Slashdot Mirror
Verizon Charged Marine's Widow an Early Termination Fee
In a decision that was reversed as soon as someone with half a brain in their PR department learned about it, Verizon charged a widow a $350 early termination fee. After the death of her marine husband, Michaela Brummund decided to move back to her home town to be with her family. Verizon doesn't offer any coverage in the small town so Michaela tried to cancel her contract, only to be hit with an early termination fee. From the article: "'I called them to cancel. I told them the situation with my husband. I even said I would provide a death certificate,' Michaela said."
Can I hear you? Good.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Why would a corporation care about a grieving widow, unless there was some sort of bad publicity to arise out of... oh dear.
doesn't exempt you from all commitments. I feel bad for her that she lost her husband but a contract is an obligation. There's a reason we have life insurance policies, you know, so you can pay some bills after your spouse dies.
I purchased a Motoroal Droid when it came out last year. Shortly after mentioning my purchase, I got a number of warnings about their billing department. Concerned, and also pissed at Verizon, I decided to return it for a full refund (it was well within two days of buying.) Shorty after, I got a huge termination fee, coupled with data charges in the megabytes (I literally never even used it with any 3G service.) and activation fees, even though it was clearly stated I wasn't supposed to be charged. It took upwards of four calls before the charges were removed from my account. Needless to say, I'm glad I did it, especially after seeing more bologna like this. Maybe one day they will realize that for each angry customer like me who cancels, they lose far more than the $350 termination fee.
"Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of face the heart is made glad." [Ecclesiastes 7:3]
This is why its bad to give zero authority to the peons at the bottom of your organization. In an effort to restrict decisions to higher-ups and make low-level decisions 95% predictable, you get bit in the ass with bad PR that can cost millions in damages, only because the first two or three people closest to the customer aren't allowed to make braindead obvious decisions.
You can almost always tell a corporate culture by calling their customer support.
That's the VZW rep.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Talk about playing the sympathy card.
Now, I'm sure Verizon should have been more flexible here, but not because she was a widow. Because the early termination fee is unfair in this circumstance. Do others get to be treated unfairly because they haven't had a bereavement?
Death is a form of early termination. Doesn't death let you out of any contracts you are in by law?
The Verizon Ouija Board: Because passing away shouldn't mean you lose contact with your relatives.
Verizon Wireless: More coverage than any other provider. Literally.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I don't understand the pathological fixation americans have with war widows and orphans. If they are married and have common property there's no reason she is exempt from the fee, even if he signed the contract. If it wasn't the case she is obligued to legally pay the money I'm sure the correct course of action would be simply to ignore it.
I don't know how it works in the US so please correct me if I'm mistaken but as far as I know she will get a widow pension for life. It's not that she can't pay $350 dollars and THAT'S precisely the point of insurance (which I'd like to believe the armed forces provide), looks more to me like she wants to profit from her war widow status.
What if the husband had died from suicide or an accident? War widow != exempt from obligations.
Actually it does.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Seriously, legal obligations are still obligations regardless of whatever you may be experiencing. If anything this just undermines the death of her husband. Now, if they were trying to charge her for her _husband's_ early termination (no horrible, horrible pun intended) then i can see being up in a huff
"She should have predicted this when she signed up for Verizon"
--
BMO
Early termination fees are simply part of the way service providers effectively finance equipment purchases at above market prices and at exorbitant rates of interest, while hiding that fact from the user as much as possible.
So, in the U.S. military members (and their families apparently) are actually exempted from contract law? Intriguing....
...and if the contract holder dies, there is no early termination fee. Chances has it that after sufficient notice the bill will just be dropped.
$350 ETF means it was a 'smart phone.' I still don't get why everyone thinks the phone is free. That's an advanced chunk of technology that fits in your pocket. ETFs are there for a reason.
It seems to be more important that he's a dead marine than a dead person. I deal with this stuff all day long and people use anything to alleviate their feelings of contractual obligations. Sorry for your loss, welcome to the world of business, pay your bills.
"Early termination" fee?
Lol.
Specifically, what is the widow's phone number? I want to, um, console her.
The issue isn't that the guy died and the widow wanted to cancel the contract. If that were so, I'd totally be with her.
It's that she decided to up and move and canceled the contract because where she decided to move didn't have service. That, is her fault only.
while(1) attack(People.Sandy);
That is all.
Like Louis C.K said in his "Being Broke" monologue about the rich guys listening to it: "Well, yeah, you are financially irresponsible and you have to pay the price, I don't frankly... see why you are angry about it. The bank has the right to accrue a fee, clearly..."
You can't handle the truth.
Phone companies aren't supposed to charge an ETF when you're going somewhere that's out of the service area.
sorry, forgot the link
You can't handle the truth.
...they break out whatever BS they think we want to hear, in the name of good publicity.
In other words, bring out the religion:
the company responded saying, " Verizon Wireless has long supported our troops.... Our thoughts and prayers are with Mrs. Brummund and her family."
Huh. So Verizon, as a company, now has a public opinion, not only on supporting our troops, but on the effectiveness of prayer?
Am I being overly sensitive, or is that just a bit odd?
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Yeah man, this is America. Pay up.
No, no, I don't care if your husband just died defending my freedom, and the loss of his income changed your lifestyle. Hell, I don't care if you're homeless and struggling to make ends meet. I don't give a shit if the taxes you or your parents paid in 10 years ago helped fund the infrastructure that enabled me to make this money in the first place.
This is America. I am a corporation with infinite rights. You're just a speck on my quarterly report.
Pay up.
So he died. Get over it.
Congratulations! That's about the most insensitive thing you could say to a grieving widow. From TFA:
Michaela's father, a veteran himself, is outraged. "It's not about the money. I don't care about the money. It's the principle. The man was overseas fighting for our country and lost his life doing so," said Kevin Gause. "It's heartless what Verizon is doing."
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The Early Termination fee is two things. One, it's a way for the company to recoup their costs of you running off with a smart phone that retails for $500+. Two, it's a way for them to ensure that none of their sheep go running off to other pastures as soon as they look a little greener. They've pretty much figured out that two years is the optimal length for a contract. Long enough to where you'll have their income coming in for a while and can make plans around that, but short enough to where you'll splurge for the most expensive phone every two years (with new two year contract, of course!) because you've had two years to save up for it.
I think a reboot of the cell phone industry really needs to happen here in the United States. I can go to Walmart right now and buy a prepaid phone for $20 or so with lots of features. Or I can go buy the same one at a cell phone store that's linked ONLY to one provider and costs $100. Free with two year plan, though..
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
yeah, I'd run train on that ass!
She has cost the phone company a certain amount for the phone they fronted her. This has no remaining value for them.
Does she also get away without paying her credit card bills? Perhaps she bought something for her husband. Will Visa refund that one since she no longer needs it?
I'm sure she could use a good laugh.
I feel sorry for her loss. However, I'm a bit unclear about the reasoning behind this. For which fees, financial obligations, and loans is it unpatriotic to ask for repayment?
Waiving such fees is a nice thing to do; it expresses gratitude for the sacrifices that our military makes.
However, I start feeling uncomfortable when members of the military start talking about it as if it were an entitlement or obligation.
No, the OP's point was aside from the PR damage why should being a war widow get you out of a contract for free? The ability to break contracts due to "exceptional circumstances" should be enshrined in law*, and not just happen due to the court of public opinion. Because we all know if Verizon couldn't provide the service for some reason or decided the customer wasn't worth the fee they would drop them like a rock and the customer would have no legal recourse.
* Also it should be illegal to only offer "free phone on a million year contract" deals.
========
CINC, 4th Penguin Legion
Exactly; the miscarriage here is that you get slapped with an ETF for being in a place without reception. Covering the depreciated hardware subsidy is one thing, but the idea that you can charge someone extra for the cost of acquiring a new customer is absurd.
ETFs are in place because you got a device cheaper than it actually costs (or sometimes even free). You agreed to pay for the device by being a customer of another service for a certain amount of time. Smart phones cost a lot of money to make. She got one for a reduced price (possibly even free) by essentially agreeing to pay it off month by month for a year or two. This is very similar to a loan or car payment. Why should Verizon take the hit?
That being said, they could certainly afford to take the hit in situations like this, but I don't blame them for not doing so.
There shouldn't be an ETF. If you finance your phone through the phone company, that should be a separate line-item on your bill, and you should only have to pay off the balance to get out of the contract.
Phone companies are dipping into the paypal level of scumminess here: they're playing the "unregulated bank" game so they can charge usury interest (and continue to charge premiums even *after* the balance is 100% paid off!)
Can you be Even More Awesome?!
First of all, she shouldn't need a fucking dime. Why are we paying $300,000 for a Blackwater mercenary and paying every real soldier a tenth of that? Why aren't we providing end of life payouts to widowed military wives? If we can't do that for people who have literally died for the country, what chance does anyone have? This is like when McCain fought education benefits for veterans. It's appalling, regardless of what I think about the true purpose of the war.
We have literally got to the point in this country where even the immediate families of dead soldiers are treated like shit if they haven't got money. Visa and Verizon are raking in record profits, and the could afford to forgive debts to dead soldiers if they wanted to. But it's far more important to bonus their board of directors for continuing to shit on the population at large.
There's a reason why their customer satisfaction has gotten lower than even the kings of shit customer service - the airlines.
RIP America
July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001
You're an asshole.
A$$ hole
Cancelling the husband's cell phone: A-Ok. She wanted HER cell phone cancelled. How does the death of your husband entitle you to get no ETF? If you don't want to deal with ETF's, don't get the contract. Stop milking your dead husband for benefits.
If you were offended by anything I said... No, I'm not sorry. Please lighten up.
This is fairly typical unfortunately. When my father, who lived alone at the time, died DirectTV kept asking to talk to him about his bills(even thought we told them he was deceased) and would not let us cancel. Same with AT&T. They even refused to take a death certificate because it did not have the cause of death. It may be a dog eat dog world but these are particularly ruthless, heartless companies and I hope they all fail one day because of it.
So, should everyone whose spouse dies be let out of such contract, or only the spouses of Marines?
Maybe only those who died serving the public - firefighters, police, military, etc? What about private "military contractors"? They kinda do the same thing (you know, defend Freedom, Justice, and the American Way), just for more money.
Maybe only those who were married to someone who's nice?
I'm fine with it either way, really, I just need to know what the rules are.
sic transit gloria mundi
If my wife dies, do I have the right to break any contract I've signed?
That is correct. The thing is, this behavior is encoded in a corporation's DNA. Corporations only understand money. They are organisms designed to extract money from their environment and give it to their owners. That's it.
Any expectation for a corporation to have a "moral code" comparable to human morals is unrealistic and naive.
Yes, by law, corporations are "persons."
Invincible, inhuman "persons," with no morals, no feelings, no compassion, programmed to extract money at any cost.
Sometimes I wonder if corporations can be viewed as parasitic life using humans to create suffering and transform it into an abstraction (the idea of value represented by the agreement of money).
The tendency to convert all natural resources, human lives and creativity into abstract numbers stored in computers leads humanity towards a future where we will have only money left on a toxic dead planet.
So how long after a spouse dies is the surviving spouse exempt from service fees for their own services?
I feel sorry about her loss, and I believe that this isn't about the money. Also, I know that when a death is involved, most companies are going to make exceptions to rules. But the (tragic) death is only tangentially related here.
The reason that she is canceling is NOT because her husband died. It is because she is moving. That part is a choice.
As a general rule, most contracts have a military clause that extends to the spouse/family of the military member. The reason this clause exists is to protect them should they be required to move without notice, relocate to another area, or lose their spouse. This applies, to homes, cars, and many other things.
It's a good policy, and Verizon screwed up by choosing to ignore it. If Verizon stuck to their guns, she could easily have gone to family advocacy department in the USMC and they would have helped correct Verizon.
If nothing else, it highlights how we little people get treated by corporations in America every day.
I am open source, and Linux baby!
Someone With Half-A-Brain works in Verizon's PR Department.
cat "Middle finger" > Verizon.
I love slashdot. What in one story is called "oil wars" in the other is called "defending our freedoms", and it doesn't raise one eyebrow.
"...I don't care if your husband just died defending my freedom"
Which freedom was that then. The freedom to drive an SUV? The freedom to invade other countries on bullshit pretences? The freedom to be a douchebag?
This is the rest of the world, fuck you America
I believe in contracts. If you didn't want the contract, don't sign it.
Do you also believe in antitrust law and public utility regulation? Some goods and services considered essential for the expected standard of living in the United States are available only from monopolies[1] and cartels that impose questionably-conscionable contracts of adhesion on their customers. So I don't know how one would live in the United States without signing such a contract, except perhaps by joining the Amish.
That's just plain unpatriotic of Verizon! Pretty evil too! I guess companies these days have no conscience and their only creed is money, money, money.
I think the issue here is the fact that she's having to pay the fee even though she's now living in an area with no service. This has nothing to do with the fact that she is a widow, this is just asshattery on VZW's part. I know certain other carriers allow you to cancel under similar circumstances without paying the ETF (AT&T).
She probably lived in base housing. When he died she was required to move.
Yes, verizon should be more reasonable in general, especially when the contract is being cancelled because they provide no coverage where it's needed.
The fact that they would be such bastards even to the widow of a veteran just demonstrates the extent of their inhumanity.
We used to call anything or anyone like that a monster. Not the creature feature sort of monster, more like the blight on humanity destroy it before it destroys us sort of monster.
Psychopaths shouldn't be allowed to have power over people's lives.
She has cost the phone company a certain amount for the phone they fronted her.
Then why doesn't the phone company cut the rate by a corresponding certain amount per month after the last month of the contract, once the customer has fully paid off the handset? T-Mobile does; other U.S. carriers don't.
Why is this news? Verizon made good. Not that I'm a fan, but why are we harassing them when they fixed the problem and apologized?
Granted, it should never have had to become a public issue, of course.
"Give a man fire, and he'll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life
I know this is unpopular, but why are we all blaming a corporation for enforcing a totally legal contract? You shouldn't enter into a contract that you don't agree with and then bitch about it later don't fucking sign it in the first place.
I saw this on consumerist and fark, Yes Verizon is a soulless corperation, that's a fact.
However you don't get out of your contract with Verizon for moving out of the coverage area. The fact that her husband is dead has nothing to do with it. The phone's not in her husband's name. That's the sympathy ploy.
The only reason Verizon caved now is because oh-noes,media-attention.
Front line customer service representatives do not have the authority to reverse or waive ETF charges. If they did, they would do it for every single stupid sob story. Employees who reverse the ETF get shown the door.
Because the media was involved, it was obviously escalated to the office of the president, and they probably felt that the PR damage being caused by consumerist, fark and every other brainless news site is somehow the sentiment of the public.
Far from it. If you read most of the comments on consumerist and fark you'll see that few are sympathetic about wanting out of the ETF.
Believe it or not, people will fake dying to get out of an ETF.
Given all the bad press that Verizon has had lately I ask myself are they any more evil than other big corporations? Personally having worked for HP and AT&T I don't think so it just that this one incident became public which is why I am independent these days because I simply cant do what these corporations demand without loosing my humanity.
Chris Sheppard
that is reversed immediately.
News at 11.
> died defending my freedom
Oh no, Afghanistan is attacking poor Americans freedom! WON'T SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!?
Let's call it what it is: he died invading a foreign country that never was a real threat.
I had my sister on my T-Mobile account and she had purchased a new Android phone through the T-Mobile store. She died last year and it took me a few months to get around to calling T-Mobile to terminate the contract on her phone.
The T-Mobile customer service representative was very understanding and sympathetic and waived any disconnect penalties or outstanding balance on the phone purchase. She had even offered to see if she could backdate the service termination a few months. I told her that was not necessary as it was my own reticence to close the account (you know, the finality of death and wrapping up the details of someone's life).
Over the years little experiences like that with T-Mobile have made me a very loyal customer. It seems that someone still remembers how to treat their customers.
Tisha Hayes
I honestly have no problem with Verizon charging the termination fee in this situation. She canceled and that's all that matters. Whenever a spouse dies there's extra expenses, and this is just one of them. Life sucks. Death sucks even more.
Verizon wanted to charge us for cancelling Dad's account when he died. Verizon told me I needed to "request" the fee be waived. Ok, fine...I ended up emailing Verizon and CC'ing the NY Times, Bloomberg and a dozen other news firms along with a dozen High profile folks in Congress who take interest in hese kinds of things to make my point. It wasn't long before I received an empathetic call from Verizon. Oh snap, is that humble pie on Verizon's face...are those crown feathers flying out of verizon's mouth. Shame on Verizon.
If she was in base housing, it isn't a choice. She would be given a limited amount of time to remove her possessions from the home and vacate the premises.
If she was no longer receiving his housing allowance and was living off base, she might have been unable to afford to remain in the area any longer.
Dude died serving his country. Stop being such a prick.
Giving your life for your country doesn't excuse your financial contractual responsibilities.
Unless you're a corporation, then you can cancel your end at any time with no penalty.
God, I love this country! :sarcasm,off //anger, that's still simmering.
T-mobile told me that if I moved out of service, there was no termination fee. I wouldn't even have to die. I didn't put that to the test though.
This is pretty shabby. Anecdotally, I know that at least one airline will refund your ticket with a death cert. It's not easy or fast; but they'll do it.
This is just shabby. Nevermind the morality of it, the bean counters at Verizon should realize that the negative PR from not cancelling the fee is more costly than the lost fees.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
How is it that you can post to /.? The computer you used to type out your entry was made by a corporattion (or the components were if you built it yourself). The internet connection you used to access /. probably involves at least a dozen corporations, when you factor in all the router hops between you and the ultimate datacenter. My guess is you probably live in a modern structure of some kind, with applicances TVs, furniture, food -- most, if not all, made by corporations.
So, you use and benefit from the goods and services hundreds of corporations provide. If you are so passionate about how evil corporations are, live completely off the grid in a house you made with yourself--or stop being such a hypocrite!
No, no, I don't care if your husband just died defending my freedom,
Spare us the nationalism. The US was never under threat. Or you mean your freedom to drive oil-guzzling SUVs?
I don't think the military can claim higher moral ground than Verizon.
(reread) Oh ... you were being ironic. sorry :)
However if you fight for the rights of people over corporations, you may get a law that early termination fees may only reflect actual costs to the company.
So if your contract includes a $500 subsidy on an smartphone, and you cancel halfway through, you should have to pay back half of that subsidy.
Fixed break fees have no justification.
I know when my grandmother died, we had just helped her renew her AT&T contract a month before. I called AT&T from her phone and requested to cancel the service and asked how much the ETF would be. The girl on the phone acted surprised I'd even asked. She essentially told me that they would never charge an ETF for a line for someone that had passed away, mostly because they didn't want to cause any more hardship on the family. I'm sure thats crap and its just that they can't really hold a deceased person to a contract, but I was surprised how easy they made it to close the account. Its a shame Verizon's level 1 support couldn't have done the same thing.
Along with others, I appreciate your taking the time and making the effort to quantify this Marine's probable financial position. And, yeah, there's no business obligation under which Verizon would have to forgive the early termination fee. But Jesus, how tone-deaf, how lacking in empathy, how disconnected from one's fellow humans can a company's management be? Oh, wait...that might explain how it was OK for the management at AIG/G-S, etc. to suck hundreds of billions of dollars out of our economy, single-handedly relegating us to a has-been on the world stage. Go, Verizon! Doubtless the only internal negative consequences will accrue to whichever employee was able to stick the widow with only the standard termination fee, being unable to come up with additional special charges suited to her circumstances.
Then join the fight, and try to bag one yourself. You can do better than trolling, you can join the contest and "enlist" on the side of your choice.
IMO there might be fewer wars if the cheerleaders went too. :)
"This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
You are totally right...I mean except for that part where your entire statement is complete and utter bullshit typed on a computer connected to a network where everything is powered by electricity all thanks to various corporations. Oh and your clean water, your food, and all of that other stuff that you enjoy today in any first world nation. All of these things have basically been delivered by those "parasitic life" corporations.
There are plenty of reasons to be pissed about various corporate behaviors, and plenty of ways to try and control some of the more disturbing abuses of power we have seen. However this "corporations are all evil" neohippie bullshit is the product of mental masturbation by people with too few braincells. But hey, I would much rather live as a permanent peasant under the boots of some totalitarian government given all the powers required to crush those evil corporations...
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
There are plenty of reasons to be pissed about various corporate behaviors, and plenty of ways to try and control some of the more disturbing abuses of power we have seen. However this "corporations are all evil" neohippie bullshit is the product of mental masturbation by people with too few braincells. But hey, I would much rather live as a permanent peasant under the boots of some totalitarian government given all the powers required to crush those evil corporations...
You are getting it backwards. Most of the power of these evil corporations is backed up by the government. We only need the government to give less protection to them.
And Verizon is the heartless one.
ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
Ding-Ding-Ding... I believe you've hit the jackpot.
You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.
There are various reasons why she could be moving; it wouldn't be ridicule to think she moved because of her dead husband.
Choices can be altered because of facts happening around you. A death would sure be a valuable option to move places.
The house could be too big for a widow; memories hanging in the old place; the husband could have chosen the place work-related ......
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
But the (tragic) death is only tangentially related here.
The reason that she is canceling is NOT because her husband died. It is because she is moving. That part is a choice.
She is canceling because she is moving because her husband died. There is a clear cut link between "husband's death" and "canceling of cell phone plan", in that it consists of one of the many affairs she is dealing with as a result of her husband's death. She wants to move closer to family for support or whatever and get on with her life, and part of that would include canceling a cellphone contract she would no longer need.
I don't see how this is "tangentially" related, I guess there's a point in it being more about the wife than the husband, but it dosen't really matter. It's been mentioned numerous times that this isn't really about the money, and this issue probably wouldn't have come up if it wasn't a great example of how retarded the early cancellation charge system is.
Unfortunately, only publicity for this type of event will cause Verizon to right it. If we didn't make a big fuss about it, I doubt their response would ensue.
I am interested in subscribing to your "suicide magazine"...
--- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..
...Verizon is allowed to unilaterally change the terms of the contract...
The contract didn't change, Verizon just decided to start enforcing the Early Termination Fee.
"don't sign a contract that allows Verizon to change the terms"
Recently Blockbuster tried to sue a woman who was the counter-party for their standard video rental contract. The judge ruled that since the terms of the contract could change at any time, by definition it wasn't a contract. The case was dismissed.
She lost her husband, who was a marine, and probably served his country in some respect during one of their pointless overseas "conquests" (if you can call soldiers dying and spending trillions of dollars for 10 years without achieving fuck all a "conquest"). Yes, very sad.
But just because her husband died does not magically make her debts and responsibilities go away.
How can you blame the service provider for sending a demand letter at a possibly "stressful" time for her ? What should they do during the billing cycle ? Hold every damn bill until they've verified no immediate relative has recently died ?
Which is only started happening as degregulation hit in the 80s, and small mom and pop orgizations were overtaken by mega corporations in the 90s. If you had a mom and pop cell phone provider, i'm sure they would totally understand why you were cancelling and have made things "right" from the first call.
In some ways these mega corporations (like verizon wireless, etc.) are good for consumers as they have coverage nationwide. In other ways, these mega corporations are leaches slowly draining the consumer and they know they can get away with it because they are probally in collusion with one another to limit choices.
For example, i understand wal-mart would start to loose money when gasoline hits the 4-5 dollar a gallon range. At which point it a) becomes too expensive to ship their cheap chinese merchandise in (so much for made in usa which wasent it a selling point of theirs so long ago), and b) the average consumer can no longer afford to travel farther to shop at a mega store. It's just too bad they've driven everyone else out of business, or out of the country.
I do not have a side. Wars are stupid and unnecessary, specially in the 21th century.
I am usually except both sides of any war, except in this case we don't actually have a war, because we don't have more than one side.
Afghanistan had a Marxist regimen before the United States decided to fund a small resistance, so the Russians backed up the democratic and legitimate government, and we had a war. For 10 fucking years. After the Soviets were no more, the CIA continued to train and provide funding and armament to the resistance. In 2001, you got an excuse to go in there (Thanks to another CIA sock puppet), and you've been there ever since.
There are small groups of crazy bastards everywhere, and potential conflicts are all around, but those potential conflicts turn into wars when the CIA comes in and trains and finances those groups. Then the army has someone to fight against.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
Spare us the nationalism. The US was never under threat. Or you mean your freedom to drive oil-guzzling SUVs?
I don't think the military can claim higher moral ground than Verizon.
(reread) Oh ... you were being ironic. sorry :)
Never under threat... oh other than planes running into buildings, killing thousands.... along with however many plots have been foiled without us even knowing about it.
That's a pretty big oversight, dude.
She probably lived in base housing. When he died she was required to move.
No, you get 365 days after the service member's death until you have to vacate base housing (or lose your housing allowance if you live off base). It's not like they push you out the door after the funeral...
So how long after a spouse dies is the surviving spouse exempt from service fees for their own services?
I realize that's a rhetorical question, but let's see...
"The remote detonated IED, one of those went off, and he took full force," explained Michaela surrounded by pictures of her husband and flowers, still fresh, from his recent funeral. "He died on the chopper on the way to the field hospital."
I'm going to say, longer than that.
I suppose it's technically possible that this is being spun, since she's not specifically talking about the termination fee here, and it doesn't say how long ago he died. Then again...
The reason that she is canceling is NOT because her husband died. It is because she is moving. That part is a choice.
She is moving because her husband died. Sure, she could choose to stay, but it's not unreasonable.
But all of this is beside the point. I'm not saying that Verizon should have to do anything...
I know that when a death is involved, most companies are going to make exceptions to rules.
I realize it would be an exception. I might even concede that this particular case isn't necessarily clear. (For example: Whose fault is it that she went with a plan and a provider that charges $350 early-termination fees?)
But I was replying to an AC who said this:
So he died. Get over it.
That is not an OK thing to say. Not now, not in ten years. If it's tangential, it's tangential, but you do not tell a grieving widow to "get over it."
Or, to be more precise: It is allowed (freedom of speech), but incredibly insensitive.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
And nothing like a pack of total "dot I cross T" pricks to stick to the policy.
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
Obvious Troll, however fear not the death of a single marine. For every proud marine that dies 5000 scumbags are destroyed to avenge his death.
Greetings and salutations...
An earlier poster raised a very important point in this debate...did the woman have a separate contract? That has yet to be answered. It is quite possible that they had a family plan, with a couple of phones and a shared pool of minutes. If so...it is quite possible that it WAS her husband that was the primary account holder. If that was the case, then, that contract SHOULD have become null and void when the husband died...and there likely SHOULD be no termination fee. The original article linked does not address this question at all.
If she had a separate contract, and, she was moving to a place that Verizon did not provide service, I suspect that a testy note from a lawyer to them, stating that their
client would be more than happy to continue paying the subscription, but, that Verizon would be required to provide service in her area, would be sufficient to eliminate the termination fee. The idea that ANY company should be allowed to continue to bill for services when their subscriber is in an area that they do not cover is more of an example of unbridled corporate greed than any idea of rational business practices.
And, since I wander just a little bit at times....This business of the Cell phone companies "giving" their subscriber an overpriced phone that has little to recommend it except that it is the latest and greatest "cool technology" in return for locking them into a 2 year contract seems a bit sketchy to me. Either the phone is a LOT cheaper than its claimed cost, or, the cost of cell service is a LOT lower than the providers claim. Either way, it seems like they are pulling in a right fair amount of money by hoodwinking the consumer.
of course, I also realize that, as a publicly traded company, their job is NOT to provide the best service for the lowest cost, but, rather to suck as much cash out of the pockets of their subscribers as possible, and, funnel as much of that cash into the pockets of their share-holders.
Pleasant dreams
Dave Mundt
YAB - http://blog.beemandave.com/
What if he was still alive? What if he wasn't military and died because of being drunk and driving against a tree? What if she did not move and just was unhappy about the service?
The only thing you can complain about is the early termination fee. The rest is irrelevant. That is as long as the contract was not on his name.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
when my daughter was diagnosed with leukemia, and we made tons of calls from the hospital, we had a very limited use plan, so we got a bill for over $1,000. one call to Verizon, and the rep who answered the phone put us retroactively on a higher minute plan, and removed all the per minute charges. did not need to talk to a manager, send letter from doctors. and a month later, when we exceeded that new plan's minutes, they did the same, retroactively put us on a higher minutes plan. after few months, and we reduced our calling pattern, we lowered the plan to a more reasonable plan, and never had an overage issue since. (esp now with the 10 friends and family numbers).
First off, this appears to be a pathetic grab by a third-rate TV station to make a story out of nothing, targeting all the pro-military nut-jobs. They know they will jump on anything with the word "military" in it.
Secondly...a contract's a contract. If the contract provided for a way for her to get out of it (e.g. if she moved into an area where they provided no service), then they were wrong, and they corrected the error. If not, then SHE was wrong and should have had to pay, and Verizon was *extremely* nice to her, much more so than it needed to be. People need to stop complaining about service contracts that they voluntarily sign into!
This has nothing to do with her husband being in the military or dying. I get so sick of these military people whining and complaining as if they didn't know what they were getting themselves into... Come on! It's the military! If you sign up (or marry someone who signs up) to murder people, there is a very high chance of them being killed. Deal with it, don't complain and expect all this special treatment! The nerve of some of these people is truly unbelievable...
Your imagery here is certainly interesting and somewhat entertaining, but IMHO, the idea that a 'corporation' is necessarily and naturally devoid of humanity and moral code is absolutely bullshit.
A society is composed of a collection of individuals who may or may not be working towards a common goal (typically they are, such as "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness"). This collection of individuals always has some composite set of morals, even if they are few and mild. The stronger the moral compass of individuals, the stronger the morals of the whole is likely to be.
A corporation should be no different, and to claim otherwise is simply a cowardly way of shirking personal responsibility on the part of CEOs all the way down to janitors. The apparent greed of a corporation is not intrinsic to the corporation as an idea, but only exists because of the greed exhibited by the individuals it is comprised of.
ERROR: SIG NOT FOUND (A)bort, (R)etry, (F)ail?:
There is a place in the US that Verizon has no service?
In the UK, early termination costs you the total sum of your contract period minus VAT, at least on Orange.
There's no ETF, because the cost of the contract easily covers the price of the handset, and then some. Often, you pay up-front for a top of the range handset anyway.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
How exactly attacking random countries on the other side of the planet for freebie oil is 'defending your freedom'?
- non-american
How would perspectives change if she got married within the next two months? Would you feel the same sense of outrage towards Verizon?
My kingdom for a mod point.
Everyone who labels this as insensitive is making a massive amounts of assumptions on the circumstances of her early termination. Reading the summary and article I know the following:
a) She had a contract with Verizon.
b) Some random event in her life changed and she decided to move back to her home town
c) She went crying to daddy who went crying to the media to get our of the early termination fee.
No more, no less. She is moving out of her own free will. She could very well move into a big city, but no she wanted to move into the country. Good for her, she should pay her early termination fee. Her husband may be a hero, and she may be grieving the loss, but that doesn't automatically make her contract null and void.
This reminds me of brides trying to get out of paying the photographer because there's no pictures of them smiling. Well if you weren't smiling then how is that their fault. The contract owner here did not die. The contract owner was not forced to move.
What this guy doesn't get and will never get because he was born without a heart is that there are some things you just don't do.
Some hitns for the parent poster and others like him:
Small kid stumbles and spills water on your best pair of pants: You don't sue him in court for his pocket money after giving him a beating that leaves him in a wheel chair.
Puppy: You don't kick it.
Orphans: You don't burn down their orphonage.
War-widows: You don't do ANYTHING to them, ever. Especially not when your country is involved in two wars.
Any real human being would understand this. If you do not get why Verizon is completely in the wrong with this then sorry, you are not a human being.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
he did not die defending anyones freedom.
i really see many of you swallowed the pill and speak the language of the television.
he died while being part of an INVADING/ATTACKING FORCE, outside your borders, while taking part in operations that involve many many things but NOT protecting YOUR freedom.
EVEN in the eventuality that you may consider that america invading countries to steal they shit is beneficial to the US economy or whatever,that STILL does not do anything to protect your freedom.
Yeah, because the planes running into buildings were planned and executed by some dudes in Iraq or Afghanistan, right. Silly me to think they were mostly from Saudi Arabia and U.A.E.
And because a few saudis decided it was a good idea to crash a couple planes into a couple buildings in the US, the correct response was to go and invade Iraq and create a shitstorm and fuck the country to kingdom come. Right. It all makes perfect sense.
I worked for Apple a while back in a call center. Customer service and stuff, answering questions about where people's iPod orders were, sorting out returns. Policy at the time was that any iPod with a personalised engraving on the back was non-returnable, NO EXCEPTIONS.
So I get a call from a man who wanted to return an iPod he had bought and personalised for his son as a birthday present. So I explained the policy, and asked why he wanted to return it as per S.O.P., and as it turns out - his son was dead. He had died the week before his birthday in a car accident.
I asked no more questions, cleared the return right then and there, and told him a courier would be by in the morning with a box to collect it. And his card would be refunded as soon as it reached the depot. My team leader didn't question my actions even for a second.
Bottom line here, yeah, he could have been lying. But one wrongly returned iPod vs the publicity fallout if I said no? Being an insensitive policy-following robot vs having some compassion? The whole point of having live humans on the front line is for customer relations, just for situations like this, and when I was at Apple they at least had a fucking clue about how to do it right - we had a lot of training and we were expected to make judgement calls on balancing the interests of the customer and the company.
This shit from Verizon? Bad. Customer. Service. And it's coming back to bite them in the ass - they're the phone company that slapped a grieving soldier's widow with a $350 fee because she wanted to move back home to be with her family. The damage control alone is going to cost a lot more than $350, and they could have avoided it all if their front line CSRs had the power and the judgement to waive the ETF if the situation merits it. Either someone made a bad call, or they just can't do it at all - and do you really want to deal with a company that doesn't trust its customer point-of-contact employees with the most basic ability to solve customer problems?
So he died. Get over it.
Congratulations! That's about the most insensitive thing you could say to a grieving widow. From TFA:
Well whoop-de fucking do. Have a pity party in private please. There are millions of other people out there who have had close relatives or spouses die recently too. Should we bend to their demands?
She should take some personal responsibility and present a normal facade to the rest of the world. That's what society is all about.
I must say besides bad business by Verizon you think they would have a little more compassion for people who died serving the USA. This is BAD BAD P.R. for a company that is advertising that being the #1 mobile provider is there main concern.
http://www.thetechnologygeek.org
Since we're sharing anecdotes, here's my T-Mobile experience.
Had a 2 year contract but was planning to move out of the country. I talked with a rep at one of their stores and was told if they don't offer service in the new country I can cancel service without an early termination fee, also I need proof of address in the new country. No problem, the rep also offers to suspend service for up to 6 months while I make my initial move, get proof of address and come back for final paperwork. Sweet, so no charge while in the (obviously no service) country for 6 months, I fly back with proof of new address and I should be golden yes?
Nope, when I get back I find out they reactivated my account soon after I left, I'm charged with 6 months of service and a $250 early termination charge. I politely explain to the new rep (different store) how I have all the paperwork with me today because of the conversation with the old rep who set everything up and explained exactly what I needed. It's obvious no calls were made over that time period and previously I'd never had a late payment. Why would I leave for 6 months and NOT suspend my account? The rep agreed it made sense, but "Can't do anything", finally the supervisor agreed to waive the early termination fee and give me some kind of "discount" but I still owe several hundred dollars.
I was told if I went back to the original store... found the same rep, got them to admit fault, then THEY could waive the other fees. Yeah right, that was in another state and I couldn't remember exactly which rep anyways.
So I head back to my new home, T-Mobile account closed with an outstanding balance. I refuse to pay a cent since they're bastards and now a credit collection agency is hounding my parents. Such fun.
Knowing my dad, he'll probably pay the whole thing just to make them stop calling. I hate T-Mobile.
There's my anecdote. They're really worthless aren't they?
Cwm, fjord-bank glyphs vext quiz
Here's a tip: she wasn't trying to terminate her husband's contract, she was trying to terminate HER OWN PERSONAL PHONE contract. See the difference?
Besides, if I was to die tomorrow run over by a bus, should my wife be entitled not to be charged an ETF on her own fucking phone if she decides to return to her hometown? Why not? Because I'm a lowly IT guy and not a fucking soldier? Well, go fuck yourself if you think that makes any sense. I, and others like me, run this fucking country. IT guys are the sole reason civilization does not crumble around your ears. Underpaid, overworked and all.
So does the remainder... ;)
Best Slashdot Co
Verizon has a policy about ETF's. Of course she was billed for it if she canceled the lines. Sure someone might have been able to credit her for it, but chances are they had to bill her first.
If only the military was sensitive enough to these things, and also wanted to make sure that private corporations didn't have to try to figure out when something like this happened, and chipped in enough extra money to cover these unexpected costs when someone died in combat (above and beyond the life insurance they would otherwise receive if they passed away peacefully on base).
Oh, wait, they do, and its $100,000 (tax-free IIRC). Its designed to cover these unpleasant situations. This is a time when we're already doing the right thing, but she wants Verizon to chip in and pay her phone subsidy for her as well.
You're special forces then? That's great! I just love your olympics!
Did you just connect the invasion of Iraq with 9/11?
Frankly, EVERY corporation should provide a "I'm in the military" checkbox which, once verified the checkbox is valid (some proof is required), it would be in the best interests (PR-wise) of that company to provide reduced cost services, and complete waiving of fees if necessary.
I'm tired of companies talking about how they "support" the country and/or the troops, while they avoid paying taxes, they actively lobby to steal more from every American, they skirt the law to avoid any responsibility for any action they do or do not take, and all they do is make commercials about how patriotic they are.
Think about all the 9/11 victims. Every damn family of some high-paid white-collar worker who died that day got tons of money and all kinds of waivers on paying anything for months! Those guys were insured up the wazoo, and even when they weren't the families sued for "what they would have earned in the lifetime", which meant millions.
Meanwhile someone truly serving the nation, some military grunt, when he dies, all the family ever gets is grief and hassle from every corner of our country. Some gratitude. I have to wonder what mental illness makes anyone *want* to serve our country when our country won't do jack shit for them when the tables have turned. It makes me want to vomit.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
While I agree with your sentiment, it could be that they lived in on-base housing. If that were the case, she would have been forced to vacate and she could argue her relocation was related to that.
How about a different situation?
You're the CEO of a multi-billion dollar international corporation that insures credit default swaps. You're goofing off as usual, playing golf on a weekday when your phone rings. It's your personal assistant, telling you that the stock market has crashed because CDS's are worthless. You're leverged to 175% of market cap, so you don't even have enough cash to make payroll next week.
Should you be allowed to continue getting your $20 million dollar a year salary while you're borrowing money from the government, and in the meantime, your inaction, stupidity, and greed has cost the entire economy trillions of dollars and basically bankrupted the entire nation?
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
How do you know I'm outraged?
I'm actually fairly indifferent towards Verizon -- more outraged that they charge $350 to anyone for termination, but that seems to be the norm in that industry.
What I was specifically responding to was the comment of "So he died. Get over it." That is not an OK thing to say to a grieving widow.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
There are millions of other people out there who have had close relatives or spouses die recently too. Should we bend to their demands?
I didn't say that. All I said is that it was pretty damned insensitive.
She should take some personal responsibility and present a normal facade to the rest of the world. That's what society is all about.
Maybe to you -- and I wish you posted this non-anonymously, so I would know who I should never trust.
But some of us would like to be authentic, and actually give a damn.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
"...I don't care if your husband just died defending my freedom"
Which freedom was that then. The freedom to drive an SUV? The freedom to invade other countries on bullshit pretences? The freedom to be a douchebag?
This is the rest of the world, fuck you America
This may help.
I am not a crackpot.
Yes, but WHY ?
Fine, I'm not debating the fact that the military provide a vital service defending the country ... But then doctors, firemen, paramedics also do a valuable job ... what about teachers, scientists, etc. ?
Should we give every widow or widower of a "professional" a pension for life and a waiver on all debts and responsibilities ? And more to the point, who the fuck is going to pay for it ?
Every time Verizon "write off" a termination fee like this, it simply means a bunch of other cunts get to pay for it. They might avoid bad PR, but for sure the rest of us will still pick up the tab.
This is good to hear.
I had a terrible experience with Sprint after my grandmother died. She had one of my old phones, not under subsidy. I called to cancel her account, and Sprint demanded I pay her ETF. After much arguing back and forth, the CSR demanded I provide them with a death certificate. To which I asked "Who am I going to show it to, you're in a call center somewhere!" I asked to speak to her manager, and I was transferred. When I told the manager that the CSR demanded a death certificate, there was a pause and he softly said, "She said *what*?" I repeated exactly what the CSR said. The manager then apologized profusely and said that the CSR's actions were inexcusable and she should have immediately referred the call to him to have the ETF waived.
Actually, I'm on Verison's side with this. Had I been in Verison's shoes... I honestly WOULDN'T care if their husband died defending my freedom. Not that I think that any current "war" that the USA is in is even remotely related to the USA's freedom to begin with. Nor do I care if it changes her life.
People die every day. Hell, every hour. In fact *googles* it would appear that nearly two people die every second in the USA. I'm sure many of them are for noble causes, too. Should every company on earth go out of their way to make every one of them feel better?
Life happens. Deal.
Oh for fucks sake, chill. It was some low paid drone in a call center who made the original decision. Not exactly an executive decision.
You can bet your life it was an executive decision to staff the call center with low-paid droids incapable of acting on moral discretion. This is the business model they choose to create, where 99% of their interaction with the public is through low-paid droids incapable of moral discretion.
On this model, getting publicly burned in effigy once every six months is a normal cost of business. The phone companies have taken it upon themselves to function as the bulwark of enculturated infantilism (few cost-up-front purchase options). They deserve what they get.
On the other side of the fence, America's enlisted men have roughly the same level of moral discretion when it comes to participating in the wrong war as Verizon's call center droids have in accepting a justifiable termination request.
DNRTFA. Is the cell phone exclusively in his or her name? I pose this question, if the cell phone was in her name and her use only, then why would the death of her husband (whatever the cause) release her from obligation of the contract? Obviously, his cell phone would be a different story, as would a joint account.
T-Mobile may not be the best company from a technical standpoint (not the "best" phones or network usually) but they are far and above the best cellular phone company when it comes to customer service. T-Mobile, ATT and Verizon are the only 3 I really ever hear anything from, either from someone I know/are face to face with or even online. The latter 2 are nearly always bad news but T-Mobile its usually praise for something like this. I wonder why I don't hear much about Sprint since they seem fairly promising lately...
Anyways I miss my T-Mobile account. If I wasn't going to get slammed by a termination fee with Verizon and they actually had 3G by my house like Verizon I'd switch back to them in a heart beat and take my Droid with me.
Heck,
I use T-Mobile pre-paid and the one time I had a problem (lost phone) and had to go into a branded store to resolve it they were awesome. It took a while to resolve (technical issues relating to moving a pre-paid phone number to a new SIM) but customer service side was beyond expectations.
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Sprint pulled the same BS on my brother in law when my sister passed away from Cancer. So instead of canceling the service he just kept the phone active for the duration of the contract and it turned out to be good as sometimes friends of hers would call and they weren't aware she had passed. In this case it was quasi OK from our end but still the most ridiculous crap I have ever heard of. Yay for big business acting like a bunch of insensitive money hungry jerks.
Seeing as how I'm against stealing money of any sort, I'm against bailouts for companies as well. But since you mentioned in your subject line "too big to fail", I feel compelled to point out that "too big to fail" is just as ludicrous an idea as your notion of "too sad to pay their bills".
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
Or not. Most life insurance companies exclude fatalities due to war. Probably only got the $250 death benefit from Social Stupidity.