Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

GSM Extend in CT

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
September 1, 2004 4:56:14 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In connecticut, when my Cingular GSM phone says Cingular Extend, whose
system am I on? Is it AT&T?

I find the coverage is very good, and the voice quality is excellent.
I used to be a Verizon evangelist, but I'm really thinking that
Cingular may be better for our family now, especially with Rollover
minutes.

More about : gsm extend

Anonymous
September 1, 2004 2:25:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"Bob" <shmget@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6333bf79.0408312356.1907f84f@posting.google.com...
> In connecticut, when my Cingular GSM phone says Cingular Extend, whose
> system am I on? Is it AT&T?
>
> I find the coverage is very good, and the voice quality is excellent.
> I used to be a Verizon evangelist, but I'm really thinking that
> Cingular may be better for our family now, especially with Rollover
> minutes.

It no longer works in our house. We live in the hills. It worked for years
but it no longer does.

T
Anonymous
September 1, 2004 5:18:08 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

Most likely ATTWS, but it could also be T-Mobile as those two are the GSM
roaming partners in CT.

Chris

"Bob" <shmget@msn.com> wrote in message
news:6333bf79.0408312356.1907f84f@posting.google.com...
> In connecticut, when my Cingular GSM phone says Cingular Extend, whose
> system am I on? Is it AT&T?
>
> I find the coverage is very good, and the voice quality is excellent.
> I used to be a Verizon evangelist, but I'm really thinking that
> Cingular may be better for our family now, especially with Rollover
> minutes.
Related resources
Can't find your answer ? Ask !
Anonymous
September 2, 2004 2:32:55 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <4shZc.217325$8_6.17349@attbi_s04> on Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:25:04 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Bob" <shmget@msn.com> wrote in message
>news:6333bf79.0408312356.1907f84f@posting.google.com...

>> In connecticut, when my Cingular GSM phone says Cingular Extend, whose
>> system am I on? Is it AT&T?
>>
>> I find the coverage is very good, and the voice quality is excellent.
>> I used to be a Verizon evangelist, but I'm really thinking that
>> Cingular may be better for our family now, especially with Rollover
>> minutes.
>
>It no longer works in our house. We live in the hills. It worked for years
>but it no longer does.

I'm guessing you're still on TDMA. The likely problem is that TDMA spectrum
is being converted to GSM, which you might want to try.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 2, 2004 5:11:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:r6sZc.11484$54.158111@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <4shZc.217325$8_6.17349@attbi_s04> on Wed, 01 Sep 2004 10:25:04 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"Bob" <shmget@msn.com> wrote in message
> >news:6333bf79.0408312356.1907f84f@posting.google.com...
>
> >> In connecticut, when my Cingular GSM phone says Cingular Extend, whose
> >> system am I on? Is it AT&T?
> >>
> >> I find the coverage is very good, and the voice quality is excellent.
> >> I used to be a Verizon evangelist, but I'm really thinking that
> >> Cingular may be better for our family now, especially with Rollover
> >> minutes.
> >
> >It no longer works in our house. We live in the hills. It worked for
years
> >but it no longer does.
>
> I'm guessing you're still on TDMA. The likely problem is that TDMA
spectrum
> is being converted to GSM, which you might want to try.

I am the person with 3 TDMA phones and one GSM phone. The TDMA has
degraded and the GSM doesn't work or not in our house the way the TDMA's
used to work.

When we upgraded a non working phone in February they said it had to be on
the new network.

Does GSM not work as well in houses?

T.




>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 2, 2004 7:45:12 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <YquZc.354070$%_6.109534@attbi_s01> on Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:11:20 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:r6sZc.11484$54.158111@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> I'm guessing you're still on TDMA. The likely problem is that TDMA spectrum
>> is being converted to GSM, which you might want to try.
>
>I am the person with 3 TDMA phones and one GSM phone. The TDMA has
>degraded and the GSM doesn't work or not in our house the way the TDMA's
>used to work.
>
>When we upgraded a non working phone in February they said it had to be on
>the new network.
>
>Does GSM not work as well in houses?

GSM works at least as well as TDMA on the same frequency. Perhaps your GSM
phones doesn't have the proper band.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 3, 2004 3:22:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:cHwZc.11546$54.158882@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <YquZc.354070$%_6.109534@attbi_s01> on Thu, 02 Sep 2004 01:11:20 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:r6sZc.11484$54.158111@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> I'm guessing you're still on TDMA. The likely problem is that TDMA
spectrum
> >> is being converted to GSM, which you might want to try.
> >
> >I am the person with 3 TDMA phones and one GSM phone. The TDMA has
> >degraded and the GSM doesn't work or not in our house the way the TDMA's
> >used to work.
> >
> >When we upgraded a non working phone in February they said it had to be
on
> >the new network.
> >
> >Does GSM not work as well in houses?
>
> GSM works at least as well as TDMA on the same frequency. Perhaps your
GSM
> phones doesn't have the proper band.

The customer service rep said she was going to increase the activation on
the phone. I am not sure what she meant by that but it did not work. Also
an engineer was supposed to call us and never did. We tried a Verizon
prepaid phone and it worked really well in our house. It was like a land
line.

My neighbor called me from her driveway yesterday, she also has Cingular and
the call quality was horrible. I don't know what Cingular has done but it
has ruined the reception.

T
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 3, 2004 5:11:43 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <duYZc.94049$9d6.10876@attbi_s54> on Fri, 03 Sep 2004 11:22:49 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:cHwZc.11546$54.158882@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> GSM works at least as well as TDMA on the same frequency. Perhaps your GSM
>> phones doesn't have the proper band.
>
>The customer service rep said she was going to increase the activation on
>the phone. I am not sure what she meant by that but it did not work.

Not terribly surprising, since that makes no sense. :) 

>Also
>an engineer was supposed to call us and never did. We tried a Verizon
>prepaid phone and it worked really well in our house. It was like a land
>line.

Different carriers have different coverage in different areas -- ads
notwithstanding, no one carrier has the best coverage everywhere -- and it
make sense to go with the carrier that works best in the areas you care about.
Unless Cingular can restore your service (in a reasonable period of time), you
should be able to terminate without penalty and move to Verizon.

>My neighbor called me from her driveway yesterday, she also has Cingular and
>the call quality was horrible. I don't know what Cingular has done but it
>has ruined the reception.

I'm guessing you were using TDMA 800 before, which is being converted by
Cingular to GSM 850 (same band, notwithstanding the different number), and
that your GSM phones don't have the GSM 850 band. Try a good GSM phone with
both 850 and 1900 bands.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 5, 2004 7:22:29 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:j4_Zc.11832$54.163724@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <duYZc.94049$9d6.10876@attbi_s54> on Fri, 03 Sep 2004 11:22:49 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:cHwZc.11546$54.158882@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> GSM works at least as well as TDMA on the same frequency. Perhaps your
GSM
> >> phones doesn't have the proper band.
> >
> >The customer service rep said she was going to increase the activation on
> >the phone. I am not sure what she meant by that but it did not work.
>
> Not terribly surprising, since that makes no sense. :) 

It didn't make any sense to us either. :-)

>
> >Also
> >an engineer was supposed to call us and never did. We tried a Verizon
> >prepaid phone and it worked really well in our house. It was like a land
> >line.
>
> Different carriers have different coverage in different areas -- ads
> notwithstanding, no one carrier has the best coverage everywhere -- and it
> make sense to go with the carrier that works best in the areas you care
about.
> Unless Cingular can restore your service (in a reasonable period of time),
you
> should be able to terminate without penalty and move to Verizon.

Maybe we are in some kind of hole because we are in the mountains that the
new network doesn't reach. We have been customers since 1999. Something
has happened that has ruined the reception.

>
> >My neighbor called me from her driveway yesterday, she also has Cingular
and
> >the call quality was horrible. I don't know what Cingular has done but
it
> >has ruined the reception.
>
> I'm guessing you were using TDMA 800 before, which is being converted by
> Cingular to GSM 850 (same band, notwithstanding the different number), and
> that your GSM phones don't have the GSM 850 band. Try a good GSM phone
with
> both 850 and 1900 bands.

Our GSM phone is the nokia 3595. This is the second model we have tried. I
was sure it was TDMA and GSM but may it isn't a good phone?

Thanks,

T

>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 1:10:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <VaG_c.35578$3l3.23104@attbi_s03> on Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:22:29 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:j4_Zc.11832$54.163724@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> I'm guessing you were using TDMA 800 before, which is being converted by
>> Cingular to GSM 850 (same band, notwithstanding the different number), and
>> that your GSM phones don't have the GSM 850 band. Try a good GSM phone with
>> both 850 and 1900 bands.
>
>Our GSM phone is the nokia 3595. This is the second model we have tried. I
>was sure it was TDMA and GSM but may it isn't a good phone?

It's GSM only, both 850 and 1900 bands, and is a good phone, so a different
phone probably won't solve your problem.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 6, 2004 6:35:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:0QV_c.12220$54.171677@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <VaG_c.35578$3l3.23104@attbi_s03> on Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:22:29 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:j4_Zc.11832$54.163724@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> I'm guessing you were using TDMA 800 before, which is being converted
by
> >> Cingular to GSM 850 (same band, notwithstanding the different number),
and
> >> that your GSM phones don't have the GSM 850 band. Try a good GSM phone
with
> >> both 850 and 1900 bands.
> >
> >Our GSM phone is the nokia 3595. This is the second model we have tried.
I
> >was sure it was TDMA and GSM but may it isn't a good phone?
>
> It's GSM only, both 850 and 1900 bands, and is a good phone, so a
different
> phone probably won't solve your problem.

Thanks for all you help.
T.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 8, 2004 5:36:17 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:0QV_c.12220$54.171677@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <VaG_c.35578$3l3.23104@attbi_s03> on Sun, 05 Sep 2004 15:22:29 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:j4_Zc.11832$54.163724@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> I'm guessing you were using TDMA 800 before, which is being converted
by
> >> Cingular to GSM 850 (same band, notwithstanding the different number),
and
> >> that your GSM phones don't have the GSM 850 band. Try a good GSM phone
with
> >> both 850 and 1900 bands.
> >
> >Our GSM phone is the nokia 3595. This is the second model we have tried.
I
> >was sure it was TDMA and GSM but may it isn't a good phone?
>
> It's GSM only, both 850 and 1900 bands, and is a good phone, so a
different
> phone probably won't solve your problem.

Does this sound right? Now the customer service rep tells me that the FCC
stopped Cingular from using T-Mobile Towers and ATT towers and that is why
our signal has deteriorated.

I asked if this is so as a matter of good faith why don't they let us out
of our contract.
She said it is not their fault and they will not let us out of our contract.
This seems wrong.

Also she said we cannot have a GSM phone on a Family plan with TDMA phones
and they have to be separated. However we went in with a broken phone in
February. It was a Cingular store and they gave us the new phone. It
wasn't our mistake it was Cingular's mistake.

And she had the nerve to ask us why we have continued to try to use the
phones for so long. We were hearing that it was going to get better and it
hasn't. We were trying to give Cingular a chance. This isn't fair. I
feel very cheated. And this woman was very condescending and very rude. I
have never had a rude customer service person before. They didn't know what
they were talking about but they were not rude. I feel like Cingular is
taking our money and doesn't care.

Since the GSM doesn't work at our house either I really really do not want
to have to sign anymore contracts with Cingular. I filed a complaint with
the BB that is why she called. Where do I go next?

When we signed up in 1999 we had a good signal and that is what we contrated
for. Now we pay them for poor service.

T

>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 8, 2004 7:55:53 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <lmt%c.50749$3l3.50651@attbi_s03> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 01:36:17 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:0QV_c.12220$54.171677@typhoon.sonic.net...

>Does this sound right? Now the customer service rep tells me that the FCC
>stopped Cingular from using T-Mobile Towers and ATT towers and that is why
>our signal has deteriorated.

That's almost certainly untrue, and irrelevant in any event.

>I asked if this is so as a matter of good faith why don't they let us out
>of our contract.
>She said it is not their fault and they will not let us out of our contract.
>This seems wrong.

If your service really has deteriorated, and Cingular fails to fix it, then
you should indeed be able to cancel without penalty.

>Also she said we cannot have a GSM phone on a Family plan with TDMA phones
>and they have to be separated.

That's not unreasonable.

>However we went in with a broken phone in
>February. It was a Cingular store and they gave us the new phone. It
>wasn't our mistake it was Cingular's mistake.

Fair enough, but you should have gotten it taken care of promptly.

>And she had the nerve to ask us why we have continued to try to use the
>phones for so long.

That's not unreasonable -- the passage of time has weakened your case.

>We were hearing that it was going to get better and it
>hasn't.

From Cingular? Did you document those promises?

>We were trying to give Cingular a chance.

Why do that, and why let it go so long?

>This isn't fair. I
>feel very cheated.

Why? You had a good case in the beginning, but let months go by.

>And this woman was very condescending and very rude.

That's inexcusable, but there's still the issue of why you let it go so long.
I'm sure she's heard lots of made up stories from subscribers. How does she
know your story isn't made up?

>I
>have never had a rude customer service person before.

It happens. Unfortunately. When it does, ask to speak to a supervisor, or
simply call back.

>They didn't know what
>they were talking about but they were not rude. I feel like Cingular is
>taking our money and doesn't care.

I think that's a bit extreme under the circumstances.

>Since the GSM doesn't work at our house either I really really do not want
>to have to sign anymore contracts with Cingular. I filed a complaint with
>the BB that is why she called. Where do I go next?

Add this to your BBB complaint, and see my other suggestions.

>When we signed up in 1999 we had a good signal and that is what we contrated
>for. Now we pay them for poor service.

Why?

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 8, 2004 2:11:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:D pv%c.12569$54.177426@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <lmt%c.50749$3l3.50651@attbi_s03> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 01:36:17 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:0QV_c.12220$54.171677@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >Does this sound right? Now the customer service rep tells me that the
FCC
> >stopped Cingular from using T-Mobile Towers and ATT towers and that is
why
> >our signal has deteriorated.
>
> That's almost certainly untrue, and irrelevant in any event.
>
> >I asked if this is so as a matter of good faith why don't they let us
out
> >of our contract.
> >She said it is not their fault and they will not let us out of our
contract.
> >This seems wrong.
>
> If your service really has deteriorated, and Cingular fails to fix it,
then
> you should indeed be able to cancel without penalty.
>
> >Also she said we cannot have a GSM phone on a Family plan with TDMA
phones
> >and they have to be separated.
>
> That's not unreasonable.
>
> >However we went in with a broken phone in
> >February. It was a Cingular store and they gave us the new phone. It
> >wasn't our mistake it was Cingular's mistake.
>
> Fair enough, but you should have gotten it taken care of promptly.

This was the first time I heard of it. This was the very first time anyone
told me this. The people at the stores are incompetent and we are supposed
to suffer?
>
> >And she had the nerve to ask us why we have continued to try to use the
> >phones for so long.
>
> That's not unreasonable -- the passage of time has weakened your case.
>
> >We were hearing that it was going to get better and it
> >hasn't.
>
> From Cingular? Did you document those promises?

No unfortunately - we believed them. My neighbor also had those same
promises. And I have read it on newsgroups.
>
> >We were trying to give Cingular a chance.
>
> Why do that, and why let it go so long?

As if they were going to let us cancel anyway.
>
> >This isn't fair. I
> >feel very cheated.
>
> Why? You had a good case in the beginning, but let months go by.

They said the network was in transition etc. it was going to be GREAT.
Again they lied and we are going to suffer because we believed them.
>
> >And this woman was very condescending and very rude.
>
> That's inexcusable, but there's still the issue of why you let it go so
long.
> I'm sure she's heard lots of made up stories from subscribers. How does
she
> know your story isn't made up?

She could check usage. Compare this time last year to this year. My
husband became frustrated trying to call me and no longer does or he calls
the landline. He has an hour commute. In fact she wants to talk to him
not me and he can't call or he is going to have to come home early to call
because their customer service hours are lousy.
>
> >I
> >have never had a rude customer service person before.
>
> It happens. Unfortunately. When it does, ask to speak to a supervisor,
or
> simply call back.
>
> >They didn't know what
> >they were talking about but they were not rude. I feel like Cingular is
> >taking our money and doesn't care.
>
> I think that's a bit extreme under the circumstances.

Well, since she lied about the towers and says it cancelling the contracts
without penalty is impossible. She knows our service is not working but
their is no way to cancel.
>
> >Since the GSM doesn't work at our house either I really really do not
want
> >to have to sign anymore contracts with Cingular. I filed a complaint
with
> >the BB that is why she called. Where do I go next?
>
> Add this to your BBB complaint, and see my other suggestions.

What other suggestions?
>
> >When we signed up in 1999 we had a good signal and that is what we
contrated
> >for. Now we pay them for poor service.
>
> Why?

They won't let us cancel without penalty.

T
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 12:25:29 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <3VA%c.131840$9d6.43512@attbi_s54> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:11:11 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:D pv%c.12569$54.177426@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> >However we went in with a broken phone in
>> >February. It was a Cingular store and they gave us the new phone. It
>> >wasn't our mistake it was Cingular's mistake.
>>
>> Fair enough, but you should have gotten it taken care of promptly.
>
>This was the first time I heard of it. This was the very first time anyone
>told me this. The people at the stores are incompetent and we are supposed
>to suffer?

Cingular has a clearly stated return (and cancellation) policy of 15 days,
which you should have observed. If you (say) bought a DVD player, and found
that it wouldn't work with your TV, the store might well take it back within a
couple of weeks (i.e., within its return policy), but not after seven months.
(At that point it would be a matter of warranty repair or replacement, not
return.)

>> Why do that, and why let it go so long?
>
>As if they were going to let us cancel anyway.

If your service has really degraded significantly since your last contract
extension, and isn't corrected by the carrier, then it really has no choice.

>> Why? You had a good case in the beginning, but let months go by.
>
>They said the network was in transition etc. it was going to be GREAT.
>Again they lied and we are going to suffer because we believed them.

The network has been in transition and has been improving greatly, so that's
no evidence of "lies." At most it would be an unfulfilled promise, and then
only if you were actually promised great reception throughout your residence,
which is doubtful given that such specific promises are against company
policy.

>> I'm sure she's heard lots of made up stories from subscribers. How does she
>> know your story isn't made up?
>
>She could check usage. Compare this time last year to this year.

That tells her nothing about call quality, and is only inferential at best.

>>... he is going to have to come home early to call
>because their customer service hours are lousy.

Cingular Customer Service is open 9am-10pm Central Mon-Sat. (There is also an
After Hours number for network problems.)

>> I think that's a bit extreme under the circumstances.
>
>Well, since she lied about the towers

What makes you think it was an actual "lie" (deliberate falsehood), rather
than just (say) poor information?

>and says it cancelling the contracts
>without penalty is impossible.

With your particular justifications, which aren't strong.

>She knows our service is not working but
>their is no way to cancel.

Your service is working, just not where you want it.

>> Add this to your BBB complaint, and see my other suggestions.
>
>What other suggestions?

See my prior posts.

>> Why?
>
>They won't let us cancel without penalty.

They have no choice if (1) your service has really degraded significantly (2)
since your latest contract extension and (3) the problem isn't corrected.

Another basic problem in your position is this part of your earlier post:

The GSM phone now works at our house but barely. It drops service
all the time and does not work in all places in our house.

Cellular is essentially an outdoors technology that may or may not work
indoors -- structures interfere with cellular signals, which is why indoor
coverage isn't guaranteed. (In my own residence I can only use my cell phone
in one upstairs room.) That why carriers won't accept
my-cell-won't-work-in-all-parts-of-my-house in and of itself as sufficient
justification for termination without penalty -- you need more than that, and
you need to work within the established time limits.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 2:09:11 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:ZUJ%c.12684$54.179474@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <3VA%c.131840$9d6.43512@attbi_s54> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:11:11 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:D pv%c.12569$54.177426@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> >However we went in with a broken phone in
> >> >February. It was a Cingular store and they gave us the new phone. It
> >> >wasn't our mistake it was Cingular's mistake.
> >>
> >> Fair enough, but you should have gotten it taken care of promptly.
> >
> >This was the first time I heard of it. This was the very first time
anyone
> >told me this. The people at the stores are incompetent and we are
supposed
> >to suffer?
>
> Cingular has a clearly stated return (and cancellation) policy of 15 days,
> which you should have observed. If you (say) bought a DVD player, and
found
> that it wouldn't work with your TV, the store might well take it back
within a
> couple of weeks (i.e., within its return policy), but not after seven
months.
> (At that point it would be a matter of warranty repair or replacement, not
> return.)

We took one back because it was broken and replaced it. The rep insisted
the phone had to be put on GSM. We didn't have a choice. We couldn't
cancel there was the early termination fee. The rep assured us and our
neigbor that GSM was going to be wonderful and to hang on it would get
better so we on good faith waited.
>
> >> Why do that, and why let it go so long?
> >
> >As if they were going to let us cancel anyway.
>
> If your service has really degraded significantly since your last contract
> extension, and isn't corrected by the carrier, then it really has no
choice.

Well, she said absolutely unequivocally no. She said that is not going to
happen. Tonight she said T-Mobile and ATT won't let them use the towers
anymore. She talked to my husband and was just as rude.
>
> >> Why? You had a good case in the beginning, but let months go by.
> >
> >They said the network was in transition etc. it was going to be GREAT.
> >Again they lied and we are going to suffer because we believed them.
>
> The network has been in transition and has been improving greatly, so
that's
> no evidence of "lies."

Fair enough perhaps lie was too strong. But what about the bit about the
towers and the FCC? From what I am reading elsewhere she did not tell the
truth.

At most it would be an unfulfilled promise, and then
> only if you were actually promised great reception throughout your
residence,
> which is doubtful given that such specific promises are against company
> policy.

An unfulfilled CONTRACT. There is a difference. We are not pals here. We
pay with taxes etc over a $120 a month. We used to be able to use the phone
in our house. That is why we have the family plan.
>
> >> I'm sure she's heard lots of made up stories from subscribers. How
does she
> >> know your story isn't made up?
> >
> >She could check usage. Compare this time last year to this year.
>
> That tells her nothing about call quality, and is only inferential at
best.

She could call my my cell phone.

>
> >>... he is going to have to come home early to call
> >because their customer service hours are lousy.
>
> Cingular Customer Service is open 9am-10pm Central Mon-Sat. (There is also
an
> After Hours number for network problems.)

Well, I do not know where you get your info but she told us from 7:30 until
4:30 central time.
>
> >> I think that's a bit extreme under the circumstances.
> >
> >Well, since she lied about the towers
>
> What makes you think it was an actual "lie" (deliberate falsehood), rather
> than just (say) poor information?

Come on. If she is a representative of the company and denying me my
rights as a consumer she better use the correct information. Where did she
get the poor information? Is this Cingular policy to hand out poor
information or is she either making things up or speculating about things
she has no knowledge about.
>
> >and says it cancelling the contracts
> >without penalty is impossible.
>
> With your particular justifications, which aren't strong.

>
> >She knows our service is not working but
> >their is no way to cancel.
>
> Your service is working, just not where you want it.

BUT when we contracted with Cingular it worked in our home. Now it no
longer works in our home. We did not get 14 days after their equipment
changed to decide whether or not we wanted to stay with them. Didn't
Cingular at least owe us that? If the telephone company cuts down the two
closest poles to our house our phone would still work down the street but
that isn't what we contracted for.

>
> >> Add this to your BBB complaint, and see my other suggestions.
> >
> >What other suggestions?
>
> See my prior posts.
>
> >> Why?
> >
> >They won't let us cancel without penalty.
>
> They have no choice if (1) your service has really degraded significantly
(2)
> since your latest contract extension and (3) the problem isn't corrected.
>
> Another basic problem in your position is this part of your earlier post:
>
> The GSM phone now works at our house but barely. It drops service
> all the time and does not work in all places in our house.
>
> Cellular is essentially an outdoors technology that may or may not work
> indoors -- structures interfere with cellular signals, which is why indoor
> coverage isn't guaranteed. (In my own residence I can only use my cell
phone
> in one upstairs room.) That why carriers won't accept
> my-cell-won't-work-in-all-parts-of-my-house in and of itself as sufficient
> justification for termination without penalty -- you need more than that,
and
> you need to work within the established time limits.

Well perhaps you should try Verizon. We tried a pre paid to see if it would
work. It works like a land line. It will cost more but it will be worth
it. I am in an electric wheelchair. I can't go outside. And I can't go
upstairs. When we contracted with Cingular we picked them because they
worked inside our house. I can't drive and during the day it gets lonely.
My sons could call me and my husband could call me during the day when they
had a moment. Their technology has ruined this and we are still expected
to pay them $121 a month? My life has changed. They should be gracious
and let it go because I am not going to let this go.

T
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 3:00:20 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <bqL%c.159687$mD.58318@attbi_s02> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 22:09:11 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:ZUJ%c.12684$54.179474@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> Cingular has a clearly stated return (and cancellation) policy of 15 days,
>> which you should have observed. If you (say) bought a DVD player, and found
>> that it wouldn't work with your TV, the store might well take it back within a
>> couple of weeks (i.e., within its return policy), but not after seven months.
>> (At that point it would be a matter of warranty repair or replacement, not
>> return.)
>
>We took one back because it was broken and replaced it. The rep insisted
>the phone had to be put on GSM. We didn't have a choice.

The rep may have pushed GSM, but you did have a choice -- TDMA handsets are
still available and still supported.

>We couldn't
>cancel there was the early termination fee.

You can only switch from TDMA to GSM with a different rate plan, so a new
contract was required. Didn't you check the paperwork?

>The rep assured us and our
>neigbor that GSM was going to be wonderful and to hang on it would get
>better so we on good faith waited.

GSM is good, but that doesn't mean you'll have coverage everywhere in your
residence. Regardless, why did you take it on faith? Buyers are expected to
exercise reasonable prudence.

>> If your service has really degraded significantly since your last contract
>> extension, and isn't corrected by the carrier, then it really has no
>> choice.
>
>Well, she said absolutely unequivocally no. She said that is not going to
>happen. Tonight she said T-Mobile and ATT won't let them use the towers
>anymore. She talked to my husband and was just as rude.

So talk to someone else. (And please don't rehash old ground here.)

>> The network has been in transition and has been improving greatly, so that's
>> no evidence of "lies."
>
>Fair enough perhaps lie was too strong. But what about the bit about the
>towers and the FCC? From what I am reading elsewhere she did not tell the
>truth.

She may not have known better, and thus it wouldn't be a "lie," just bad
information.

>> At most it would be an unfulfilled promise, and then
>> only if you were actually promised great reception throughout your residence,
>> which is doubtful given that such specific promises are against company
>> policy.
>
>An unfulfilled CONTRACT. There is a difference.

Your CONTRACT doesn't include what the rep might have said, and doesn't
guarantee coverage throughout your residence. (If it did, we wouldn't be
having this discussion:)  What specific part of your CONTRACT don't you think
is being fulfilled?

>We are not pals here. We
>pay with taxes etc over a $120 a month. We used to be able to use the phone
>in our house. That is why we have the family plan.

As I explained in my earlier response, that's not something you can count on.

>> That tells her nothing about call quality, and is only inferential at
>best.
>
>She could call my my cell phone.

That still tells her nothing about the past.

Because the carrier has no obligation to make service work throughout your
residence, your only real case is to show that service deteriorated
significantly, and that it did so during your latest contract term.

>> Cingular Customer Service is open 9am-10pm Central Mon-Sat. (There is also an
>> After Hours number for network problems.)
>
>Well, I do not know where you get your info

Cingular website: <http://www.cingular.com/customer_service/contact_us&gt;

>but she told us from 7:30 until
>4:30 central time.

You clearly need to talk to someone else. ;-)

>> What makes you think it was an actual "lie" (deliberate falsehood), rather
>> than just (say) poor information?
>
>Come on. If she is a representative of the company and denying me my
>rights as a consumer she better use the correct information.

She should, but failing to do so doesn't automatically constitute a "lie."

>Where did she
>get the poor information? Is this Cingular policy to hand out poor
>information or is she either making things up or speculating about things
>she has no knowledge about.

I'd guess the latter.

>> Your service is working, just not where you want it.
>
>BUT when we contracted with Cingular it worked in our home. Now it no
>longer works in our home.

What matters is the start of the current contract.

>We did not get 14 days after their equipment
>changed to decide whether or not we wanted to stay with them.

Actually you did.

>Didn't
>Cingular at least owe us that?

Cingular owes you what you actually contracted for. You of course bear
responsibility for your own actions.

>> Cellular is essentially an outdoors technology that may or may not work
>> indoors -- structures interfere with cellular signals, which is why indoor
>> coverage isn't guaranteed. (In my own residence I can only use my cell phone
>> in one upstairs room.) That why carriers won't accept
>> my-cell-won't-work-in-all-parts-of-my-house in and of itself as sufficient
>> justification for termination without penalty -- you need more than that, and
>> you need to work within the established time limits.
>
>Well perhaps you should try Verizon.

I have, and it's much worse than Cingular in my area. There is no one best
carrier.

>We tried a pre paid to see if it would
>work. It works like a land line.

Why didn't you check sooner?

>It will cost more but it will be worth
>it.

Fair enough -- that's how the market works.

>I am in an electric wheelchair. I can't go outside. And I can't go
>upstairs. When we contracted with Cingular we picked them because they
>worked inside our house.

Fair enough, but when service deteriorated, you should have dealt with the
problem in a timely manner.

>I can't drive and during the day it gets lonely.
>My sons could call me and my husband could call me during the day when they
>had a moment.

Why not use a land line and cordless phone? Surely that would be less
expensive?

>Their technology has ruined this

GSM is greatly improved over TDMA, but won't necessarily be better for
everyone, and obviously not for you.

>and we are still expected
>to pay them $121 a month?

That was what you agreed to.

>My life has changed.

That's unfortunate.

>They should be gracious
>and let it go because I am not going to let this go.

You accept no responsibility for what happened? You blame the carrier and the
rep for everything? And you think the best way to win is by fighting? With
all due respect (and sympathy), that's not reasonable. Try being both nice
and persistent. Take at least some of the responsibility for your own
actions. Write to the President of the company. Propose a reasonable
compromise.

p.s. From all you've posted, I'm thinking your TDMA phone was actually
working on AMPS in your residence, rather than TDMA, and that the loss of AMPS
is what caused your problem, not the switch from TDMA to GSM. Old TDMA phones
also supported AMPS (analog); new GSM phones don't (because AMPS is being
phased out).

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 4:58:52 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:8aM%c.12731$54.179510@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <bqL%c.159687$mD.58318@attbi_s02> on Wed, 08 Sep 2004 22:09:11 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:ZUJ%c.12684$54.179474@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> Cingular has a clearly stated return (and cancellation) policy of 15
days,
> >> which you should have observed. If you (say) bought a DVD player, and
found
> >> that it wouldn't work with your TV, the store might well take it back
within a
> >> couple of weeks (i.e., within its return policy), but not after seven
months.
> >> (At that point it would be a matter of warranty repair or replacement,
not
> >> return.)
> >
> >We took one back because it was broken and replaced it. The rep insisted
> >the phone had to be put on GSM. We didn't have a choice.
>
> The rep may have pushed GSM, but you did have a choice -- TDMA handsets
are
> still available and still supported.

Not in Connecticut. You are mistaken. I don't know where you are but In
Connecticut all new phones have to be on the GSM. That is what they told us
at the store and that is what they told my neighbor just last week. She has
four phones and they are not on a family plan.

>
> >We couldn't
> >cancel there was the early termination fee.
>
> You can only switch from TDMA to GSM with a different rate plan, so a new
> contract was required. Didn't you check the paperwork?

Nope. That isn't what happened here. He said all new phones had to be GSM
and the phone was put on our family plan. There was no contract. There was
only an upgrade on the broken phone. >

> >The rep assured us and our
> >neigbor that GSM was going to be wonderful and to hang on it would get
> >better so we on good faith waited.
>
> GSM is good, but that doesn't mean you'll have coverage everywhere in your
> residence. Regardless, why did you take it on faith? Buyers are expected
to
> exercise reasonable prudence.

Perhaps you do not understand. We went into the store with a phone that was
broken. It was already on the family plan and we were paying $20 a month.
To cancel the phone so that we did not have to pay the $20 a month there
would be an early termination fee on the original broken phone. Or we could
continue to pay the $20 a month and not have a working phone. The Rep
insisted all new phones in CT have to be on the GSM network. He sent us
home with a new phone that was a GSM phone. It didn't work. We took it
back and he gave us the nokia. It still doesn't work like our original TDMA
that we contracted for but he assured us that the network was going to get
better. We had no choice. Perhaps the problem here was with the original
salesperson. Perhaps he didn't know what he was talking about. We had
never heard of TDMA or GSM. When we first got our phones we did our
homework. Cingular worked for us. No one told us that the network was
going to change. Shouldn't we expect the same service? Or at least an
option to leave if it didn't work? Not false promises.
>
> >> If your service has really degraded significantly since your last
contract
> >> extension, and isn't corrected by the carrier, then it really has no
> >> choice.
> >
> >Well, she said absolutely unequivocally no. She said that is not going
to
> >happen. Tonight she said T-Mobile and ATT won't let them use the towers
> >anymore. She talked to my husband and was just as rude.
>
> So talk to someone else. (And please don't rehash old ground here.)

Sorry. This was a new incidence of rudeness. He came home early because
she wanted to talk to him because the phones are in his name.
>
> >> The network has been in transition and has been improving greatly, so
that's
> >> no evidence of "lies."
> >
> >Fair enough perhaps lie was too strong. But what about the bit about the
> >towers and the FCC? From what I am reading elsewhere she did not tell
the
> >truth.
>
> She may not have known better, and thus it wouldn't be a "lie," just bad
> information.
>
> >> At most it would be an unfulfilled promise, and then
> >> only if you were actually promised great reception throughout your
residence,
> >> which is doubtful given that such specific promises are against company
> >> policy.
> >
> >An unfulfilled CONTRACT. There is a difference.
>
> Your CONTRACT doesn't include what the rep might have said, and doesn't
> guarantee coverage throughout your residence. (If it did, we wouldn't be
> having this discussion:)  What specific part of your CONTRACT don't you
think
> is being fulfilled?
>
> >We are not pals here. We
> >pay with taxes etc over a $120 a month. We used to be able to use the
phone
> >in our house. That is why we have the family plan.
>
> As I explained in my earlier response, that's not something you can count
on.
>
> >> That tells her nothing about call quality, and is only inferential at
> >best.
> >
> >She could call my my cell phone.
>
> That still tells her nothing about the past.

But there are known holes with the GSM. There is a report in Consumer
Reports. When I read that report I finally understood what had happened to
us. My neighbor is complaining too. It isn't working for us up here. What
would be the purpose of us banding together? She is in real estate and it
is bad for her business.

>
> Because the carrier has no obligation to make service work throughout your
> residence, your only real case is to show that service deteriorated
> significantly, and that it did so during your latest contract term.
>
> >> Cingular Customer Service is open 9am-10pm Central Mon-Sat. (There is
also an
> >> After Hours number for network problems.)
> >
> >Well, I do not know where you get your info
>
> Cingular website: <http://www.cingular.com/customer_service/contact_us&gt;
>
> >but she told us from 7:30 until
> >4:30 central time.
>
> You clearly need to talk to someone else. ;-)

She called me because I made a complaint with the better business bureau.
And she was at least the third person we have talked to on the phone.
>
> >> What makes you think it was an actual "lie" (deliberate falsehood),
rather
> >> than just (say) poor information?
> >
> >Come on. If she is a representative of the company and denying me my
> >rights as a consumer she better use the correct information.
>
> She should, but failing to do so doesn't automatically constitute a "lie."
>
> >Where did she
> >get the poor information? Is this Cingular policy to hand out poor
> >information or is she either making things up or speculating about things
> >she has no knowledge about.
>
> I'd guess the latter.
>
> >> Your service is working, just not where you want it.
> >
> >BUT when we contracted with Cingular it worked in our home. Now it no
> >longer works in our home.
>
> What matters is the start of the current contract.
>
> >We did not get 14 days after their equipment
> >changed to decide whether or not we wanted to stay with them.
>
> Actually you did.

No we didn't. No one told us why the TDMA was degrading. No one sent out
notices that it was changing. Our phones just got worse and worse. The
only place my phone did not work before was in the middle of my house in the
hallway. Now if people call me or I call them there is no where I can go
that we can talk. See we have two problems - The TDMA phones and the GSM
phone. Perhaps you don't remember or understand?
>
> >Didn't
> >Cingular at least owe us that?
>
> Cingular owes you what you actually contracted for. You of course bear
> responsibility for your own actions.
>
> >> Cellular is essentially an outdoors technology that may or may not work
> >> indoors -- structures interfere with cellular signals, which is why
indoor
> >> coverage isn't guaranteed. (In my own residence I can only use my cell
phone
> >> in one upstairs room.) That why carriers won't accept
> >> my-cell-won't-work-in-all-parts-of-my-house in and of itself as
sufficient
> >> justification for termination without penalty -- you need more than
that, and
> >> you need to work within the established time limits.
> >
> >Well perhaps you should try Verizon.
>
> I have, and it's much worse than Cingular in my area. There is no one
best
> carrier.

It may be different. Our first clue was when someone was at our house with
a Verizon phone in the Spring. Sprint also works here but not as well.
>
> >We tried a pre paid to see if it would
> >work. It works like a land line.
>
> Why didn't you check sooner?

Because Cingular was telling us to hang on it was going to get better! And
when we started our family plan in 1999 Cingular worked here.
>
> >It will cost more but it will be worth
> >it.
>
> Fair enough -- that's how the market works.
>
> >I am in an electric wheelchair. I can't go outside. And I can't go
> >upstairs. When we contracted with Cingular we picked them because they
> >worked inside our house.
>
> Fair enough, but when service deteriorated, you should have dealt with the
> problem in a timely manner.

Well we did we asked about it and they said it was going to get better. I
don't know what else we could have done. We trusted Cingular. It did not
get better and now we are the ones at fault.
>
> >I can't drive and during the day it gets lonely.
> >My sons could call me and my husband could call me during the day when
they
> >had a moment.
>
> Why not use a land line and cordless phone? Surely that would be less
> expensive?

Not as inexpensive as a family plan. Four or even three people would be
more expensive. That is what family plans are all about. We only have
400 d/t minutes and 4500 n/w minutes. It is an old contract.
>
> >Their technology has ruined this
>
> GSM is greatly improved over TDMA, but won't necessarily be better for
> everyone, and obviously not for you.
>
> >and we are still expected
> >to pay them $121 a month?
>
> That was what you agreed to.

AGH! no it isn't.
>
> >My life has changed.
>
> That's unfortunate.
>
> >They should be gracious
> >and let it go because I am not going to let this go.
>
> You accept no responsibility for what happened?

I didn't change the network. What responsibility do I have? I really don't
understand. We called we asked, we went to stores, we asked what was wrong
and were told it was going to get better.

You blame the carrier and the
> rep for everything? And you think the best way to win is by fighting?
With
> all due respect (and sympathy), that's not reasonable. Try being both
nice
> and persistent. Take at least some of the responsibility for your own
> actions. Write to the President of the company. Propose a reasonable
> compromise.

I was nice. We have talked to so many people. Barbara in Little Rock is
rude and interrupts. She was not very professional. She was the first one
we ever talked to who was rude. I think she was in the president's office.
When my husband called back it was the president's office that answered. I
don't know what compromise is available except to let us out of our
contract. Our TDMA phones do not work - GSM doesn't work. We have
supported them for 5 years. We waited patiently for the network to work.
We were nice and all these months later we are still being nice. We have
one phone that can go this month, two phones next month and then the one a
year from February. This is business they do not care about people they
care about profits. Otherwise they would admit that their service through
no fault of ours has changed and no longer works in our house and they would
be kind enough to let us go. They could consider it a public service for
the alternately abled - give themselves a pat on the back for what is a
paltry sum to them. It would be great PR.

>
> p.s. From all you've posted, I'm thinking your TDMA phone was actually
> working on AMPS in your residence, rather than TDMA, and that the loss of
AMPS
> is what caused your problem, not the switch from TDMA to GSM. Old TDMA
phones
> also supported AMPS (analog); new GSM phones don't (because AMPS is being
> phased out).

Could be, it is a tri-mode phone. Our TDMA phones are all nokia 5165s.

T

n
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 7:26:38 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <gVN%c.60320$3l3.56386@attbi_s03> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:58:52 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:8aM%c.12731$54.179510@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> The rep may have pushed GSM, but you did have a choice -- TDMA handsets are
>> still available and still supported.
>
>Not in Connecticut. You are mistaken. I don't know where you are but In
>Connecticut all new phones have to be on the GSM. That is what they told us
>at the store

What kind of store? A real Cingular company store, or a branded Cingular
dealer? Cingular isn't responsible for the latter, only the former.

>and that is what they told my neighbor just last week. She has
>four phones and they are not on a family plan.

Given its push to GSM, Cingular may not be willing to sell you a new TDMA
phone (or TDMA rate plan), but TDMA phones are still readily available (e.g.,
from on-line dealers, on eBay), and I'm pretty sure that Cingular would
activate one, at least as a replacement for an existing TDMA phone.

>> You can only switch from TDMA to GSM with a different rate plan, so a new
>> contract was required. Didn't you check the paperwork?
>
>Nope. That isn't what happened here. He said all new phones had to be GSM
>and the phone was put on our family plan. There was no contract. There was
>only an upgrade on the broken phone. >

You need to check your rate plan(s)! AFAIK, you can't have TDMA and GSM
phones on the same rate plan. And there must be a contract, even if you
didn't get any actual paper, or there wouldn't be an Early Termination Fee.

>> GSM is good, but that doesn't mean you'll have coverage everywhere in your
>> residence. Regardless, why did you take it on faith? Buyers are expected to
>> exercise reasonable prudence.
>
>Perhaps you do not understand.

That's certainly possible. How about starting over with your original
contract date and term, the dates and terms of any contract extensions, and
the date and term of your current contract?

>We went into the store with a phone that was
>broken. It was already on the family plan and we were paying $20 a month.
>To cancel the phone so that we did not have to pay the $20 a month there
>would be an early termination fee on the original broken phone.

Phones don't have ETF, only services (lines).

>Or we could
>continue to pay the $20 a month and not have a working phone.

Or you could get your own TDMA phone, and have it activated without any
contract extension.

>The Rep
>insisted all new phones in CT have to be on the GSM network.

The key word there is "new" (rather than "replacement").

>He sent us
>home with a new phone that was a GSM phone. It didn't work. We took it
>back and he gave us the nokia. It still doesn't work like our original TDMA
>that we contracted for

You didn't contract for any given phone. You contracted for service.

>but he assured us that the network was going to get
>better.

It probably has, just not in your residence.

>We had no choice.

You did have a choice. You were not obligated to switch to GSM or to pay for
TDMA that wasn't working. You let yourself get pressured into doing things
that you shouldn't have done. I think that's unfortunate, but it's quite
legitimate in this country. (Think about that when you vote in November.)

>Perhaps the problem here was with the original
>salesperson. Perhaps he didn't know what he was talking about. We had
>never heard of TDMA or GSM. When we first got our phones we did our
>homework. Cingular worked for us. No one told us that the network was
>going to change.

It's been widely reported in the press, and on the Cingular website.

>Shouldn't we expect the same service?

Not necessarily.

>Or at least an
>option to leave if it didn't work?

Under the UCC you do have the right to leave without penalty if (1) the
service got substantially worse (2) during a contract term and (3) the problem
isn't fixed by the carrier. You haven't yet said if all three apply, which
makes me think they don't, thus undermining your case.

>Not false promises.

Did the rep really promise that you would get service throughout your
residence (which hasn't happened), or just that it would get better (which
probably has happened)?

>> So talk to someone else. (And please don't rehash old ground here.)
>
>Sorry. This was a new incidence of rudeness. He came home early because
>she wanted to talk to him because the phones are in his name.

So talk to someone else.

>> That still tells her nothing about the past.
>
>But there are known holes with the GSM.

There are holes with all cellular services -- it's the (unfortunate) nature of
the beast.

>There is a report in Consumer
>Reports. When I read that report I finally understood what had happened to
>us.

No offense, but I don't think so.

>My neighbor is complaining too. It isn't working for us up here. ...

I assume that's true. If so, you had recourse. The apparent problem is that
you've weakened your case by letting so much time go by.

>> You clearly need to talk to someone else. ;-)
>
>She called me because I made a complaint with the better business bureau.
>And she was at least the third person we have talked to on the phone.

Whatever -- you clearly need to talk to someone else (and three calls isn't
very many).

>... No one told us why the TDMA was degrading. No one sent out
>notices that it was changing.

How is that relevant?

>Our phones just got worse and worse.

Probably worse just at one particular point in time.

>The
>only place my phone did not work before was in the middle of my house in the
>hallway. Now if people call me or I call them there is no where I can go
>that we can talk. See we have two problems - The TDMA phones and the GSM
>phone. Perhaps you don't remember or understand?

I've been doing my best to follow you, but there's been so much conflicting,
incomplete, and inconsistent information. For example:

* You say you've been a customer for 6 years, and don't have a contract, but
are facing an Early Termination Fee, so you must have agreed to a contract
extension within the past 2 years.

* You first said the new phone was an upgrade, but now the old phone was
broken -- which is it?

* You haven't answered many of the questions I've asked. Why not?

I suggest you start over and give us the straight story with all the details,
including the date and term of your last contract extension, the exact rate
plan(s) you are on, and the date of service deterioration.

>> Why didn't you check sooner?
>
>Because Cingular was telling us to hang on it was going to get better!

No offense, but it's getting harder and harder to see that as a good reason.

>And
>when we started our family plan in 1999 Cingular worked here.

Irrelevant, since that can't possibly be your current plan. If you agreed to
a contract extension after service got worse, then, and with all due respect,
you only have yourself to blame, no matter what anyone said at Cingular.

>> Fair enough, but when service deteriorated, you should have dealt with the
>> problem in a timely manner.
>
>Well we did we asked about it and they said it was going to get better. I
>don't know what else we could have done. We trusted Cingular. It did not
>get better and now we are the ones at fault.

I sincerely mean no offense, but that sounds hopelessly naive (if not
disingenuous).

>> Why not use a land line and cordless phone? Surely that would be less
>> expensive?
>
>Not as inexpensive as a family plan. Four or even three people would be
>more expensive. That is what family plans are all about. We only have
>400 d/t minutes and 4500 n/w minutes. It is an old contract.

Whatever -- it still looks more expensive than a landline to me.

>> That was what you agreed to.
>
>AGH! no it isn't.

Sorry, but it is.

>> You accept no responsibility for what happened?
>
>I didn't change the network. What responsibility do I have?

To return unsatisfactory equipment within the return period. To terminate
unsatisfactory service within the grace period. To exercise reasonable care
and prudence.

>I really don't
>understand. We called we asked, we went to stores, we asked what was wrong
>and were told it was going to get better.

Sorry, but I'm not persuaded that you exercised reasonable care and prudence.

>> You blame the carrier and the
>> rep for everything? And you think the best way to win is by fighting? With
>> all due respect (and sympathy), that's not reasonable. Try being both nice
>> and persistent. Take at least some of the responsibility for your own
>> actions. Write to the President of the company. Propose a reasonable
>> compromise.
>
>I was nice. We have talked to so many people. Barbara in Little Rock is
>rude and interrupts. She was not very professional. She was the first one
>we ever talked to who was rude. I think she was in the president's office.
>When my husband called back it was the president's office that answered. I
>don't know what compromise is available except to let us out of our
>contract.

One (of many) possibilities: Offer to at least split the Early Termination
Fee. After all, you did get a big discount on a new phone.

>Our TDMA phones do not work - GSM doesn't work.

You've said it does work, just not well for you as it used to.

>We have
>supported them for 5 years.

No, you've been buying service for 5 years.

>We waited patiently for the network to work.

No offense, but it sounds more like you simply let things slide, and are now
upset and trying to blame the carrier for your own failure to cancel without
penalty.

>We were nice and all these months later we are still being nice.

Again, why did you wait so long? That you did so is your responsibility, not
that of the carrier.

>We have
>one phone that can go this month, two phones next month and then the one a
>year from February.

Then why all the angst?

>This is business they do not care about people they
>care about profits.

As they should.

>Otherwise they would admit that their service through
>no fault of ours has changed and no longer works in our house and they would
>be kind enough to let us go.

They probably would have been kind enough to let you go if you had exercised
your rights, rather than letting so much time slide by.

>They could consider it a public service for
>the alternately abled - give themselves a pat on the back for what is a
>paltry sum to them. It would be great PR.

That's pretty nasty, and doesn't make your case more persuasive. You need
facts in your favor, not emotion.

Your real problem isn't the phone or the switch to GSM -- it's the degradation
in service, since you're complaining about your TDMA service as well. I don't
think you have a terribly good case on the GSM phone, since you could have
returned it without penalty, but instead let seven months go by. So it comes
down to your TDMA phones that are nearly expired. I suggest you switch to the
cheapest possible rate plan, pay off the remaining TDMA terms, bite the bullet
on the GSM phone you shouldn't have kept but did, and be done with it. No
offense, but I really don't see that you have much to complain about.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 3:24:36 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:o 3Q%c.12781$54.179701@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <gVN%c.60320$3l3.56386@attbi_s03> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:58:52 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:8aM%c.12731$54.179510@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> The rep may have pushed GSM, but you did have a choice -- TDMA handsets
are
> >> still available and still supported.
> >
> >Not in Connecticut. You are mistaken. I don't know where you are but In
> >Connecticut all new phones have to be on the GSM. That is what they told
us
> >at the store
>
> What kind of store? A real Cingular company store, or a branded Cingular
> dealer? Cingular isn't responsible for the latter, only the former.

A real store - there are only three in our area that one can take a phone to
that doesn't work or to get an upgrade.
>
> >and that is what they told my neighbor just last week. She has
> >four phones and they are not on a family plan.
>
> Given its push to GSM, Cingular may not be willing to sell you a new TDMA
> phone (or TDMA rate plan), but TDMA phones are still readily available
(e.g.,
> from on-line dealers, on eBay), and I'm pretty sure that Cingular would
> activate one, at least as a replacement for an existing TDMA phone.

Wrong - all new phones activated have to be GSM.
>
> >> You can only switch from TDMA to GSM with a different rate plan, so a
new
> >> contract was required. Didn't you check the paperwork?
> >
> >Nope. That isn't what happened here. He said all new phones had to be
GSM
> >and the phone was put on our family plan. There was no contract. There
was
> >only an upgrade on the broken phone. >
>
> You need to check your rate plan(s)! AFAIK, you can't have TDMA and GSM
> phones on the same rate plan. And there must be a contract, even if you
> didn't get any actual paper, or there wouldn't be an Early Termination
Fee.

Well, Gee it is too bad the guy who sold us the phone at the authorized
Cingular store did not know that! We took in the phone - he gave us a
phone. The only choices were GSM phones.

>
> >> GSM is good, but that doesn't mean you'll have coverage everywhere in
your
> >> residence. Regardless, why did you take it on faith? Buyers are
expected to
> >> exercise reasonable prudence.

I didn't take it on faith. It worked and now it does not work. Why is this
so hard to understand?
> >
> >Perhaps you do not understand.
>
> That's certainly possible. How about starting over with your original
> contract date and term, the dates and terms of any contract extensions,
and
> the date and term of your current contract?

We had a family plan with four phones. I think it was in January that I
noticed the phone did not work as well anymore. I blamed the weather, the
age of the phone, my new computer. In February we took one of the 4 phones
in because the buttons were stuck and the phone wouldn't work. I think that
was the first time we started to ask about the degradation is service and
were told to be patient. We do not have a plan contract. We have contracts
on the phones. When we get a new phone we sign a contract for two years.
But the contract really says nothing about the plan. I was told in
September of 2002 that Cingular did want customers to be stuck with a plan
so written contracts that detailed everything aren't available. You may
not believe this but it is true. Your area of the country may be different.

>
> >We went into the store with a phone that was
> >broken. It was already on the family plan and we were paying $20 a
month.
> >To cancel the phone so that we did not have to pay the $20 a month there
> >would be an early termination fee on the original broken phone.
>
> Phones don't have ETF, only services (lines).

WRONG.
>
> >Or we could
> >continue to pay the $20 a month and not have a working phone.
>
> Or you could get your own TDMA phone, and have it activated without any
> contract extension.

WRONG.
>
> >The Rep
> >insisted all new phones in CT have to be on the GSM network.
>
> The key word there is "new" (rather than "replacement").

At the time we did not know that one could buy a used phone. And he (at the
Cingular store) said ALL phones activated in CT had to be on the GSM
network. When the Second GSM phone did not work we asked him if there
wasn't someone possible way to go back to phones like we had and he said no.
He told us to wait once the network was fixed it would be wonderful.
>
> >He sent us
> >home with a new phone that was a GSM phone. It didn't work. We took it
> >back and he gave us the nokia. It still doesn't work like our original
TDMA
> >that we contracted for
>
> You didn't contract for any given phone. You contracted for service.

Wrong.
>
> >but he assured us that the network was going to get
> >better.
>
> It probably has, just not in your residence.

This isn't true either. There are a lot more holes now. There are a lot
of places where there is not service. My nieghbor travels around the state.
>
> >We had no choice.
>
> You did have a choice. You were not obligated to switch to GSM or to pay
for
> TDMA that wasn't working. You let yourself get pressured into doing
things
> that you shouldn't have done. I think that's unfortunate, but it's quite
> legitimate in this country. (Think about that when you vote in November.)

What?
>
> >Perhaps the problem here was with the original
> >salesperson. Perhaps he didn't know what he was talking about. We
had
> >never heard of TDMA or GSM. When we first got our phones we did our
> >homework. Cingular worked for us. No one told us that the network was
> >going to change.
>
> It's been widely reported in the press, and on the Cingular website.

Well, I am not a Cingular guru like you.
>
> >Shouldn't we expect the same service?
>
> Not necessarily.
>
> >Or at least an
> >option to leave if it didn't work?
>
> Under the UCC you do have the right to leave without penalty if (1) the
> service got substantially worse (2) during a contract term and (3) the
problem
> isn't fixed by the carrier. You haven't yet said if all three apply,
which
> makes me think they don't, thus undermining your case.

They all apply. No one has even offered us any options because they know
nothing will work at our house. The one person said she would "increase
activation" whatever that meant. That didn't work. An engineer was
supposed to call and they did not. Barbara in Little Rock says it is the
FCCs fault our phones no longer work.
>
> >Not false promises.
>
> Did the rep really promise that you would get service throughout your
> residence (which hasn't happened), or just that it would get better (which
> probably has happened)?
>
> >> So talk to someone else. (And please don't rehash old ground here.)
> >
> >Sorry. This was a new incidence of rudeness. He came home early because
> >she wanted to talk to him because the phones are in his name.
>
> So talk to someone else.
>
> >> That still tells her nothing about the past.
> >
> >But there are known holes with the GSM.
>
> There are holes with all cellular services -- it's the (unfortunate)
nature of
> the beast.
>
> >There is a report in Consumer
> >Reports. When I read that report I finally understood what had happened
to
> >us.
>
> No offense, but I don't think so.

Check it out for yourself. this was from February of 2004. I thought you
were knowledgable about Cingular but your part of the country must have
different rules or something.

Trouble in the GSM network


Cell-phone systems in Europe and Asia generally use the same digital network
technology: GSM, for Global System for Mobile Communications. In the U.S.,
however, GSM is only one of four digital technologies in use. T-Mobile uses
it exclusively, while AT&T Wireless and Cingular are building a GSM network
alongside their older one, which uses TDMA technology. Both carriers plan to
offer new data services only on GSM. But the change is creating problems for
current AT&T and Cingular customers.

One problem is coverage. The two carriers' GSM networks don't appear to
provide the same coverage that TDMA customers get. An AT&T spokesman told us
that the two networks mostly coincide, but he concedes that "there could
still be Bermuda triangles where you get coverage on one but not the other."
A look at AT&T's map of coverage in North Carolina (see illustrations below)
shows how different the two networks can be. With GSM, the home calling area
is smaller and thus, the roaming area is larger.

Another problem, which we encountered in our testing, affects the Sony
Ericsson T62u phone sold by Cingular. It uses a multinetwork technology that
's designed to provide the best possible coverage on Cingular's TDMA and GSM
networks. The T62u that we purchased for testing worked well for a while,
then could no longer pick up a GSM signal. Even though we had the help of
Cingular store clerks and customer-service personnel, exchanged the phone
for a new sample, and obtained a new phone number, the T62u continued to
work erratically.


>
> >My neighbor is complaining too. It isn't working for us up here. ...
>
> I assume that's true. If so, you had recourse. The apparent problem is
that
> you've weakened your case by letting so much time go by.

But see we have asked questions about the service it isn't getting better as
we were told.

>
> >> You clearly need to talk to someone else. ;-)
> >
> >She called me because I made a complaint with the better business bureau.
> >And she was at least the third person we have talked to on the phone.
>
> Whatever -- you clearly need to talk to someone else (and three calls
isn't
> very many).

I am not counting the many times we went back with the GSM phone or when my
neighbor called. This is ridiculous. We are supposed to spend our lives
chasing Cingular?

>
> >... No one told us why the TDMA was degrading. No one sent out
> >notices that it was changing.
>
> How is that relevant?
>
> >Our phones just got worse and worse.
>
> Probably worse just at one particular point in time.

Are you calling me a liar?
>
> >The
> >only place my phone did not work before was in the middle of my house in
the
> >hallway. Now if people call me or I call them there is no where I can go
> >that we can talk. See we have two problems - The TDMA phones and the
GSM
> >phone. Perhaps you don't remember or understand?
>
> I've been doing my best to follow you, but there's been so much
conflicting,
> incomplete, and inconsistent information. For example:
>
> * You say you've been a customer for 6 years, and don't have a contract,
but
> are facing an Early Termination Fee, so you must have agreed to a contract
> extension within the past 2 years.

Everytime we buy a new phone we sign a contract.
>
> * You first said the new phone was an upgrade, but now the old phone was
> broken -- which is it?

The old phone was broken and was eligible upgrade because of the age of the
phone.
>
> * You haven't answered many of the questions I've asked. Why not?

What questions?
>
> I suggest you start over and give us the straight story with all the
details,
> including the date and term of your last contract extension, the exact
rate
> plan(s) you are on, and the date of service deterioration.

I don't know the name of the plan there was no contract. It says Family H
400R/5000 and it expires 10/25/04 (but that is the expiration on my
husband's phone) on the Website -
>
> >> Why didn't you check sooner?
> >
> >Because Cingular was telling us to hang on it was going to get better!
>
> No offense, but it's getting harder and harder to see that as a good
reason.

Okay, we were patient and that works against us. We should have said "make
it work now" but in reality there would not be any difference.
>
> >And
> >when we started our family plan in 1999 Cingular worked here.
>
> Irrelevant, since that can't possibly be your current plan. If you agreed
to
> a contract extension after service got worse, then, and with all due
respect,
> you only have yourself to blame, no matter what anyone said at Cingular.

Okay. I don't understand it but whatever.
>
> >> Fair enough, but when service deteriorated, you should have dealt with
the
> >> problem in a timely manner.
> >
> >Well we did we asked about it and they said it was going to get better.
I
> >don't know what else we could have done. We trusted Cingular. It did
not
> >get better and now we are the ones at fault.
>
> I sincerely mean no offense, but that sounds hopelessly naive (if not
> disingenuous).

Okay - we were stupid. We should have said - "Fix it now!" They said be
patient towers were being added. We should have said, "Put the Tower up
now!" What could we have done. You are the "expert" tell me.
>
> >> Why not use a land line and cordless phone? Surely that would be less
> >> expensive?
> >
> >Not as inexpensive as a family plan. Four or even three people would be
> >more expensive. That is what family plans are all about. We only
have
> >400 d/t minutes and 4500 n/w minutes. It is an old contract.
>
> Whatever -- it still looks more expensive than a landline to me.

Nope. At the cheapest plan at 39.00 a month time 4 with 300 or 400 day time
minutes it isn't cheaper.
>
> >> That was what you agreed to.
> >
> >AGH! no it isn't.
>
> Sorry, but it is.
>
> >> You accept no responsibility for what happened?
> >
> >I didn't change the network. What responsibility do I have?
>
> To return unsatisfactory equipment within the return period. To terminate
> unsatisfactory service within the grace period. To exercise reasonable
care
> and prudence.

The service degraded after the grace period was over.
>
> >I really don't
> >understand. We called we asked, we went to stores, we asked what was
wrong
> >and were told it was going to get better.
>
> Sorry, but I'm not persuaded that you exercised reasonable care and
prudence.
>
> >> You blame the carrier and the
> >> rep for everything? And you think the best way to win is by fighting?
With
> >> all due respect (and sympathy), that's not reasonable. Try being both
nice
> >> and persistent. Take at least some of the responsibility for your own
> >> actions. Write to the President of the company. Propose a reasonable
> >> compromise.
> >
> >I was nice. We have talked to so many people. Barbara in Little Rock is
> >rude and interrupts. She was not very professional. She was the first
one
> >we ever talked to who was rude. I think she was in the president's
office.
> >When my husband called back it was the president's office that answered.
I
> >don't know what compromise is available except to let us out of our
> >contract.
>
> One (of many) possibilities: Offer to at least split the Early
Termination
> Fee. After all, you did get a big discount on a new phone.

No one has made us an offer. In fact I would pay the early termination on
the old phone. But for the one that is up this month and the other two that
are up next month?
>
> >Our TDMA phones do not work - GSM doesn't work.
>
> You've said it does work, just not well for you as it used to.

Yeah this is true. The person are the other side cannot hear me. Once in
awhile a garble word. It is extremely frustrating.
>
> >We have
> >supported them for 5 years.
>
> No, you've been buying service for 5 years.

true
>
> >We waited patiently for the network to work.
>
> No offense, but it sounds more like you simply let things slide, and are
now
> upset and trying to blame the carrier for your own failure to cancel
without
> penalty.
>
> >We were nice and all these months later we are still being nice.
>
> Again, why did you wait so long? That you did so is your responsibility,
not
> that of the carrier.
>
> >We have
> >one phone that can go this month, two phones next month and then the one
a
> >year from February.
>
> Then why all the angst?

We want to talk on the phone! It has been months and months since we have
been able to. And since I read the report on Consumer Reports - I finally
understood what was happening. It may not get better. We have been
trying to get this worked out for over a month. My son went back to college
I would like to talk to him. We want to get our moneys worth.
>
> >This is business they do not care about people they
> >care about profits.
>
> As they should.
>
> >Otherwise they would admit that their service through
> >no fault of ours has changed and no longer works in our house and they
would
> >be kind enough to let us go.
>
> They probably would have been kind enough to let you go if you had
exercised
> your rights, rather than letting so much time slide by.

Aghhh!
>
> >They could consider it a public service for
> >the alternately abled - give themselves a pat on the back for what is a
> >paltry sum to them. It would be great PR.
>
> That's pretty nasty, and doesn't make your case more persuasive. You need
> facts in your favor, not emotion.

Why is that nasty? Do you think companies do PR out of the goodnes of
their heart? I don't think so. It is to make themselves look kind. And
the fact of the matter is it is emotional. I cannot go upstairs. I
cannot go outside without anyone else at home. I used to be able to have
pleasant conversations with family members and now I cannot. All they hear
is garbled speech and they become frustrated. It may not sound relevant
to you but it is to me. This is emotional.

>
> Your real problem isn't the phone or the switch to GSM -- it's the
degradation
> in service, since you're complaining about your TDMA service as well. I
don't
> think you have a terribly good case on the GSM phone, since you could have
> returned it without penalty, but instead let seven months go by. So it
comes
> down to your TDMA phones that are nearly expired. I suggest you switch to
the
> cheapest possible rate plan, pay off the remaining TDMA terms, bite the
bullet
> on the GSM phone you shouldn't have kept but did, and be done with it. No
> offense, but I really don't see that you have much to complain about.

If the person would not have told us to sit tight and wait for this great
new network we would have returned the phone. But actually we would have
still have to pay ETF for the phone that it replaced until this October or
contine to pay $20 a month until October. It was broken. It did not work.

What I think happens is Cingular should tell their representatives to be
realistic and not promise things that may not be true. I also think they
should have pro-rated termination fees.

T


>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 9, 2004 9:55:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <7a%%c.62629$3l3.12681@attbi_s03> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:04:19 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>... John seems to think I have been making this up or
>something.

That wasn't what I said.

>I think his area of the country must have different rules.

Same rules.

>My
>neighbor and I are thinking of getting all the people in this area together
>and have a mass protest.

What does that mean? How could that possibly help?

>... Maybe we could get New England together.

Or the whole country! :) 

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 6:53:59 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:8O00d.12859$54.180849@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <7a%%c.62629$3l3.12681@attbi_s03> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 16:04:19 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >... John seems to think I have been making this up or
> >something.
>
> That wasn't what I said.

I said:
> >There is a report in Consumer
> >Reports. When I read that report I finally understood what had happened
to
> >us.
>
You said:
> No offense, but I don't think so.

Check it out for yourself. this was from February of 2004. I thought you
were knowledgable about Cingular but your part of the country must have
different rules or something.



>
> >I think his area of the country must have different rules.
>
> Same rules.

You were mistaken about the Consumer Reports article and no matter what you
say either customer service lied and this time I mean lie or you are
mistaken about your rules being different than ours.

Were they given a commission here to push the GSM phones? Why when we asked
did they tell us all phones had to be activated on GSM or are you mistaken?
When we asked to switch back they said we could not. Who is mistaken John?
The Cingular Store or John? If you are correct John then Cingular does
owe us the ETF because their representative lied to us.

>
> >My
> >neighbor and I are thinking of getting all the people in this area
together
> >and have a mass protest.
>
> What does that mean? How could that possibly help?

Make the company more responsible to consumers. Why is that a bad thing?
Do you work for Cingular or own stock?

T
>
> >... Maybe we could get New England together.
>
> Or the whole country! :) 
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 8:46:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <T3X%c.405439$%_6.69210@attbi_s01> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 11:24:36 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:o 3Q%c.12781$54.179701@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> What kind of store? A real Cingular company store, or a branded Cingular
>> dealer? Cingular isn't responsible for the latter, only the former.
>
>A real store -

A real Cingular store (with real Cingular employees)? Note that independent
resellers can look just like Cingular, right down to signs, display boards,
branded handsets, even shirts -- it can be hard to tell the difference unless
you ask.

>there are only three in our area that one can take a phone to
>that doesn't work or to get an upgrade.

Independent resellers also handle phone issues.

>> Given its push to GSM, Cingular may not be willing to sell you a new TDMA
>> phone (or TDMA rate plan), but TDMA phones are still readily available (e.g.,
>> from on-line dealers, on eBay), and I'm pretty sure that Cingular would
>> activate one, at least as a replacement for an existing TDMA phone.
>
>Wrong - all new phones activated have to be GSM.

I stand by what I wrote.

>> You need to check your rate plan(s)! AFAIK, you can't have TDMA and GSM
>> phones on the same rate plan. And there must be a contract, even if you
>> didn't get any actual paper, or there wouldn't be an Early Termination Fee.
>
>Well, Gee it is too bad the guy who sold us the phone at the authorized
>Cingular store did not know that! We took in the phone - he gave us a
>phone. The only choices were GSM phones.

Check your rate plan. If you don't yet have a written copy, get it, or at
least check it on the Cingular website.

>I didn't take it on faith. It worked and now it does not work. Why is this
>so hard to understand?

It's not hard to understand. What's hard to understand is why you think the
company is responsible for your apparent failure to exercise reasonable
prudence.

>> That's certainly possible. How about starting over with your original
>> contract date and term, the dates and terms of any contract extensions, and
>> the date and term of your current contract?
>
>We had a family plan with four phones.

Date and term? Or were you month-to-month? (You go month-to-month after the
initial term expires if you don't extend the service agreement with something
like a new subsidized handset.)

>I think it was in January that I
>noticed the phone did not work as well anymore. I blamed the weather, the
>age of the phone, my new computer.

The weather? Your new computer? Really?

If only 1 of the 4 phones exhibited a problem, then it was likely a phone
problem. If all 4 exhibited the same problem, then you should have known
something was wrong with the service.

>In February we took one of the 4 phones
>in because the buttons were stuck and the phone wouldn't work. I think that
>was the first time we started to ask about the degradation is service and
>were told to be patient. We do not have a plan contract.

You absolutely do have a plan contract (service agreement) -- that's the only
way Cingular can bill you. You don't have a phone contract -- you own the
phone outright.

>We have contracts
>on the phones.

No, you have service agreement minimum terms in exchange for the subsidies on
those phones -- that's how it works. You're not paying for the phones each
month, you're paying for the service, and service fees recover the phone
subsidies.

>When we get a new phone we sign a contract for two years.

The contract is a service agreement extension.

>But the contract really says nothing about the plan.

The contract is the plan, and there is definitely a plan.

>I was told in
>September of 2002 that Cingular did want customers to be stuck with a plan
>so written contracts that detailed everything aren't available. You may
>not believe this but it is true.

What I believe (actually know) is that it's nonsense. You should know that
too, and have insisted on it -- you are always entitled to a written copy of
any contract (service agreement). The person may not want to go through the
hassle, and try to discourage you, but is required to do so by law if you
insist.

>Your area of the country may be different.

Nope.

>> Phones don't have ETF, only services (lines).
>
>WRONG.

Sorry, but you are misinformed. You own the phone outright, so there can't be
a contract on the phone.

>> Or you could get your own TDMA phone, and have it activated without any
>> contract extension.
>
>WRONG.

I stand by what I wrote.

>> The key word there is "new" (rather than "replacement").
>
>At the time we did not know that one could buy a used phone.

Why not? You can also buy a new phone at other places (for more money).
There are lots of ads for this.

>And he (at the
>Cingular store) said ALL phones activated in CT had to be on the GSM
>network.

I think you had a 'failure to communicate' -- what he said was probably true
with respect to new phones and to upgrade phones, as compared to simple
replacement of a defective phone. It may also be true that he didn't even
have a replacement TDMA phone to sell you, meaning that you would have to get
one someplace else. (He's not obligated to tell you that you could buy one
someplace else -- that's called reasonable prudence on the part of the buyer.)

>When the Second GSM phone did not work we asked him if there
>wasn't someone possible way to go back to phones like we had and he said no.

Correct -- you've already made the mistake, and by then it's too late to go
back.

>He told us to wait once the network was fixed it would be wonderful.

Throughout your residence? Or did you accept a vague generalization?
Again, reasonable prudence.

>> You didn't contract for any given phone. You contracted for service.
>
>Wrong.

Sorry, but you are misinformed. You bought the phone outright, so there is no
contract on the phone.

>This isn't true either. There are a lot more holes now. There are a lot
>of places where there is not service. My nieghbor travels around the state.

It may not be great, but that doesn't mean that it hasn't improved, and it
almost certainly has improved.

>> You did have a choice. You were not obligated to switch to GSM or to pay for
>> TDMA that wasn't working. You let yourself get pressured into doing things
>> that you shouldn't have done. I think that's unfortunate, but it's quite
>> legitimate in this country. (Think about that when you vote in November.)
>
>What?

Consumer protection laws and regulations, and which parties and candidates are
actually for and against them.

>> It's been widely reported in the press, and on the Cingular website.
>
>Well, I am not a Cingular guru like you.

It doesn't take a guru -- you found it out when you visited the store, and
that should have prompted you to do some checking.

>> Under the UCC you do have the right to leave without penalty if (1) the
>> service got substantially worse (2) during a contract term and (3) the problem
>> isn't fixed by the carrier. You haven't yet said if all three apply, which
>> makes me think they don't, thus undermining your case.
>
>They all apply. ...

Then exercise your rights. That's up to you, not the carrier. It's not going
to happen unless you insist (and unless you actually have a strong case).

>> >There is a report in Consumer
>> >Reports. When I read that report I finally understood what had happened to
>> >us.
>>
>> No offense, but I don't think so.
>
>Check it out for yourself. [SNIP]

I'm quite familiar with the Consumer Reports story (on coverage in general,
and which is already badly out of date). I was commenting on your claim. The
story in Consumer Reports has no real bearing on your particular experience.

>> I assume that's true. If so, you had recourse. The apparent problem is that
>> you've weakened your case by letting so much time go by.
>
>But see we have asked questions about the service it isn't getting better as
>we were told.

Do you always believe everything you are told, no matter how vague?

>> Whatever -- you clearly need to talk to someone else (and three calls isn't
>> very many).
>
>I am not counting the many times we went back with the GSM phone or when my
>neighbor called. This is ridiculous. We are supposed to spend our lives
>chasing Cingular?

No, you are supposed to exercise reasonable prudence.

>> Probably worse just at one particular point in time.
>
>Are you calling me a liar?

No.

Are you now professing to be an expert in cellular?

>> I've been doing my best to follow you, but there's been so much conflicting,
>> incomplete, and inconsistent information. For example:
>>
>> * You say you've been a customer for 6 years, and don't have a contract, but
>> are facing an Early Termination Fee, so you must have agreed to a contract
>> extension within the past 2 years.
>
>Everytime we buy a new phone we sign a contract.

You sign a service plan extension in return for the subsidy you're getting on
the phone. You do know that you're not paying full price on the phone, that
you get the discount in return for a service plan extension, and that you can
pay full price and not have a service plan extension? Or aren't you reading
those materials you're signing? And getting things in writing?

>> * You first said the new phone was an upgrade, but now the old phone was
>> broken -- which is it?
>
>The old phone was broken and was eligible upgrade because of the age of the
>phone.

[sigh] It's only "eligible" because the old subsidy has been paid off. The
upgrade is a new subsidy, so there you go again with a new service agreement
extension. If you had taken phone insurance, you could have gotten a
replacement for free without any service agreement extension. You could also
have bought a replacement phone someplace else. But by getting an "upgrade"
rather than repair or replacement, you made the commitment to switch to GSM.
That's something you did, not the company, not the salesperson.

>> * You haven't answered many of the questions I've asked. Why not?
>
>What questions?

You've left out many important details, and have failed to answer many of the
things I've asked; e.g.,

Did the rep really promise that you would get service throughout your
residence (which hasn't happened), or just that it would get better (which
probably has happened)?

>> I suggest you start over and give us the straight story with all the details,
>> including the date and term of your last contract extension, the exact rate
>> plan(s) you are on, and the date of service deterioration.
>
>I don't know the name of the plan there was no contract.

There absolutely is a contract, and you should always know the name of
whatever plan you're on.

>It says Family H
>400R/5000 and it expires 10/25/04 (but that is the expiration on my
>husband's phone) on the Website -

Progress -- that's good. And that's the expiration on the service plan, not
the phone.

>Okay, we were patient and that works against us.

No -- you failed to exercise reasonable prudence.

>We should have said "make
>it work now" but in reality there would not be any difference.

There would definitely have been a difference -- you always have 15 days to
terminate without penalty.

>> I sincerely mean no offense, but that sounds hopelessly naive (if not
>> disingenuous).
>
>Okay - we were stupid. We should have said - "Fix it now!" They said be
>patient towers were being added. We should have said, "Put the Tower up
>now!" What could we have done. You are the "expert" tell me.

You should have said, "It doesn't work well enough for me. Take it back."
Simple. Effective.

>> To return unsatisfactory equipment within the return period. To terminate
>> unsatisfactory service within the grace period. To exercise reasonable care
>> and prudence.
>
>The service degraded after the grace period was over.

You said the degradation started in January, but you didn't get the new phone
until February.

>> One (of many) possibilities: Offer to at least split the Early Termination
>> Fee. After all, you did get a big discount on a new phone.
>
>No one has made us an offer.

I said you make an offer, not hope for one.

>> Then why all the angst?
>
>We want to talk on the phone!

Then deal with the problem in a timely manner instead of letting months go by.

>It has been months and months since we have
>been able to.

That was your choice, not anything the company did.

>And since I read the report on Consumer Reports - I finally
>understood what was happening.

The story in Consumer Reports (on coverage in general, and which is already
badly out of date) is not directly relevant to your experience, which is a
degradation in existing service.

>It may not get better.

It may not get better in your residence, but GSM coverage has in fact been
improving rapidly.

>We have been
>trying to get this worked out for over a month.

You shouldn't have started trying months ago when the problem started.

>My son went back to college
>I would like to talk to him. We want to get our moneys worth.

Again, you should have dealt with this months ago. If you bought a dress, and
it didn't fit well when you get it home, but then you kept it for seven
months, do you think the store is still obligated to take it back? Really?

>> They probably would have been kind enough to let you go if you had exercised
>> your rights, rather than letting so much time slide by.
>
>Aghhh!

Indeed. We all make mistakes. Hopefully we learn from them.

>> That's pretty nasty, and doesn't make your case more persuasive. You need
>> facts in your favor, not emotion.
>
>Why is that nasty? ...

Because you imply that you're entitled to special treatment because of your
disability.

>>... No
>> offense, but I really don't see that you have much to complain about.

>If the person would not have told us to sit tight and wait for this great
>new network we would have returned the phone.

That person is a salesperson trying to keep you as a customer, not your
personal advisor. You didn't understand that? You don't make your own
choices? You always do what salespeople tell you to do?

>But actually we would have
>still have to pay ETF for the phone that it replaced until this October or
>contine to pay $20 a month until October. It was broken. It did not work.

The ETF applies to the service agreement, not the phone.

>What I think happens is Cingular should tell their representatives to be
>realistic and not promise things that may not be true.

What I think is that your expectations are unrealistic.

>I also think they
>should have pro-rated termination fees.

1. Nobody (that I know of) has pro-rata ETF in cellular.

2. You knew (or should have known) that when you signed up.

3. You are only obligated for the lesser of the ETF or the remaining service
fees, whichever is smaller. (That should be obvious.)

4. The service agreement extension and ETF are to compensate for the phone
discount (subsidy), which is optional.

5. The discount on the phone was apparently worth more to you than the ETF,
so it's a bit late to complain about the ETF now.

6. Since you broke the phone you are responsible for it not working (as
compared to warranty).

7. You apparently failed to get phone insurance, so must bear the cost
yourself. Again, that was your choice.

8. When you went for an "upgrade" deal (discounted price) rather than paying
full price for repair or replacement, you again agreed to a service agreement
extension with ETF in return for the discount.

9. If you switch to Verizon, you're going to run into these same issues.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 9:50:39 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:CTk0d.13033$54.182628@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <T3X%c.405439$%_6.69210@attbi_s01> on Thu, 09 Sep 2004 11:24:36 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:o 3Q%c.12781$54.179701@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> What kind of store? A real Cingular company store, or a branded
Cingular
> >> dealer? Cingular isn't responsible for the latter, only the former.
> >
> >A real store -
>
> A real Cingular store (with real Cingular employees)? Note that
independent
> resellers can look just like Cingular, right down to signs, display
boards,
> branded handsets, even shirts -- it can be hard to tell the difference
unless
> you ask.

Cingular Wireless
3298 Berlin Tnpk

Newington, CT 06111, USA

Phone: (860) 594-4110
Fax: (860) 667-8802

Hours: MON-FRI 9:00-8:00 ,SAT 9:00-6:00 ,SUN 11:00-5:00

Services:

Equipment Upgrade
Prepaid
Process Insurance Claims


This is the store. I am done discussing this with you. I am not an idiot.
You call them and you ask them if you are so sure of your information. If
you give people information you really should check your facts.

T
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 9:54:11 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <5H80d.165246$mD.126709@attbi_s02> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 02:53:59 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>Check it out for yourself. this was from February of 2004.

I have. Lots of other studies as well.

>I thought you
>were knowledgable about Cingular but your part of the country must have
>different rules or something.

Same rules.

>You were mistaken about the Consumer Reports article

Not true.

>and no matter what you
>say either customer service lied and this time I mean lie or you are
>mistaken about your rules being different than ours.

Also not true (as I've explained in considerable detail). But you seem to be
very stubborn and unwilling to accept what's actually happened (no offense
intended).

>Were they given a commission here to push the GSM phones?

Cingular is switching to GSM, and is phasing out TDMA, as you've now known for
many months. Thus the salesperson only has GSM to push.

>Why when we asked
>did they tell us all phones had to be activated on GSM or are you mistaken?

To repeat what I wrote previously:

I think you had a 'failure to communicate' -- what he said was probably true
with respect to new phones and to upgrade phones, as compared to simple
replacement of a defective phone. It may also be true that he didn't even
have a replacement TDMA phone to sell you, meaning that you would have to get
one someplace else. (He's not obligated to tell you that you could buy one
someplace else -- that's called reasonable prudence on the part of the buyer.)

>When we asked to switch back they said we could not.

To repeat what I wrote previously:

Correct -- you've already made the mistake, and by then it's too late to go
back.

>Who is mistaken John?
>The Cingular Store or John? If you are correct John then Cingular does
>owe us the ETF because their representative lied to us.

Not really, as explained previously and above.

>> >My
>> >neighbor and I are thinking of getting all the people in this area together
>> >and have a mass protest.
>>
>> What does that mean? How could that possibly help?
>
>Make the company more responsible to consumers.

I fail to see how a protest would actually do that. Are you thinking of
picketing the company headquarters? Or just the local store? And for how
long? Or perhaps marching to Washington DC?

>Why is that a bad thing?

It's not bad, just unrealistic. If you want the company to be more responsive
(what I presume you meant), then you need to exercise your rights.

>Do you work for Cingular or own stock?

Neither. Do you always insult people with differing opinions?

I started out trying to inform and help you, and I've spent considerable time
and effort in trying to do just that, but you seem to want only sympathy and
support, and to get nasty when you don't get it. So I'm pretty much done.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
September 10, 2004 9:54:12 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>Thus the salesperson only has GSM to push.

Then why was I told we HAD to switch NOW
to renew the contract, hell he even told
me I needed to change the number, which is
a lie, and I told him so. AGAIN, a Cingular
employee lies. Or are you calling ME a liar..?

Mind ya, they gave free phones, $$, an Mp3
player, etc etc with the GSM, but I'd of
taken SERVICE IN MY HOUSE over them.

AND..telling someone months later that they
should of canceled after 15 days means squat
if the problem doesn't happen to long long
after that 15 day period. Lies..more lies..

But golly, geee, now that they opened a store
down the street from me, I should praise the
"..office of the president.." for my luck?

Then again, I'm just a stupid paying customer
for the last 3 years. What do I know, or deserve?

JJT




-------------------------------------------------------------
Don't go away MAD, here's a SASE for you to fill out telling
me how tasty my dust is, and an order blank for re-fills....

...ok....NOW you can go......
-------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 11:00:07 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <OPl0d.68063$3l3.58254@attbi_s03> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:50:39 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>... I am done discussing this with you.

Good -- me too.

>I am not an idiot.

I didn't say or even imply that.

>You call them and you ask them if you are so sure of your information. If
>you give people information you really should check your facts.

My facts are checked thoroughly.

If you ask people for information you really should have an open mind.
You might well learn some useful things. Just a thought. Have a nice day.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 10, 2004 11:24:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <4mq3k0ppsq3fq2t65238gf51bmtkpbh7k9@4ax.com> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 14:01:52
-0400, 1234 <1234@5678.910> wrote:

>>Thus the salesperson only has GSM to push.
>
>Then why was I told we HAD to switch NOW
>to renew the contract, hell he even told
>me I needed to change the number, which is
>a lie, and I told him so. AGAIN, a Cingular
>employee lies. Or are you calling ME a liar..?

I calling you nasty, and I'm done with the "discussion."

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 2:04:10 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:XQm0d.13068$54.182937@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <OPl0d.68063$3l3.58254@attbi_s03> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 17:50:39 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >... I am done discussing this with you.
>
> Good -- me too.
>
> >I am not an idiot.
>
> I didn't say or even imply that.
You most certainly did by challenging practically every word I said and by
insisting I did not know what kind of a store I went to.
>
> >You call them and you ask them if you are so sure of your information.
If
> >you give people information you really should check your facts.
>
> My facts are checked thoroughly.

Good excuse. Don't want to make the call huh? You aren't going to
believe me and you just make up an excuse. That is the easy way out.

>
> If you ask people for information you really should have an open mind.
> You might well learn some useful things. Just a thought. Have a nice
day.

And you need some classes in humility. Or perhaps social image and
awareness. You don't "help" people by taking the side of the company in
every instance. You don't help people by alluding they are idiots or lying
or by insisting they are overreacting or naive.

When I first came into this group I wondered why there were so many
derogatory posts aimed at you because you originated the newsgroup. I am
the owner of a group, the co-administrator on another and a moderator on
another so I understand about trolls and people who come to disrupt groups.
But now I understand. You are very close minded about Cingular.


This should be alt.I love Cingular and big business and screw the little
person.

T
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 5:03:16 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <uxp0d.169236$mD.85356@attbi_s02> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:04:10 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:XQm0d.13068$54.182937@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> My facts are checked thoroughly.
>
>Good excuse. Don't want to make the call huh? You aren't going to
>believe me and you just make up an excuse. That is the easy way out.

I've already made the call -- to Cingular Customer Service, not the store,
something you should have done as well.

>> If you ask people for information you really should have an open mind.
>> You might well learn some useful things. Just a thought. Have a nice
>> day.
>
>And you need some classes in humility.

Because I'm not chanting, "Yeah, baby!" Again, I think you have unrealistic
and unreasonable expectations.

>Or perhaps social image and
>awareness.

Thanks for the insult.

>You don't "help" people by taking the side of the company in
>every instance.

I don't. The problem is that in this case your side is pretty weak.

>You don't help people by alluding they are idiots or lying

Sorry you feel that way, but I really haven't done that.

>or by insisting they are overreacting or naive.

Guilty as charged, because that's what I think.

>When I first came into this group I wondered why there were so many
>derogatory posts aimed at you because you originated the newsgroup. I am
>the owner of a group, the co-administrator on another and a moderator on
>another so I understand about trolls and people who come to disrupt groups.
>But now I understand. You are very close minded about Cingular.

Just because I'm not chanting, "Yeah, baby!" Notwithstanding all the time
I've spent trying to actually help you (until it became clear that you weren't
really after help here). How nice. Not.

>This should be alt.I love Cingular and big business and screw the little
>person.

You screwed yourself (no offense intended). It's a shame you can't see and/or
admit that. For your own sake. You're just venting, and I have little
patience for that.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 11, 2004 8:13:36 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:o 9s0d.13115$54.183681@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <uxp0d.169236$mD.85356@attbi_s02> on Fri, 10 Sep 2004 22:04:10 GMT,
> "Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:XQm0d.13068$54.182937@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> >> My facts are checked thoroughly.
> >
> >Good excuse. Don't want to make the call huh? You aren't going to
> >believe me and you just make up an excuse. That is the easy way out.
>
> I've already made the call -- to Cingular Customer Service, not the store,
> something you should have done as well.
>
> >> If you ask people for information you really should have an open mind.
> >> You might well learn some useful things. Just a thought. Have a nice
> >> day.
> >
> >And you need some classes in humility.
>
> Because I'm not chanting, "Yeah, baby!" Again, I think you have
unrealistic
> and unreasonable expectations.
>
> >Or perhaps social image and
> >awareness.
>
> Thanks for the insult.
>
> >You don't "help" people by taking the side of the company in
> >every instance.
>
> I don't. The problem is that in this case your side is pretty weak.
>
> >You don't help people by alluding they are idiots or lying
>
> Sorry you feel that way, but I really haven't done that.
>
> >or by insisting they are overreacting or naive.
>
> Guilty as charged, because that's what I think.
>
> >When I first came into this group I wondered why there were so many
> >derogatory posts aimed at you because you originated the newsgroup. I am
> >the owner of a group, the co-administrator on another and a moderator on
> >another so I understand about trolls and people who come to disrupt
groups.
> >But now I understand. You are very close minded about Cingular.
>
> Just because I'm not chanting, "Yeah, baby!" Notwithstanding all the time
> I've spent trying to actually help you (until it became clear that you
weren't
> really after help here). How nice. Not.
>
> >This should be alt.I love Cingular and big business and screw the little
> >person.
>
> You screwed yourself (no offense intended). It's a shame you can't see
and/or
> admit that. For your own sake. You're just venting, and I have little
> patience for that.

I beg to differ. Take a good look at yourself John.

T

>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
Anonymous
September 12, 2004 6:55:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

In <QXu0d.414068$%_6.120586@attbi_s01> on Sat, 11 Sep 2004 04:13:36 GMT,
"Turbocane" <Turbocane1nospamthem@comcast.net> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:o 9s0d.13115$54.183681@typhoon.sonic.net...

>> You screwed yourself (no offense intended). It's a shame you can't see and/or
>> admit that. For your own sake. You're just venting, and I have little patience for that.
>
>I beg to differ. Take a good look at yourself John.

1. I'm not the one venting.

2. I don't experience such problems because I pay attention to my service and
service agreements.

3. I wasted considerable time and effort trying to help you.

--
Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular&gt;
September 13, 2004 4:57:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:03:16 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>Notwithstanding all the time
>I've spent trying to actually help you

Some help.

RJ
September 13, 2004 11:21:35 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

>On Sat, 11 Sep 2004 01:03:16 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>Notwithstanding all the time
>>I've spent trying to actually help you
>
>Some help.
>
>RJ


The big ? is "WHY" is he trying to 'help'..?

He has a fetish for Cingular, the need to protect them
against all us big bad consumers who are lied to..

THEN he bitches about 'helping'..?

LIKE WHO ASKED HIM TOO ?

Fool has no life. AND a Cingular fetish..

JJT






-------------------------------------------------------------
Don't go away MAD, here's a SASE for you to fill out telling
me how tasty my dust is, and an order blank for re-fills....

...ok....NOW you can go......
-------------------------------------------------------------
!