All Cingular contracts now VOID

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

The contract Cingular has with you is not merely the TOS fine print
agreement you signed, but also includes all representations made in
sales brochures or representations made by salespeople.

What salespeople said may be hard to prove, but what the sales brochures
said is indisputable if you have the brochure. Many of the brochures
talk of how easy it is to check your minutes used. However one can not
check their minutes used now due to computer "upgrades" (they call it).

Since that promise of service is now not being provided your contract is
VOID.

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

Jack Zwick wrote:

> The contract Cingular has with you is not merely the TOS fine print
> agreement you signed, but also includes all representations made in
> sales brochures or representations made by salespeople.
>
> What salespeople said may be hard to prove, but what the sales brochures
> said is indisputable if you have the brochure. Many of the brochures
> talk of how easy it is to check your minutes used. However one can not
> check their minutes used now due to computer "upgrades" (they call it).

I suspect these upgrades are related to their internal systems being
modified for the pending assimilation of ATTWS clients.

>
> Since that promise of service is now not being provided your contract is
> VOID.


--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'

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

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-7FF6EF.15575721102004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> The contract Cingular has with you is not merely the TOS fine print
> agreement you signed, but also includes all representations made in
> sales brochures or representations made by salespeople.
>
> What salespeople said may be hard to prove, but what the sales brochures
> said is indisputable if you have the brochure. Many of the brochures
> talk of how easy it is to check your minutes used. However one can not
> check their minutes used now due to computer "upgrades" (they call it).
>
> Since that promise of service is now not being provided your contract is
> VOID.

Only if it were the only way to check minutes- which it is not.

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

"Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:_-idnV5hDPhpzuXcRVn-pQ@adelphia.com...
> >
> > Since that promise of service is now not being provided your contract is
> > VOID.

Don't you just love the Internet? Another lawyer wannabe selling advice for
free. You get what you pay for.

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

======================================================================
* Reply by Jack D. Russell, Sr. <jackru$$ell2@notmail.com>
* Newsgroup:alt.cellular.cingular
* Reply to: All; "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com>
* Date:Fri, 22 Oct 2004 16:15:26 -0500
* Subj:Re: All Cingular contracts now VOID
======================================================================

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

JN> In <jzwick3-7FF6EF.15575721102004@news1.west.earthlink.net> on
JN> Thu, 21 Oct 2004 20:57:48 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>> The contract Cingular has with you is not merely the TOS fine print
>> agreement you signed, but also includes all representations made in
>> sales brochures or representations made by salespeople.

JN> Are you a lawyer? Or are you practicing law without a license.

>> What salespeople said may be hard to prove, but what the sales
>> brochures said is indisputable if you have the brochure. Many of
>> the brochures talk of how easy it is to check your minutes used.
>> However one can not check their minutes used now due to computer
>> "upgrades" (they call it).

JN> So call Customer Service or use SMS.

>> Since that promise of service is now not being provided your
>> contract is VOID.

JN> Nonsense.

[shaking head]
I take a break for a couple of weeks and you let this guy in?
[/shaking head]

--
Jack

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

Jack Zwick wrote:
> In article <cl9gng$fbc@library1.airnews.net>, Jer <gdunn@airmail.ten>
> wrote:

>>I suspect these upgrades are related to their internal systems being
>>modified for the pending assimilation of ATTWS clients.
>>
>
> The problem is they are merely "changes" and hardly upgrades if your
> level of service has been downgraded so seriously.


Well, admittedly, the 'upgrade' word was theirs, not mine.

--
jer email reply - I am not a 'ten'

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

In article <clpocl01alk@enews1.newsguy.com>,
"Brian Oakley" <brianoakley@ispwest.com> wrote:

>
> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:jzwick3-A543C4.22143821102004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> > In article <iWXdd.414$_3.6654@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >
> > > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> > >
> > > In <jzwick3-7FF6EF.15575721102004@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Thu, 21
> Oct
> > > 2004 20:57:48 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >The contract Cingular has with you is not merely the TOS fine print
> > > >agreement you signed, but also includes all representations made in
> > > >sales brochures or representations made by salespeople.
> > >
> > > Are you a lawyer? Or are you practicing law without a license.
> > >
> > > >What salespeople said may be hard to prove, but what the sales
> brochures
> > > >said is indisputable if you have the brochure. Many of the brochures
> > > >talk of how easy it is to check your minutes used. However one can not
> > > >check their minutes used now due to computer "upgrades" (they call it).
> > >
> > > So call Customer Service or use SMS.
> > >
> > > >Since that promise of service is now not being provided your contract
> is
> > > >VOID.
> > >
> > > Nonsense.
> >
> > Typical, if you're not still on the Cingular payroll, you sure act like
> > it.
> >
> > ALL CONTRACTS ARE NOW VOID.
>
> I think if you look at your contract, it will probably say something in
> there to the effect that temporary loss of service does not void the
> contract. What you are stating has, lets say, been thought of already, and
> there are provisions made for such situations but companies all over the
> world. Try getting out of your ISP yearly contract because your ISP cant be
> connected to for a couple of hours. I think you get the point.

Cingular's fubarred website is now messed up for almost a month, thats
not quite a couple of hours. And whenever you ask a 611 person when it
will be fixed you get an answer meant to quiet you, but apparently
untruthful as it isnt fixed yet. "It's part of an upgrade all be OK in 2
weeks" BUT IT'S ALL A LIE.

It's like the Ford Hybrid Escape. For 3 years now: "IT'LL BE OUT IN 6
MONTHS".


WHEN WILL FOLKS LEARN: JUST BECAUSE A COMPANY PERSON TELLS YOU
SOMETHING, DOESN'T MAKE IT TRUE.

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

In article <mWcgd.1788$_3.24636@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> What we already know: Just because you tell us something, doesn't make it
> true.

Of course, we've known for a long time now that just because John Navas
says something, it isn't true. It's just John flapping his jaws to hear
himself speak, because that's his favorite pasttime.

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

"Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:jzwick3-EAFD7F.18270828102004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> In article <elmop-9F859B.17190428102004@text.usenetserver.com>,
> "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

Do you think anyone is unaware that you are responding to your own posts?

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

In article <cmfgd.5330$jD4.3294@trnddc06>,
"Bernard Farquart" <bernardfarquart@hotmail.delete.com> wrote:

> "Jack Zwick" <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:jzwick3-EAFD7F.18270828102004@news1.west.earthlink.net...
> > In article <elmop-9F859B.17190428102004@text.usenetserver.com>,
> > "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
> Do you think anyone is unaware that you are responding to your own posts?

I was under the impression that I was responding to Jack Zwick's post.

????