Since there's not much traffic here, I expect not much info, but I'll
feel better, i think.
I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder. When I
tried to figure out what was going on with billing, they wouldn't talk
to me as I wasn't the account holder. It seems when the Verizon store
gave me a new phone to replace the one that died, they must have added
3 new services w/o the account holder's permission. Services I neither
asked for nor was informed of when I picked up the new phone (nice
phone too). For about 11 months, when my wife noticed the charges,
they've been billing an add'l $15 a month. She has auto pay and rarely
looks at the bill, her ass't opens the mail. We got a supervisor on
the line who was willing to refund 3 months of charges, but insisted
the charges as far as she could tell, were legit. I can only assume
the charges were added when got the new phone and signed the form.
I'm not authorized to change the account so whether i signed or not it
shouldn't matter. They agree with this assumption, but suggest someone
authorized the changes. I called the store and a young woman
inexperienced enough to realize she wasn't supposed to be as helpful
and forthcoming said they had a copy of the contract and i could pick
it up at the store. I asked her if the store could handle it from
there and she said she'd speak to her supervisor and call me back. Not
yet. Is this type of thing common? Considering what I've read about
customer satisfaction and phone Co.'s I expect it is. Your experience?
Before this, I've had no issues with cell phone co.'s.
On 2007-08-20, julianstan@gmail.com <julianstan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since there's not much traffic here, I expect not much info, but I'll
> feel better, i think.
>
> I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder.
Either you need her to call and get the problem ironed out, or you need
her to call and add you as an authorized person on the account so VZW will
talk to you.
> phone too). For about 11 months, when my wife noticed the charges,
> they've been billing an add'l $15 a month. She has auto pay and rarely
> looks at the bill, her ass't opens the mail.
Unfortunately, if you haven't even looked at the bill and they've
continued to bill you, the most you will probably be able to do is get a
credit for a few months and get it taken off the bill. It's your responsibility
to check your bill. Unfortunately, stupidity does happen quite often with
cell bills, so we check ours every month.
>We got a supervisor on
> the line who was willing to refund 3 months of charges, but insisted
> the charges as far as she could tell, were legit. I can only assume
> the charges were added when got the new phone and signed the form.
Well, if the argument is "the charges are legit," my question would be
"ok, where's the documentation?" And if they can't produce it, then I might
push for a refund of *all* charges.
> I'm not authorized to change the account so whether i signed or not it
> shouldn't matter. They agree with this assumption, but suggest someone
> authorized the changes.
OK, so they can document it then?
And hey... you and your wife need to read your bill. Yes, cellcos do make
mistakes, and yes, there are less-than-honest people working for any big
company from time to time (not to imply that they're ALL slimebags, but
any company the size of a cellco is bound to have some bad apples).
--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED
"Drench yourself in words unspoken / Live your life with arms wide open
Today is where your book begins / The rest is still unwritten"
- Natasha Beddingfield
On Aug 20, 6:57 pm, Steve Sobol <sjso...@JustThe.net> wrote:
> On 2007-08-20, julians...@gmail.com <julians...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Since there's not much traffic here, I expect not much info, but I'll
> > feel better, i think.
>
> > I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder.
>
> Either you need her to call and get the problem ironed out, or you need
> her to call and add you as an authorized person on the account so VZW will
> talk to you.
We did that today and I called and she was available as well.
>
> > phone too). For about 11 months, when my wife noticed the charges,
> > they've been billing an add'l $15 a month. She has auto pay and rarely
> > looks at the bill, her ass't opens the mail.
>
> Unfortunately, if you haven't even looked at the bill and they've
> continued to bill you, the most you will probably be able to do is get a
> credit for a few months and get it taken off the bill. It's your responsibility
> to check your bill. Unfortunately, stupidity does happen quite often with
> cell bills, so we check ours every month.
I read my bills, she has an ass't look at hers (she's busier than I).
>
> >We got a supervisor on
> > the line who was willing to refund 3 months of charges, but insisted
> > the charges as far as she could tell, were legit. I can only assume
> > the charges were added when got the new phone and signed the form.
>
> Well, if the argument is "the charges are legit," my question would be
> "ok, where's the documentation?" And if they can't produce it, then I might
> push for a refund of *all* charges.
I asked that question over & over to no avail.
>
> > I'm not authorized to change the account so whether i signed or not it
> > shouldn't matter. They agree with this assumption, but suggest someone
> > authorized the changes.
>
> OK, so they can document it then?
See last answer. I was able to secure a mail address to complain to as
she was the capo de capo with no one above her ( I guess the CEO
reports to her...)
>
> And hey... you and your wife need to read your bill. Yes, cellcos do make
> mistakes, and yes, there are less-than-honest people working for any big
> company from time to time (not to imply that they're ALL slimebags, but
> any company the size of a cellco is bound to have some bad apples).
Methinks the local store did this, that's why I'm taking it to them.
Thanks for your interest and advice. I've been home recovering from
shoulder surgery that's why I have more time to deal with this crap.
Unfortunately, due to the injury/repair, I'm unable to drive for a
while longer. Cheers
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Victorville, California PGP:0xE3AE35ED
> "Drench yourself in words unspoken / Live your life with arms wide open
> Today is where your book begins / The rest is still unwritten"
> - Natasha Beddingfield
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/cons...cts/pro18.shtm
File a complaint with the FTC from this webpage article. Call them, they
don't bite, or, at least, didn't bite me...(c; They are very interested
in cellular phone cramming just like POTS cramming on landlines. And,
they have the Federal Law to do something about it, making the bastards
at Verizon a lot more user friendly during the trial...(c;
Congratulations sir, you have an idiot for a wife. Using auto pay and not
checking your bill is complete idiocy. Also, you are asking for trouble if
you use automatic Bill payment. By doing so you are giving people an
opportunity to take your money in perpetuity and for anything they would
like to add to your billing.
<julianstan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187650043.626606.302350@r23g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
> Since there's not much traffic here, I expect not much info, but I'll
> feel better, i think.
>
> I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder. When I
> tried to figure out what was going on with billing, they wouldn't talk
> to me as I wasn't the account holder. It seems when the Verizon store
> gave me a new phone to replace the one that died, they must have added
> 3 new services w/o the account holder's permission. Services I neither
> asked for nor was informed of when I picked up the new phone (nice
> phone too). For about 11 months, when my wife noticed the charges,
> they've been billing an add'l $15 a month. She has auto pay and rarely
> looks at the bill, her ass't opens the mail. We got a supervisor on
> the line who was willing to refund 3 months of charges, but insisted
> the charges as far as she could tell, were legit. I can only assume
> the charges were added when got the new phone and signed the form.
> I'm not authorized to change the account so whether i signed or not it
> shouldn't matter. They agree with this assumption, but suggest someone
> authorized the changes. I called the store and a young woman
> inexperienced enough to realize she wasn't supposed to be as helpful
> and forthcoming said they had a copy of the contract and i could pick
> it up at the store. I asked her if the store could handle it from
> there and she said she'd speak to her supervisor and call me back. Not
> yet. Is this type of thing common? Considering what I've read about
> customer satisfaction and phone Co.'s I expect it is. Your experience?
> Before this, I've had no issues with cell phone co.'s.
>
Don't you think it incumbent on the OP to share/find out a few more
details about what the charges actually were (instead of a vague '3
services' reference) before making allegations of cramming? Oh, wait,
it's Larry. Of course you don't.
<julianstan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187650043.626606.302350@r23g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
> It seems when the Verizon store
> gave me a new phone to replace the one that died, they must have added
> 3 new services w/o the account holder's permission. Services I neither
> asked for nor was informed of when I picked up the new phone (nice
> phone too).
Doesn't surprise me. I went in last month to simply swap out a dead phone
for a new one. When I got home I noticed they snuck in an additional
$4.99/mo text messaging 500 plan on the sales receipt. I never use text
messaging.
The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
news:5alkc31k3vmvj64h50190gj9isn5afpe88@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:57:12 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>>julianstan@gmail.com wrote in news:1187650043.626606.302350
>>@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>>
>>> Is this type of thing common?
>>
>>Yes, it's called "Cramming" and is against Federal Law.
>>
>>http://www.mcgb.com/CM/Articles/Articles52.asp
>>http://www.fraud.org/tips/telemarketing/cramming.htm
>>http://www.phone-cramming.com/
>
> Don't you think it incumbent on the OP to share/find out a few more
> details about what the charges actually were (instead of a vague '3
> services' reference) before making allegations of cramming? Oh, wait,
> it's Larry. Of course you don't.
>
>>All the more reason to make SKYPE your home phone.....(c;
>>http://www.skype.com/
>>http://www.mobivox.com/ (Skype and cheap LD for your cell)
>
> Oh yes, Skype is *so* wonderful. I hear this past weekend was a
> rather interesting one for most Skype users. How was your service
> this weekend, Larry?
>
> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13...nferencing/art
> icle.html
>
> Just more evidence that Skype is a toy service, not ready for prime
> time. BTW, just how does falling for the Skype hype help the OP in
> this matter?
>
> Note to OP: Be wary of "advice" from Larry. He our resident
> conspiracy whore.
>
>
Are you in telecom and threatened by Skype in some way? That's the only
reason I can think of why you are so acid whenever it is mentioned.
Skype works great, here. Yes, they had ONE outage in the last year. So
what? How many has any cell carrier had?
What company do you work for, if at all? Got telecom stock or some other
threatened reason for the negativity?
On Aug 21, 10:10 am, "Paul" <pa...@nospam-mindspring.com> wrote:
> <julians...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1187650043.626606.302350@r23g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > It seems when the Verizon store
> > gave me a new phone to replace the one that died, they must have added
> > 3 new services w/o the account holder's permission. Services I neither
> > asked for nor was informed of when I picked up the new phone (nice
> > phone too).
>
> Doesn't surprise me. I went in last month to simply swap out a dead phone
> for a new one. When I got home I noticed they snuck in an additional
> $4.99/mo text messaging 500 plan on the sales receipt. I never use text
> messaging.
>
> -- Paul
The 3 added services were
1. WPP Insurance-Lock\line?
2. Mobile Web 2.0 Mp
3. 250 messages Camera
I use none of these I think.
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 14:15:36 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>> Just more evidence that Skype is a toy service, not ready for prime
>> time. BTW, just how does falling for the Skype hype help the OP in
>> this matter?
>>
>> Note to OP: Be wary of "advice" from Larry. He our resident
>> conspiracy whore.
>>
>>
>
>Are you in telecom and threatened by Skype in some way? That's the only
>reason I can think of why you are so acid whenever it is mentioned.
>
>Skype works great, here. Yes, they had ONE outage in the last year. So
>what? How many has any cell carrier had?
>
>What company do you work for, if at all? Got telecom stock or some other
>threatened reason for the negativity?
>
>Who poured vinegar over your cereal??
Answer my question, Larry. How does your pimping of Skype in any way
solve the OP's problem?
Larry wrote:
> The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
> news:5alkc31k3vmvj64h50190gj9isn5afpe88@4ax.com:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Aug 2007 01:57:12 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> julianstan@gmail.com wrote in news:1187650043.626606.302350
>>> @r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>> Is this type of thing common?
>>> Yes, it's called "Cramming" and is against Federal Law.
>>>
>>> http://www.mcgb.com/CM/Articles/Articles52.asp
>>> http://www.fraud.org/tips/telemarketing/cramming.htm
>>> http://www.phone-cramming.com/
>> Don't you think it incumbent on the OP to share/find out a few more
>> details about what the charges actually were (instead of a vague '3
>> services' reference) before making allegations of cramming? Oh, wait,
>> it's Larry. Of course you don't.
>>
>>> All the more reason to make SKYPE your home phone.....(c;
>>> http://www.skype.com/
>>> http://www.mobivox.com/ (Skype and cheap LD for your cell)
>> Oh yes, Skype is *so* wonderful. I hear this past weekend was a
>> rather interesting one for most Skype users. How was your service
>> this weekend, Larry?
>>
>> http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,13...nferencing/art
>> icle.html
>>
>> Just more evidence that Skype is a toy service, not ready for prime
>> time. BTW, just how does falling for the Skype hype help the OP in
>> this matter?
>>
>> Note to OP: Be wary of "advice" from Larry. He our resident
>> conspiracy whore.
>>
>>
>
> Are you in telecom and threatened by Skype in some way? That's the only
> reason I can think of why you are so acid whenever it is mentioned.
>
> Skype works great, here. Yes, they had ONE outage in the last year. So
> what? How many has any cell carrier had?
Its a toy service. Enterprise class services just don't go down for more
than two days. Do you actually believe their official announcement that
it didn't work for more than two days because people rebooted their
computers?
I can't ever remember a VZW outage. I also can't remember the last time
the landline went down.
>
> What company do you work for, if at all? Got telecom stock or some other
> threatened reason for the negativity?
>
> Who poured vinegar over your cereal??
>
>
>
> Larry
The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
news:h9vlc39si7sp2ihpa2pekqs1respbsobdi@4ax.com:
> Answer my question, Larry. How does your pimping of Skype in any way
> solve the OP's problem?
>
>
I answered his question, first, with many webpage references to cramming as
examples of what has happened to her, with references on how to prevent it.
My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:46 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
So's a cheeseburger, but you can't make calls on it. Skype is useless
unless you constantly stay within range of a WiFi network. That's not
what cellular is about. You can wet dream all you want, but Skype and
its bastard siblings won't be a threat to or replacement for cellular
in your lifetime.
<julianstan@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187650043.626606.302350@r23g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
> I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder. When I
> tried to figure out what was going on with billing, they wouldn't talk
> to me as I wasn't the account holder.
You are a girlie man, soft and weak, you make me want to puke.
On Aug 22, 3:43 pm, "Topo Gigio" <thistoosh...@pass.com> wrote:
> <julians...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1187650043.626606.302350@r23g2000prd.googlegr oups.com...
>
> > I'm an add'l user on my wifes plan and not the account holder. When I
> > tried to figure out what was going on with billing, they wouldn't talk
> > to me as I wasn't the account holder.
>
> You are a girlie man, soft and weak, you make me want to puke.
Perhaps, but you are a pusillaimous l'il mouse with a nauseating
clingy cloying voice who finds Ed Sullivan (even to this day),
irresistable......
The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
news:3a9nc3ttb9ok8ftjh8gjhbibagdlhagl38@4ax.com:
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:46 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>
>>My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
>
> So's a cheeseburger, but you can't make calls on it. Skype is useless
> unless you constantly stay within range of a WiFi network. That's not
> what cellular is about. You can wet dream all you want, but Skype and
> its bastard siblings won't be a threat to or replacement for cellular
> in your lifetime.
>
>
Who said anything about roaming or replacing cellular with Skype??
Chill pill, Gen! Put that bottle back in the cupboard for a while.
Skype IS a great replacement for landline or cable telephones AT HOME,
where I use mine. Out on the road, I use Alltel to call Skypers through
Mobivox's Charlotte access number. Skypers also call me, mobile, on
Alltel as I have Skype In and Skype set to forward to my cell if I'm not
online Skype.
BTW, I called a Japanese ham friend in Osaka, Japan's home phone on my
cellphone through the Mobivox portal for 1.9c/min off my Mobivox account
just to see how well that worked. I call Charlotte and give the
computer:
CALL +(country code - number) in voice. Dialed Japan right up real
cheap. No Skype involved, so keep your panties on. Mobivox has its own
international LD portal even cheaper than Skype's...(c;
......because paying cellular for overseas LD is just STUPID!
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 00:32:12 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
>news:3a9nc3ttb9ok8ftjh8gjhbibagdlhagl38@4ax.com :
>
>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:46 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>>My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
>>
>> So's a cheeseburger, but you can't make calls on it. Skype is useless
>> unless you constantly stay within range of a WiFi network. That's not
>> what cellular is about. You can wet dream all you want, but Skype and
>> its bastard siblings won't be a threat to or replacement for cellular
>> in your lifetime.
>>
>>
>
>Who said anything about roaming or replacing cellular with Skype??
This goes back to your ongoing propensity to bring it up as though it
is some sort of replacement, or to bring it up when it's completely
irrelevant to the issue at hand (as you did in this case).
>Chill pill, Gen! Put that bottle back in the cupboard for a while.
Nice try, Larry. I don't drink. But considering some of your rants,
I'm beginning to wonder about you.
Larry wrote:
> The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
> news:3a9nc3ttb9ok8ftjh8gjhbibagdlhagl38@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:46 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
>> So's a cheeseburger, but you can't make calls on it. Skype is useless
>> unless you constantly stay within range of a WiFi network. That's not
>> what cellular is about. You can wet dream all you want, but Skype and
>> its bastard siblings won't be a threat to or replacement for cellular
>> in your lifetime.
>>
>>
>
> Who said anything about roaming or replacing cellular with Skype??
You did. Every post In every post that I have seen where you pimp skype
in cellular groups you conveniently forget to mention that it isn't any
sort of replacement for a cell phone.
So now you agree that it really is not a replacement and there is little
if any reason to discuss it in cellular groups?
>
> Chill pill, Gen! Put that bottle back in the cupboard for a while.
>
> Skype IS a great replacement for landline or cable telephones AT HOME,
> where I use mine. Out on the road, I use Alltel to call Skypers through
> Mobivox's Charlotte access number. Skypers also call me, mobile, on
> Alltel as I have Skype In and Skype set to forward to my cell if I'm not
> online Skype.
>
> BTW, I called a Japanese ham friend in Osaka, Japan's home phone on my
> cellphone through the Mobivox portal for 1.9c/min off my Mobivox account
> just to see how well that worked. I call Charlotte and give the
> computer:
> CALL +(country code - number) in voice. Dialed Japan right up real
> cheap. No Skype involved, so keep your panties on. Mobivox has its own
> international LD portal even cheaper than Skype's...(c;
>
> .....because paying cellular for overseas LD is just STUPID!
>
> Larry
> The Ghost of General Lee <ghost@general.lee> wrote in
> news:3a9nc3ttb9ok8ftjh8gjhbibagdlhagl38@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 02:50:46 +0000, Larry <noone@home.com> wrote:
>>
>>> My comment about Skype was that it is cramproof, which it is.
>>
>> So's a cheeseburger, but you can't make calls on it. Skype is useless
>> unless you constantly stay within range of a WiFi network. That's not
>> what cellular is about. You can wet dream all you want, but Skype and
>> its bastard siblings won't be a threat to or replacement for cellular
>> in your lifetime.
>>
>>
>
> Who said anything about roaming or replacing cellular with Skype??
>
> Chill pill, Gen! Put that bottle back in the cupboard for a while.
>
> Skype IS a great replacement for landline or cable telephones AT HOME,
> where I use mine. Out on the road, I use Alltel to call Skypers through
> Mobivox's Charlotte access number. Skypers also call me, mobile, on
> Alltel as I have Skype In and Skype set to forward to my cell if I'm not
> online Skype.
>
> BTW, I called a Japanese ham friend in Osaka, Japan's home phone on my
> cellphone through the Mobivox portal for 1.9c/min off my Mobivox account
> just to see how well that worked. I call Charlotte and give the
> computer:
> CALL +(country code - number) in voice. Dialed Japan right up real
> cheap. No Skype involved, so keep your panties on. Mobivox has its own
> international LD portal even cheaper than Skype's...(c;
>
> .....because paying cellular for overseas LD is just STUPID!
>
> Larry
> --
>
Was my (wife's) account scammed? 
Linear Mode
