Can't only criticize D* on this. So much for DISH customer service improving.
The Eternal Satellite Bill
The Eternal Satellite Bill
Looks like DISH has the same policy as D*
- Thread starter Curtis0620
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 20
- Views 3K
- Status
You know what I love most about your post? The fact its been here nearly an hour and 1000 "DirecTV Fan Boys" haven't descended like rabid jackals to gloat and flame or stir the pot.
Great job guys!
We ALL know the truth that these sort of things / policies happen from time to time with EVERY company and that they aren't REAL news. Just bad-mouthing and finger pointing to stroke egos.
Great job guys!
We ALL know the truth that these sort of things / policies happen from time to time with EVERY company and that they aren't REAL news. Just bad-mouthing and finger pointing to stroke egos.
Sometime but more often than not its the other way around; or at least more one-sided. I could care less either way because reality points to the fact that nearly all companies get caught up in something like this or very similar at least a few times.
its surprising how ingrateful people in CEO that approve of fine prints and not follow them.
bastards. at least the problem is fixed and solved.
i wonder why customers have to deal with such situation before it goes public and THEN do something about it and withdraw charges.
seems how cold D* and E* are when we have to work holidays and stories that come popped up like this one in OP can show you what kind of workplace u really work in. no one has a heart espeically CEOs.
bastards. at least the problem is fixed and solved.
i wonder why customers have to deal with such situation before it goes public and THEN do something about it and withdraw charges.
seems how cold D* and E* are when we have to work holidays and stories that come popped up like this one in OP can show you what kind of workplace u really work in. no one has a heart espeically CEOs.
Do I need to point to the similar thread here that had quite a response by DISH fan boys?
Can we expect a "What the Hell is wrong with DISH" article? A nice sequel to the "What the Hell is wrong with Directv" one.
I'm not a lawyer, and I didnt even stay at a Holiday Inn last night.
However I'm pretty familiar with contract law. Generally any unsecured debt/contractual arrangements expire upon the death of the person who signed the contract. If there is a legitimate claim for payment for products or services rendered, the claimant can add their amounts owed to the probate process and if the claim is found to be reasonable and there is sufficient funding in the estate, that claim will be paid.
In the case where the charges are for services that have not been rendered, and/or for equipment that is not owned by the deceased but is a leased product that was to be returned at the end of the service period, its likely that directv, dish or anyone else being silly enough to pursue probate over a few hundred bucks and risking bad publicity...would get their boxes back and a hearty pat on the back.
All that having been said, you're going to see more and more of these sorts of cases, since so many service providers have long contractual requirements and theres always someone that works for the company who didnt read the manual or follow the right process.
And more and more threads showing the stupidity and heartlessness of the companies. Its just simple incompetence folks. But since no system is idiot proof (and should one be created, the universe will automatically produce a better idiot) these companies should be aware that their contractual policies will lead inevitably to bad press that will cost them far more than the penny ante monies they extract from customers who want to cancel early.
The 'stick' is often used equally well on both parties in a transaction that specifies the use of a stick.
However I'm pretty familiar with contract law. Generally any unsecured debt/contractual arrangements expire upon the death of the person who signed the contract. If there is a legitimate claim for payment for products or services rendered, the claimant can add their amounts owed to the probate process and if the claim is found to be reasonable and there is sufficient funding in the estate, that claim will be paid.
In the case where the charges are for services that have not been rendered, and/or for equipment that is not owned by the deceased but is a leased product that was to be returned at the end of the service period, its likely that directv, dish or anyone else being silly enough to pursue probate over a few hundred bucks and risking bad publicity...would get their boxes back and a hearty pat on the back.
All that having been said, you're going to see more and more of these sorts of cases, since so many service providers have long contractual requirements and theres always someone that works for the company who didnt read the manual or follow the right process.
And more and more threads showing the stupidity and heartlessness of the companies. Its just simple incompetence folks. But since no system is idiot proof (and should one be created, the universe will automatically produce a better idiot) these companies should be aware that their contractual policies will lead inevitably to bad press that will cost them far more than the penny ante monies they extract from customers who want to cancel early.
The 'stick' is often used equally well on both parties in a transaction that specifies the use of a stick.
If anyone had bothered to read the article, you would have found out that the contract was not in the deceased's name. The person who was on the contract wanted out only because the system was no longer needed.
No Comment .... Other then I be more then willing to see where it been ( has it been 6 to 8 weeks yet?)
Here is the gist of the issue.
This is just a straight-forward early termination of a contract. Special circumstance - yes but not really worthy of all this press. Especially since E* made it right and with an apology.
:up:up
it's the same BS for both areas. i would know. i find it stuipid and childish. glad this thread didn't go down the same path.
To be honest I think it would of been the same with Directv. I wish I could say with certainty no but i cant.
Voyager got this right. It was not in the deceased named but it was a clearly a simple termination under special circumstances.
Voyager got this right. It was not in the deceased named but it was a clearly a simple termination under special circumstances.
- Status
Similar threads
