Fido Contracts And Credit Rating

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

I recently took Fido up on their offer of extending my City Fido contract
for two years. This locked me into the original $40 rate plus they sent me
a new phone as well.

I thought that was very fair, but what they didn't specifiy that the $40
City Fido (unlimited) is being phased out in lieu of a $40 City Fido
(750/min/mo) plan.

My question is, since the two year contract was 'verbal', can they decimate
my credit rating should I decide to switch carriers should I not want to pay
the buy out extortion fee?

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

Yes, they can place a mark on your credit rating for what you are suggesting
but the actual question is will they? In any event, I believe that the
contract that you verbally agreed to locks you in for 2 years at your
original plan (unlimited subject to Fido abuse rules) and not to the 750
plan... but I could be mistaken. I also locked in for 2 years and they gave
me a free SonyEricsson phone, 3 months of unlimited incoming/outgoing, and 2
years of free extended coverage. I unlocked my SonyEricsson phone and then
sold it for $75 to a friend since I prefer using my Treo 600 with Fido. I
was basically only interested in the extended coverage which would have cost
me $120 for 24 months and I'm now getting it for "free".


"Cjb" <c_k_lassader@_no_spam_yahoo.us> wrote in message
news:QIeWd.575623$Xk.311987@pd7tw3no...
> I recently took Fido up on their offer of extending my City Fido contract
> for two years. This locked me into the original $40 rate plus they sent
me
> a new phone as well.
>
> I thought that was very fair, but what they didn't specifiy that the $40
> City Fido (unlimited) is being phased out in lieu of a $40 City Fido
> (750/min/mo) plan.
>
> My question is, since the two year contract was 'verbal', can they
decimate
> my credit rating should I decide to switch carriers should I not want to
pay
> the buy out extortion fee?
>
>

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

Harry Eugene Ly wrote:
> contract that you verbally agreed to locks you in for 2 years at your
> original plan (unlimited subject to Fido abuse rules) and not to the 750
> plan... but I could be mistaken.

Verbally is the problem here. You have the legal right to insist on
having it written down. If they refuse, make damned sure that you mark
down the date, name/number of employee and request that they add a note
to your file stating that you requested contract in writing and that
they refused.

Videotron had tried to slip a contract on me (I was without contract and
they sent a "contract RENEWALL" letter). It was essentially a $15 fee
increase for me if I didn't take the contract. It took a long time to
get them to admit that I was not under contract right now. (they were
trying to slip contracts onto all non-contract customers by just maing
it look like a simple renewall).

Anyone who did not protest this and had the comtract imposed on them
couldn't do a thing. But anyone who could prove that they had refused
the contract could have gone to court.

This was information given to me by the Office du Protection du
Consommateur. And you're on your own because mobile telephony is not
under the jurisdiction of the consumer protection bodies.

Remember that during the term of your contract, Fido will become far
more integrated into Rogers and we all know how "ethical" Rogers can be.

And when you get the paper, make sure you read it carefully so that you
know if it covers only the $40 or any other options you have chosen at
time of contract signing.

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

"JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message
news:1110053675.f302e86908157ee244047b7a6f92bf04@teranews...
> Cjb wrote:
> > I figured that as far as the credit rating goes, they weren't allowed to
> > tarnish it becuase there was no written contract where I acknowledged
that I
> > owed them money or that I agreed to any specific terms.
>
> Wrong.
>
> They will claim that you consulted a web site and called to agree to a
> contract. They don't need specifics, and they can change their web site
> anytime they want and thus you lose any point of reference to what you
> agreed to. The problem is that their web site doesn't provide a
> contract specific to you, it only provides general terms and conditions.
> It allows them to define how you can breach the contract, it doesn't
> provide any way for you to prove how they breached their side of the
contract.

Well as long as I keep unlimited City Fido for the remainder of my
extension, I'll be happy. If they go ahead and change the plan to a maxium
of 750/month, it seems to me they would be breaching their part of the
contract as my rate was suppposed to be locked in for two years.

I appreciate the information.

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

"DevilsPGD" <ihatespam@crazyhat.net> wrote in message
news:v5ak21t6uqe3shht3rp9bqaep28f2h8k1j@localhost...
> In message <FrpWd.578687$8l.440593@pd7tw1no> "Chris_Cdn"
> <forex73@yahoo.ca> wrote:
>
> >
> >"JF Mezei" <jfmezei.spamnot@teksavvy.com> wrote in message
> >news:1110053675.f302e86908157ee244047b7a6f92bf04@teranews...
> >> Cjb wrote:
> >> > I figured that as far as the credit rating goes, they weren't allowed
to
> >> > tarnish it becuase there was no written contract where I acknowledged
> >that I
> >> > owed them money or that I agreed to any specific terms.
> >>
> >> Wrong.
> >>
> >> They will claim that you consulted a web site and called to agree to a
> >> contract. They don't need specifics, and they can change their web site
> >> anytime they want and thus you lose any point of reference to what you
> >> agreed to. The problem is that their web site doesn't provide a
> >> contract specific to you, it only provides general terms and
conditions.
> >> It allows them to define how you can breach the contract, it doesn't
> >> provide any way for you to prove how they breached their side of the
> >contract.
> >
> >Well as long as I keep unlimited City Fido for the remainder of my
> >extension, I'll be happy. If they go ahead and change the plan to a
maxium
> >of 750/month, it seems to me they would be breaching their part of the
> >contract as my rate was suppposed to be locked in for two years.
>
> I haven't read Fido's contract recently, but my TELUS contract
> guarantees the basic monthly charge and the number of minutes.
>
> While nothing else is explicitly included (and in fact, they explicitly
> exclude everything else), if they were to start trying to charge for any
> of the other features which were included free I could make a reasonable
> argument that TELUS has materially changed the offering. However, if
> they were to raise the prices on an additional feature I use, I would
> have no recourse. <-- This is the advice given to me by a lawyer. We
> were out for drinks at the time, but we were discussing his new TELUS
> contact, and his legal interpretation of it, so I would tend to trust
> his judgment since he read the contract when he was sober
>
> I suspect Fido's contract is virtually identical.
>
>
> --
> Failure is not an option. It's bundled with your software.

And here I thought you couldn't trust a sober lawer.

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

In message <lXqWd.580263$6l.552930@pd7tw2no> "Chris_Cdn"
<forex73@yahoo.ca> wrote:

>And here I thought you couldn't trust a sober lawer.

He wasn't sober when I was chatting with him... Plus we're friends and I
was buying drinks, so I'd say he was trustworthy.


--
Men are from Earth. Women are from Earth. Deal with it.

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

DevilsPGD wrote:
> He wasn't sober when I was chatting with him... Plus we're friends and I
> was buying drinks, so I'd say he was trustworthy.

You're friends with a lawyer ?

Oh dear... doesn't that rank right up there with being friends with a
murderer ?




Why do they bury dead lawyers 10 metres underground ?







Because deep down, they're really good people :-)

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

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 01:00:24 GMT, sbdot@mailandnews.com (sbdot) wrote in
news:6212bd00.0503061700.286ee28d@posting.google.com:

> ...Apparently, even that's not enough. I made note of the names of
> the agents that I spoke with and the dates. I even recorded a few
> conversations (because I had a hunch that they would never write down
> what they were telling me, even when I requested it). Write down the
> exact time you started talking to the agent as well. Otherwise their
> managers will tell you it's too much effort to go through all their
> calls for a shift just to find yours. Yep, that's what it's come to.

The trend for most service organizations I have dealt with recently
is to take all calls anonymously and then deny. Requests for written
confirmation often results in vaguely worded letters of little use.

For that reason all my conversations are recorded when I am
negotiating a form of agreement or when there is some legal
liability at issue. If I want confirmation, I write the terms
or concerns in a letter and send it in, often using their
fax machine so that there is a concrete record they must now
write to deny.

My recent break-up with Fido was recorded and before the
conversation went further than "hello" I got a fax machine
number - which they were very reluctant to give out.
They wanted to know why I wanted it. I just kept repeating
I wanted their general customer service fax number until
they gave it to me.

Yes, it is quite sad that things have come to this in their
(and I don't just mean Fido's) quest for *profitability*.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

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

In message <Xns9611CEEC6D06Cfidoguy@38.119.71.210> DogTired
<fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote:

>My recent break-up with Fido was recorded and before the
>conversation went further than "hello" I got a fax machine
>number - which they were very reluctant to give out.
>They wanted to know why I wanted it. I just kept repeating
>I wanted their general customer service fax number until
>they gave it to me.

I had one call like that when I was working for TELUS. There simply was
NO "general" fax number to give, and definitely no "general customer
service" fax, at a minimum I needed to know whether it was residential
or business, as well as whether it was wireline, internet, billing,
repair, or other.

The idiot didn't answer, and eventually went away unsatisfied.

Sure, I could have given him the fax number of my group, but if the fax
wasn't addressed to a specific individual it would likely have been
discarded, so I don't think that would have helped him.



--
Yeah man, I tell ya what, man. That dang ol'
Internet, man. You just go on there and point
and click. Talk about W-W-dot-W-com. An' lotsa
nekkid chicks on there, man. Click. Click. Click.
Click. Click. It's real easy, man.
-- Boomhauer, "King Of The Hill"

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

In message <Xns9612117B8B344fidoguy@38.119.71.210> DogTired
<fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote:

>On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 05:39:57 GMT, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
>wrote in news:fmnn211cvf297dlbk8bcq5rdotso5rso92@localhost:
>
>> In message <Xns9611CEEC6D06Cfidoguy@38.119.71.210> DogTired
>> <fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote:
>>
>>>My recent break-up with Fido was recorded and before the
>>>conversation went further than "hello" I got a fax machine
>>>number - which they were very reluctant to give out.
>>>They wanted to know why I wanted it. I just kept repeating
>>>I wanted their general customer service fax number until
>>>they gave it to me.
>>
>> I had one call like that when I was working for TELUS. There simply
>> was NO "general" fax number to give, and definitely no "general
>> customer service" fax, at a minimum I needed to know whether it was
>> residential or business, as well as whether it was wireline, internet,
>> billing, repair, or other.
>>
>> The idiot didn't answer, and eventually went away unsatisfied.
>>
>> Sure, I could have given him the fax number of my group, but if the
>> fax wasn't addressed to a specific individual it would likely have
>> been discarded, so I don't think that would have helped him.
>
>If you call a customer an idiot for requesting a fax number, I can
>see why us consumers are having trouble.

No: He's an idiot for not telling me what department the fax should be
directed to.

It's entirely possible that the fax wouldn't be discarded, but it
certainly wouldn't be handled promptly if it shows up in the wrong
place.

Please don't get me wrong: I'm not saying this is the way it should be,
I'm saying that this is the way it is (or at least the way it was when I
was at TELUS)


--
What's orange, brown, black, and red? Give up?
They're COLOURS, idiot!

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

On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 00:45:15 -0600, DogTired wrote:
> Any company will have at least one fax number where "to whom it may
> concern" can be passed on to somebody who can deal with it. If they don't
> have a general fax number, it's just more evidence that they don't have a
> clue about what real customer service is. I think more likely they just
> are using the latest tactic of trying to avoid the customer who wants to
> complain.

Bingo.

> CBC's marketplace did a show on complaining. They detailed the many ways
> companies are now avoiding dealing with their customers altogether. One
> way is to simply put you on hold until you hang up. Sound familiar?

Yup, done it myself on a very rude customer.

> And if a fax comes in to any fax machine in a company *anywhere* from a
> customer and is discarded by an employee, that employee should be tossed
> out on their behind.

You've obviously never worked CS. I'd say an employee that tosses the fax
is more likely to be PROMOTED then booted...

> I send letters by fax very often when I want something done. They always
> get attention. I usually get a very polite letter back via the post
> because they know what ignoring it can mean.

Hehe, consider yourself lucky anyone actually treated your fax seriously.
I once saw a fax waiting for WEEKS...

> Another tool I now use is to put up a web site with the complaint on it.
> (recommended by CBC: "spread the news" ) I reference the web site in the
> complaint. They then know that the complaint is public, and they have to
> address it or face the consequences of more than just my
> dissatisfaction. It works very well. I have not had to threaten to call
> the media yet.

Again, you're lucky, some companies are really quite bad and simply don't
care. I won't mention the company I worked CS for, but trust me, the
"tactics" CBC promoted are NOT universal...

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

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:03:42 GMT, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
wrote in news:3p8q21hlbo1on3v4tmvjtu3f7r3n199h0b@localhost:

> In message <Xns9612D2638E6EBfidoguy@38.119.71.210> DogTired
> <fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote:
>>The customer is always right. Period.
>
> No. The customer is fair from "always" right. The customer is
> occasionally right, although usually by accident.
>
> You can vote with your dollars and leave, but just as equally the
> company can refuse your money.

The customer is right because without the customer, there is no
business. A business exists solely to serve the customer.
Some businesses have that bass-ackwards. Likely greed
that drives that philosophy.

>>There are
>>customers who might be less profitable, and some companies
>>may want them to leave, but in the end those companies will
>>not prosper. It is simply good business to look after your
>>customers.
>
> If a customer is costing you money, how is it good business to keep
> that customer?

If a business is putting out loss leader products to get customers
in the door, you can't blame the customer for buying the product.

See "Bad Business Model"


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

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

I had a guy at Amex do this to me once... rather, try to do this to
me. They forget that people have speakerphone. So he put me on hold,
I put him on speakerphone. He keeps coming back every 5 mins to see
if I have hung up yet. This goes on for half an hour. I tell him
that the conversation is being recorded (it wasn't) and that I'm sure
his manager would like to hear it. At that point he couldn't hang up,
as he thought it was being recorded. Long story short, I got a sorry
ass apology from him and got passed on to his manager, who fixed my
problem and also apologised. Why not just fix the problem from the
beginning instead of wasting time and pissing off the customer? I
don't get it, but, then again, little in the way of modern business
practices makes much sense if you sit down to disect it.

DogTired <fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote in message news:<Xns9612117B8B344fidoguy@38.119.71.210>...
> On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 05:39:57 GMT, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
> wrote in news:fmnn211cvf297dlbk8bcq5rdotso5rso92@localhost:
>
> CBC's marketplace did a show on complaining. They detailed
> the many ways companies are now avoiding dealing with their
> customers altogether. One way is to simply put you on hold
> until you hang up. Sound familiar?
>
> http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market [...] mplaining/

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

I think you've confused things. Recording a telephone conversation in
Canada is legal as long as ONE part is aware of it. There are parts of the
US where BOTH parties must be aware, but AFAIK in Canada only one party
needs to be aware. TTYL

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:32:00 +0000, xt wrote:

> recording a voice conversation over a telephone in Canada, is only valid
> once the other party is aware and has agreed to it. Once, i am advised
> the conversation is being recorded, i simply state it is now considered a
> legal matter and politely end the call. Matters of a criminal nature fall
> into a whole different catagory. "sbdot" <sbdot@mailandnews.com> wrote in
> message news:6212bd00.0503090733.5c1f8cf9@posting.google.com...
>>I had a guy at Amex do this to me once... rather, try to do this to
>> me. They forget that people have speakerphone. So he put me on hold, I
>> put him on speakerphone. He keeps coming back every 5 mins to see if I
>> have hung up yet. This goes on for half an hour. I tell him that the
>> conversation is being recorded (it wasn't) and that I'm sure his manager
>> would like to hear it. At that point he couldn't hang up, as he thought
>> it was being recorded. Long story short, I got a sorry ass apology from
>> him and got passed on to his manager, who fixed my problem and also
>> apologised. Why not just fix the problem from the beginning instead of
>> wasting time and pissing off the customer? I don't get it, but, then
>> again, little in the way of modern business practices makes much sense
>> if you sit down to disect it.
>>
>> DogTired <fidoguy@fido.somewhere> wrote in message
>> news:<Xns9612117B8B344fidoguy@38.119.71.210>...
>>> On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 05:39:57 GMT, DevilsPGD <ihatespam@crazyhat.net>
>>> wrote in news:fmnn211cvf297dlbk8bcq5rdotso5rso92@localhost:
>>>
>>> CBC's marketplace did a show on complaining. They detailed the many
>>> ways companies are now avoiding dealing with their customers
>>> altogether. One way is to simply put you on hold until you hang up.
>>> Sound familiar?
>>>
>>> http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market [...] mplaining/

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

>>recording a voice conversation over a telephone in Canada, is only valid
>>once the other party is aware and has agreed to it.
>
>
> Actually, Canadian law allows either party to record the call. In
> general, the reason a company will warn you that calls are
> monitored/recorded is because it tends to reduce the number of people
> who call in and say "Rep xyz promised me" and then make up the rest of
> the sentence.

That, and from a business standpoint, it's also common courtesy.

TH

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

In contract law, verbal agreements are just as good as written agreements.

"Cjb" <c_k_lassader@_no_spam_yahoo.us> wrote in message
news:QIeWd.575623$Xk.311987@pd7tw3no...
>I recently took Fido up on their offer of extending my City Fido contract
> for two years. This locked me into the original $40 rate plus they sent
> me
> a new phone as well.
>
> I thought that was very fair, but what they didn't specifiy that the $40
> City Fido (unlimited) is being phased out in lieu of a $40 City Fido
> (750/min/mo) plan.
>
> My question is, since the two year contract was 'verbal', can they
> decimate
> my credit rating should I decide to switch carriers should I not want to
> pay
> the buy out extortion fee?
>
>