 23]

I work in a business where we have equipment under our monthly rate. Given what our equipment costs vs compared to Directv, I do understand the customer getting charged. We have lost a lot of equipment in fires and hurricanes. Most of the time the customer refuses to issue an insurance claim. Last year we got stuck with a $15,000 bill following the Houston Hurricane.

It is sad you had a fire, but the loss of someone else property has to be covered. Is it fair for directv to eat all the receivers lost in a fire? In my opinion no. Last December there was an apartment fire locally in which 100 residents lost there home. Just image if it was a mandated directv install for all the residents. Look at the loss of equipment. Guess who pays for that?? All the current subscribers.

In the end have homeowners and let that be your means of getting your money back.

 

[DetFan]

His insurance should have covered it, and directv ended up not charging the guy IIRC.

If his car in the garage burned up, would it have been shocking that Toyota Credit would have wanted him to keep making the payments on it? Same thing, his insurance would have paid it.

You are comparing a stupid TV receiver to a car? WOW!!

 

[cfb]

Yep, WOW. Is what you're saying that it would be okay to take something that costs $250 from someone else, but not if it was $5000?

It something of value that belongs to someone else thats in your house. Its covered by your insurance. File a claim.

But I do understand that there are plenty of people who suffer misfortune or take on risk, then expect everyone else involved to agreeably share in their misfortune or the results of their risk taking. I dont agree with it, but I understand that it happens.

 

[jtwex]

But I do understand that there are plenty of people who suffer misfortune or take on risk, then expect everyone else involved to agreeably share in their misfortune or the results of their risk taking. I dont agree with it, but I understand that it happens.

It's the new American way; the fact that people think this way is incredible. If the write offs showed up proportionally on each of our bills imagine the uproar. It's straight from the words of Kramer on Seinfeld, "it's a write off, Jerry!"

 

[cfb]

It does show up on our bills. When people dont pay, they just charge the rest of us a little extra or the rest of us get a little less service, support or product.

 

[jtwex]

It does show up on our bills. When people dont pay, they just charge the rest of us a little extra or the rest of us get a little less service, support or product.

I understand that, but it would be interesting if the debit column specifically referenced 'no home owners insurance Joe' or 'wildfire victim unwilling to make a claim' as the reasoning for the small increase that month. I wonder how many of these "DTV is despicable" threads would pop up then.