Damn you coverage maps!

[wolfie]

What really bothers me is that we have pretty much a blanket policy at <Red Checkmark> of absolutely NOT giving the customer any breaks on their cancellation costs if they decide to bail because their coverage stinks. Part of the problem is that, as far as our policy goes, if our coverage maps show you have coverage (there's those damn things again!), you have coverage. Regardless of what your actual experience is. You have to literally be in an area on the map that shows ABSOLUTELY ZERO coverage at all to get out of your services without paying.

WTF? I'm surprised customers don't mention things like "fraud" and "implied warranty of merchatibility". Prospective customer looks at the coverage map and signs up based on the promise that there's coverage at their home. Finds out that there's no coverage. Company denies waiving the ETF on the grounds that they told the customer that there was coverage (by showing it on their map) even though there was none - the very reason the customer wants out. Why do they think that it's OK to lie to prospective customers?

[CrazedClerkthe2nd]

WTF? I'm surprised customers don't mention things like "fraud" and "implied warranty of merchatibility". Prospective customer looks at the coverage map and signs up based on the promise that there's coverage at their home. Finds out that there's no coverage. Company denies waiving the ETF on the grounds that they told the customer that there was coverage (by showing it on their map) even though there was none - the very reason the customer wants out. Why do they think that it's OK to lie to prospective customers?

This is, in a nutshell why I am not a huge fan of the policy and why I am thankful as HELL that I don't work in cancellations!

Of course ETFs as such don't exist anymore, but now if you bail early, you're on the hook for the total payments on a device lease plan, which on a higher end smartphone can be a substantially higher penalty than a $250-300 ETF.

It doesn't seem legal to me but then again I assume <Red Checkmark>'s lawyers would have had to sign off on that policy before it was implemented.

[Silent-Hunter]

Ah but what if the device is unlocked or otherwise paid in full? I wouldn't expect them to just let them out of it because of that.

[Mr Hero]

This video showed up in my YouTube subscriptions list this morning. Reminded me of this topic.

If Cell Phone Commercials Were Honest