always to companys fault

[Avatard]

Originally Posted by Trip

Sorry, I am not a fan of government making sure your dumbass gets saved when you knowingly sign a contract.

Yeah, me either...but phone companies are essentially public utilities. You have to serve stupid people too, Trip. There has to be limits as to how hurt someone can get in a month. This is outrageous.

The guy is stupid, but I'd go so far as to say it coulda conceivably even been you or me, if we had some fucked up shit going on in our lives, and weren't paying real close attention. Even the smartest among us is not immune from occasional random acts of negligent stupidity.

There has to be limits before you are moved automatically to a data plan. This scenario just underscores the need for such caps, IMHO.

Verizon just hit this issue with a highlighter pen, if you ask me, and I fully expect to see an FCC letter on it.

[LeeNetworX]

Originally Posted by askmrjesus

always to companys fault ?

WTF is that?

You should write fortune cookies, or instruction manuals for weed wackers.

JC

[RACER X]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Yeah, me either....

BS, you want the gov. to regulate phone co's, reg. healthcare what else?

[Avatard]

Your pie hole. Poor Z.

[Avatard]

I'm no legal scholar, but I see it this way:

Since Verizon is the party that essentially will be electronically logging access, and doing all the "bookeeping", they are the party handling accounting.

As the party responsible for accounting, they should be compelled to notify all parties of major account issues...and I would say that since a data plan would be around $60, vs. a $21K+ charge on this guy's account as reported, he could have [they have the technology], and should have been notified of this alarming trend before the first full billing cycle, as the trend is so far out of whack, and could have been easily flagged.

Not to have reported it sooner IS negligent, and comes from a system structured and designed to entrap, not inform consumers.

[Kaneman]

Originally Posted by Avatard

Your pie hole. Poor Z.

The fees are absurd for sure, I'm very sure Verizon will work with him on it. If not he better sign up with another provider before they ruin his credit. I notice a lot of people seem to have trouble seeing the difference between legally right and ethically right. You don't charge a guy $21k for 1.5g of data transfer.

[Destitute]

Originally Posted by Trip

Sorry, I am not a fan of government making sure your dumbass gets saved when you knowingly sign a contract. These people signed a contract to pay that price for data. They fucked up. Verizon or the Government isn't responsible because you are a dumbass.

Mr. Legal Eagle must know the definition of an unconscionable contract.

Being asked to pay 35000% more than an "Unlimited" plan's monthly charge might be considered to be exorbitant.

[derf]

Originally Posted by Avatard

I'm no legal scholar, but I see it this way:

Since Verizon is the party that essentially will be electronically logging access, and doing all the "bookeeping", they are the party handling accounting.

As the party responsible for accounting, they should be compelled to notify all parties of major account issues...and I would say that since a data plan would be around $60, vs. a $21K+ charge on this guy's account as reported, he could have [they have the technology], and should have been notified of this alarming trend before the first full billing cycle, as the trend is so far out of whack, and could have been easily flagged.

Not to have reported it sooner IS negligent, and comes from a system structured and designed to entrap, not inform consumers.

Yeh this sounds sorta like common sense you might be using there buddy, none of that is allowed in this discussion

[unknownroad]

Originally Posted by RACER X

do phone co's cap D/L info?

Of course they do... on their "unlimited" plan.

[CrazyKell]

So what if the Dad's saying is true and he asked Verizon to stop it?