Wired Strongarms Subscribers?
yali writes "Wired has apparently been sinking to some rather low tactics with ex-subscribers. Namely, siccing a collections agency on them. If you let your subscription run out, you might get one of these. Nerds beware." From the article: "First came the usual letters warning McMillan, 36, that his subscription was up and that he wouldn't get any more copies of Wired unless he ponied up some cash. Then Wired's correspondence took a different turn. In May, McMillan received a letter from North Shore Agency, a leading debt-collection firm. The letter, headed 'Please Respond,' said he owed $12 for his Wired subscription."
I've seen this tactic before. The 'collection agency' in question barely even exists, and certainly has no teeth. It's simply a very shady tactic, used by several magazines, to trick people into subscribing - sometimes they'll even send these notices to people who have never subscribed. Just garbage the letter and you'll be fine.
Paul Anderson
"I drank WHAT?!" -- Socrates
They don't have your SSN, which means no matter what they say, they cannot do jack to your credit report.
If you are not sure of this or don't believe, simply go ask for a free copy of your credit report at Experian, Transunion, or whatever the third one was. Just say you're credit was used fraudulently, which they'll put your credit on alert (a good damned thing if you ask me) and send you a free report.
Don't sweat it, they just sound tough but can't do a single thing. If they do have your credit card number or bank number and then charge without your permission, you can get it back, just go to whatever got charged and dispute it.
Really, they can't do a thing, people just give in because it sounds all scary.
I don't see what's the big deal. Dealing with collection agencies is very easy. Just write a simple letter giving the "account number" from the agency's dunning letter, and stating that you dispute the debt, that you request proof of the debt, and that you don't want to be contacted by telephone in writing.
Then, pay three bucks to send the letter by certified mail with return receipt. Unless you owe a lot of money, and the collection agency has some real paperwork to prove that, this is the last time you'll hear from them. The certified mail receipt makes sure that you can burn their ass off if they ever try to bother you again for no reason.
Although some might baulk at the three bucks, just keep in mind that it costs the collection agency more than that to send the letter off and process your response (someone has to go in, look up your account number in their system, and mark it off).
If everyone did that, the collection agencies will quickly go out of business.
You should have been told when you rented that there are penalties for returning late. Blockbuster is not being "greedy" by expecting you to conform to contract terms.
If you returned the movie on time, their charge is fraudulent (like Wired's). If you were late, suck it up and pay, or let them tarnish your credit.
You are not legally entitled to screw corporations just because they want to screw you.
There was a long standing precedent in the business that established that late fees for movies that had been returned were not collected until the next rental. This precedent had been in place for years, all over the country. Blockbuster decided to deviate from this practice without calling special attention to it, just so they could get a few more cents here and there in "time value of money". This may not be against the law, but I would call it unethical, or at the least, extremely poor customer service.
They lost my business over this issue too. Yes I know they changed this policy eventually, but I'm still not giving them my business again.
I may not be legally entitled to screw corporations that have poor customer service, but I don't have to patronize them either, and I am certainly within my rights to suggest that others shouldn't patronize them either.
What did the rental agreements say prior to the precedent change? That you owed the money or that you owed it before you could rent again? If it's the former, I don't think they were outside their rights in the least to demand it, and I don't think it was particularly unethical. That was money you owed. Probably they started sending collection agencies after people because those who are willing to let a late fee go on that long are either a) not going to rent from them anymore anyway, and thus they don't risk any loss of customer for it or b) were intentionally not renting because they'd have to pay the additional fee. In the case of a, they've lost a customer already, so why not get what's owed by the terms of the contract? In the case of b, they get what's owed and moreover, since the person now has paid their late fee, they may rent again, thus generating revenue.
/think/ Blockbuster, but it's been a long time) and they sent out their goons. He gladly paid, since he figured the collection agency cost them far more than the dollar they were getting back, and he liked the irony of it.
Two anecdotes:
One friend of mine had a dollar late fee somewhere (I
Another time, he had over $50 in late fees to a store called Hastings. He obviously stopped renting there, since he wasn't about to drop $50+rental fee to rent a movie (he actually just BOUGHT movies for the longest time since it was cheaper--yes yes, overall it wouldn't have been but whatever). After over a year had passed, Hastings sent out a clemency note--come in and bring this coupon, and they'll forgive the late fees. This is clearly the way to go, as it gets people back into the store (always a good thing) and moreover, gets rid of their late fees so they'll start renting again. It also generates a bit of goodwill. This is the same store that will amortize your late fee so that you can continue renting without paying a large fee. Generally when I get a late fee, they offer to let me pay $1 per future rental until it's covered. I never bother, preferring to just pay the whole thing, but it's a good business practice, I think.