1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!

Verizon Wireless Fraud? BEWARE!!!

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by John, Jan 3, 2004.

  1. "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FFA1892.20601@earthlink.net...
    > [sorry for the delay... a busy life must be compartmentalized]


    More like the moron must be institutionalized.

    >
    > My sole purpose in posting was to expose this practice and in so doing get
    > them to change it! or cost them customers. the more eyes that see it the

    better.

    No- your sole purpose was to display your complete lack of a clue about
    anything higher than third grade mathematics.

    >
    > Ileen "gets it" (and a couple of others) and I didn't know I had to "dumb
    > down" the description for the message to get through.
    >
    > What is right is right. And in this case what is right is a number of

    minutes
    > between 300 and 400. no other explanation is required. They contacted me

    by US
    > Mail to UPGRADE!


    No other explanation would get through to you- countless tried in this
    thread, and you have shown a complete lack of logic skills.

    >
    > It *is* a deceptive practice. it is a practice that causes VZW excess

    gain.
    > that is the definition of "fraud". I wasn't sure it was fraud until I

    looked
    > up its specific definition, and it fits perfectly so I have no reservation

    in
    > calling it that!


    no- it is a practice outlined in the service agreement you signed.

    >
    > I received no written summary nor warning that I would have less minutes

    than
    > either plan. That is so illogical it is ridiculous to even consider!


    You didn't, but I'm too tired to try to come down to your level and explain
    it in little words.

    >
    > I have no intention of personally profiting from this, I have enough

    money. I
    > would like to see VZW lose millions to lawyers for such a practice. But is

    is
    > the PRINCIPLE that they are so arrogant to rip off their customers this

    way!
    > To me, that is over the top! In fact, I am going to spend far more than

    the
    > $50 on US Mail to Attorneys General, BBBs, etc. as I indicated in my first
    > post. I have the addresses of several hundred BBBs across the country if
    > anyone wants the list.


    Yeah, yeah, yeah.........the raise negotiated by the Janitor's Union
    probably comes in handy.

    >
    > I did put the case in with VZW on their customer (dis)service page. They
    > finally responded today with the fact that I would have a response in 8

    hours.
    > I am waiting. If the timestamps are correct for our time zone, they have

    two
    > more hours.


    And if they are a minute late, would that be fraud, too? Or maybe
    discrimination against fools? You could get a fortune for that.


    >
    > I'm sorry for being so irate when a deep pockets corporation decides to

    rip
    > off its unsuspecting customers. that includes you too. It isn't about the

    $50.
    > I spend more than that on a dinner. If you notice, the issues that I get

    up on
    > my soapbox about are when some coproration pulls a really boneheaded

    stunt. I
    > am an advocate for the consumer. Being a Casper Milque (sp?) Toast in this
    > area buys nothing. Being over the top gives a calculated psychological

    advantage.

    Being over the top makes you an asshole, and if that's your way of getting
    attention, then do yourself a favor- seek help.

    >
    > Back to your regular programming...


    Regular programming sucks tonight- its the only reason I chose to waste my
    time with you again.



    › See More: Verizon Wireless Fraud? BEWARE!!!
  2. Giambi

    Giambi Guest

    "ileen" <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote in message
    news:woAKb.116802$JW3.19009@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
    >
    > "Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote
    > >
    > > You don't actually _pay_ "in advance" to the extent you've suggested.
    > > Instead, you are _billed_ in advance

    >
    > Yes, you're right of course. My point is that you agree per contract to

    pay
    > a certain amount for a certain amount of minutes for the entire month. No
    > one tells you at that time that if you upgrade your month gets cut-off.

    If
    > no one mentions it when the plan is upgraded, how are you supposed to just
    > "know." It irks me when people act like it's simple logic and

    intuition --
    > that any reasonable person should understand what Verizon means when they
    > say "prorate." Reasonable would be what I described in the post you're
    > responding to. Being charged over-age when you haven't used more minutes
    > than EITHER plan simply isn't reasonable!


    Regarding the "being told", yes.. they're supposed to explain it. It's a
    standard M&P (methods and practices). See below.

    Regarding pro-rating itself.. it's a double-edged sword. When someone goes
    over their minutes because of pro-rating, then it's easy to see it as unfair
    in their circumstance. But when you're a customer with a very high dollar
    plan coming down to a lower priced one, what if they instead required you to
    stay on the plan until the end of the cycle, paying far more money for
    minutes you never used? Everybody would be up in arms about being ripped off
    and "forced" to stay on the plan until the end of the cycle.

    Would the claim that it makes billing simpler cool then anyones jets? I
    doubt it. Not to mention situations where the plan type (local/AC/NSR) was
    being changed also. Customers would be forced to pay roaming charges because
    they couldn't change plans until the bill cycle date. Again, even more
    pissed off customers.

    If nothing else, pro-rating is one thing, exact. You make a change, they
    bill you for the number of days you were on the old plan and give you the
    respective number of minutes, then bill you for the number of days left to
    complete the cycle on the new plan and again give you the respective number
    of minutes. The computer sees those numbers as black and white. Talking to
    the people on the other end will usually come to a peacefully grey
    resolution.

    > > The key is all in how you approach it and how you act
    > > towards said rep.

    >
    > I see your point but I don't think it should be left to the customers to
    > play nice with the rep after Verizon overcharges their customers. Verizon
    > should have a method of pro-rating that doesn't cause this ridiculous
    > problem in the first place. They should also have policies and procedures
    > in place that make it abundantly clear to the customer exactly what
    > upgrading a plan will entail. They should enforce these procedures.


    Agreed. That's why pro-rating is suposed to explained whenever a plan change
    is made. Does it always happen? No. Do customers always understand even when
    it is explained? No. But are they usually even paying enough attention to
    discern if it was or wasn't presented? A very generous "maybe". But that's
    why 9 out of 10 times, they'll re-rate the bill if you explain politely that
    you weren't told, didn't understand, etc. The tenth time is usually when
    people like John fly off the handle and start acting like asses. On the off
    change it's really an obstinate CSR (sadly, there are bad apples
    everywhere), calling back and trying a new CSR usually works out just fine.

    > > You can see for yourself just how well John's approach
    > > (arrogant while uncomprehending) works out as an alternative.

    >
    > Agreed.
    >
    > Ileen


    I don't really think we're that far apart in philosophy. I happen to have
    been a CSR in many different industries (including cellular), and I know
    that most people don't really pay attention until they f- something up and
    then get the bill for it. I'll admit I've been lazy about details as a
    customer myself. It just happens somtimes. But if you ask for an explanation
    nicely, the odds are people won't hold it against you (within reason as a
    business of course). If you fly off the handle, things go downhill quickly.
    You may get the same monetary result in the end, but I bet it takes a whole
    lot longer and is much more stressful too. Why do it the hard way?
    --
    Jason G
    Marlins Win. The Gods of Baseball Smite Me Again.
    Remove 'WINNER' to reply.
  3. me@me.com

    me@me.com Guest

    In article <3FF7919F.4090309@earthlink.net>,
    John <jhy001@earthlink.net> wrote:
    >oh, this will be clear to anyone with an IQ greater than 80.
    >So if choose to challenge, that tells me clearly that your
    >IQ is below 80.


    Is that IQ averaged or prorated?
  4. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote

    > But when you're a customer with a very high dollar
    > plan coming down to a lower priced one, what if they instead required you

    to
    > stay on the plan until the end of the cycle, paying far more money for
    > minutes you never used?


    Why not use the same simpler and fairer method of proration already
    discussed? Example, someone goes from $99.99/1600 minute plan to $39.99/400
    minute plan on day 20 after using 1500 minutes. Allotted minutes for the
    month would be 1600*20/30 + 400 *10/30 = 1200. Customer overage would be
    300 minutes plus any minutes used in the last 10 days of billing cycle.
    Suppose same scenario, but customer had only used 300 minutes (a more likely
    scenario because a customer using 1500 minutes wouldn't be going down to a
    400 minute plan): allotted minutes = 1200, customer gets 900 more minutes
    in the last 10 days of billing cycle. In these cases, customer pays $99.99
    * 20/30 + $39.99 * 10/30 = $79.99 for 1200 minutes. And, lo & behold,
    that's exactly what a 1200 minute/month plan costs! Fairness and
    mathematical simplicity all at once, what's not to like.

    > Not to mention situations where the plan type (local/AC/NSR) was
    > being changed also. Customers would be forced to pay roaming charges

    because
    > they couldn't change plans until the bill cycle date. Again, even more
    > pissed off customers.


    In the case of switching product types, it may make sense to close out one
    plan and start another. Since more is changing besides just the number of
    minutes (like roaming area, promo N&W minutes, etc.), having to lose minutes
    to make the change mid-cycle will be far more palatable to the customer.
    This was the case in my situation; I knew I'd be losing minutes but I needed
    to switch to AC before travelling so I went ahead with switching mid-cycle.
    But this is different than simply changing the number of minutes within a
    product offering. Sorry, but there's no way you can convince me that it
    makes sense to be allowed *less* minutes than originally contracted for when
    increasing the number of minutes within a plan.
    >
    > If nothing else, pro-rating is one thing, exact. You make a change, they
    > bill you for the number of days you were on the old plan and give you the
    > respective number of minutes,


    Not exactly. They would be giving you the respective number of minutes if
    they let you roll over the ones you didn't use. What they actually do is
    cut you off mid-month and say tough if you didn't use them.

    > Agreed. That's why pro-rating is suposed to explained whenever a plan

    change
    > is made. Does it always happen? No.


    I know for a fact that it doesn't always happen because nothing at all was
    mentioned when I upgraded my mom's plan for her (she speaks no English).
    When I asked about pro-rating, the response was, "yeah, it will be
    prorated." (gee thanks, no kidding) Yet when I upgraded my own account
    earlier, it was not only explained but I was given a print-out of my
    minutes. As usual with Verizon, it all depends which rep you get.

    > Do customers always understand even when
    > it is explained? No. But are they usually even paying enough attention to
    > discern if it was or wasn't presented? A very generous "maybe".


    *sigh* I won't argue with you there. It amazes me how people go through
    life not understanding much of anything and yet signing on the dotted line
    anyway. My nephew visited over the weekend and had no idea if his cellphone
    plan included LD, N&W, etc. His mom just handed him his family share phone.
    She'll probably be screaming when the bill comes in. My neighbor got a new
    phone from ATTW a couple of months ago and now claims that she wasn't TOLD
    that this extended her contract for two more years. OK, whatever.

    Ileen
  5. David S

    David S Guest

    On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 00:26:52 GMT, "ileen"
    <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> chose to add this to the great
    equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >"ShackAttack" <shackattack6089@nospam.yahoo.com> wrote
    >> When you
    >> change your plan, you will have your bill prorated on a 30 day cycle. If
    >> your 1/4 into your cycle and change the plan (up or down in peak minutes)
    >> you will only be alloughted 1/4 of your "old" plans peak minutes for the
    >> first 1/4 of your bill cycle. Simple. Fair. Efficient.

    >
    >Yes, that's the way it's done and it may be efficient -- it may even be
    >considered "simple" if it is explained properly -- but I would hardly call
    >it fair.
    >
    >When a customer signs on for a new plan, they pay X amount of dollars *in
    >advance* for a certain amount of minutes. On the first bill, you get
    >pro-rated for any portion of the first month and you also pay for the
    >*entire* next month *in advance*. Nowhere does it say that if you upgrade
    >your plan will you will not be able to use all the minutes that you paid
    >for, um, did I mention IN ADVANCE?
    >
    >So, for example, if you paid for 300 minutes that you are supposed to be
    >able to use anytime during the coming month (and nowhere is it written that
    >you should use your minutes "proportionally" to the number of days in the
    >month) and then you upgrade 20 days later to a higher plan it is possible
    >that you will end up with less than 300 usable minutes. Suppose you only
    >used 30 minutes in 2/3 of the month. Then you upgrade to, say, 400 minutes.
    >Pro-rating the Verizon way gives you an allotment of only 163 minutes for
    >the entire month. (30 minutes used plus 400*10/30 = 163.) Therefore, you
    >are PAYING for two-thirds of a month of a 300 minute plan and one third of a
    >month of a 400 minute plan and yet only being allotted 163 minutes -- even
    >though you paid for *300* minutes, IN ADVANCE! How on earth do you
    >consider this FAIR?


    I told myself I wasn't going to post to this thread anymore, but here goes,
    one last time (I hope)...

    First, about paying in advance: your next bill will not only prorate your
    minutes, it will also prorate what you pay. Here's my current bill:

    Monthly access Prorate (partial month) --- from 11/19/03 to 11/23/03: 3.33
    Monthly access Prorate (partial month) --- from 11/24/03 to 12/18/03: 29.16
    Monthly Access --- from 11/19/03 to 12/18/03: 19.99 Credit [this is what I
    already paid ("in advance") on last month's bill]
    Monthly Access --- from 12/19/03 to 01/18/04: 34.99

    Total Monthly Access Charges $47.49

    So you can see that they took 3.33 (the prorate portion of my old plan) and
    added 29.16 (the prorate portion of my new plan) for a sum of 32.49, then
    subtracted the 19.99 I already paid, leaving 12.50 for which they charged
    me after the fact.

    Second, about their method of prorating being fair: in your example, you
    get 200 minutes for the first 2/3 of the month and if you only use 30 of
    them, that's your problem, *just like* if you don't use all the minutes in
    a normal month (one where you don't change plans). So this is no less fair
    than their normal practice.

    Just as you can't average the 2 plans' minutes, you can't add them
    (figuring two prorates and adding them is just a different (and less
    accurate, since they only use whole numbers) way of doing an average).

    Does it suck for the consumer? Absolutely. Is it more profitable for them?
    Absolutely. Are they going to keep on doing the most profitable thing they
    can? Absolutely.

    >Here's fair:
    >
    >a.) Going back to the old way and making upgrades retro-active to the start
    >of the billing cycle.


    That would be great. (Unless you're *lowering* your plan.)

    >b.) Instituting a fair formula for prorationing by allowing the customer to
    >use ALL of the minutes that they paid for, yes, in f*king advance, for the
    >entire month instead of making the upgrade date a cut-off date. Allotted
    >minutes for *entire* month should equal a proportional amount of minutes
    >from first plan plus a proportional amount of minutes from upgraded plan --
    >to be used at ANYTIME during the month. In the example above it would work
    >like this: 300 minutes * 2/3 month = 200 minutes, plus 400 minutes * 1/3
    >month = 133 minutes, for a total of 333 minutes for that first month. See
    >how the total number of minutes nicely falls between the allotment of the
    >two plans yet takes into account the porportionality of when in the month


    As I said, that's just a different way to calculate an average.

    >the change in plans went into effect? Now that would be very efficient,
    >even simpler, and most importantly FAIR.


    Yeah, that sure would be nice. Do I think they're going to do it? Not
    bloody likely.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "The phonograph... is not of any commercial value." - Thomas Edison
  6. David S

    David S Guest

    On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:28:40 GMT, "ileen"
    <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> chose to add this to the great
    equation of life, the universe, and everything:

    >> If nothing else, pro-rating is one thing, exact. You make a change, they
    >> bill you for the number of days you were on the old plan and give you the
    >> respective number of minutes,

    >
    >Not exactly. They would be giving you the respective number of minutes if
    >they let you roll over the ones you didn't use. What they actually do is
    >cut you off mid-month and say tough if you didn't use them.


    If you don't make a change, they cut you off at the end of the month and
    say tough if you didn't use them. How is the plan-change scenario any less
    fair than that?

    I still don't like it, but I knew what I was getting when I signed on the
    little credit terminal screen, and so did you... and John.

    --
    David Streeter, "an internet god" -- Dave Barry
    http://home.att.net/~dwstreeter
    Expect a train on ANY track at ANY time.
    "One special form of contact, which consists of mutual approximation of the
    mucous membranes of the lips in a kiss, has received a sexual value among
    the civilized nations, though the parts of the body do not belong to the
    sexual apparatus and merely form the entrance to the digestive tract."
    - Sigmund Freud, _The Sexual Aberrations_
  7. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "David S" <dwstreeter@att.net> wrote in message
    news:sdhuvv8r3ogv4ubadn1rcu1kp5vq159so5@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 20:28:40 GMT, "ileen"
    > <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> chose to add this to the great
    > equation of life, the universe, and everything:
    >
    > >> If nothing else, pro-rating is one thing, exact. You make a change,

    they
    > >> bill you for the number of days you were on the old plan and give you

    the
    > >> respective number of minutes,

    > >
    > >Not exactly. They would be giving you the respective number of minutes

    if
    > >they let you roll over the ones you didn't use. What they actually do is
    > >cut you off mid-month and say tough if you didn't use them.

    >
    > If you don't make a change, they cut you off at the end of the month and
    > say tough if you didn't use them. How is the plan-change scenario any less
    > fair than that?


    The difference is in how you define "the respective number of minutes." In
    your first post you wrote: "they bill you for the number of days you were
    on the old plan and give you the respective number of minutes." That would
    mean that if you changed the plan after, say, 30% of the month had gone by,
    you would be billed for 30% of the monthly fee and allowed *30% of the
    minutes for that month.* I'm saying that yes, they bill you the number of
    days on the old plan, but they *don't* give you the "respective" minutes.
    You get whatever minutes you already used, period. It's not "fair" because
    there is nothing written anywhere that says you are supposed to use your
    minutes in a proportional manner. What is written is that there are no
    roll-over minutes to the next MONTH. Nowhere does it say there will be no
    roll-over of *respective* minutes when you upgrade the minutes on your plan
    mid-month.

    Once again, there is no way you or anyone can convince me that it is FAIR
    for Verizon to give you LESS minutes than you originally contracted for in a
    month that you UPGRADED your plan. I understand it is how it is. I still
    feel that Verizon is the best provider (by far) for me.

    I'm not arguing that I didn't know about it. I was told. I am saying that
    not everyone has it spelled out for them (and I know this for a fact because
    it happened to me personally on a different occasion), and that if
    Verizon's definition of proration isn't spelled out, it *is not intuitively
    obvious*.

    Apparently, it isn't obvious for some people even when it IS explained. So,
    Verizon should make it part of its practices to provide customers with
    written documentation of the proration deal and have customers sign off on
    it. Just like they do with their contracts.

    That's all I'm sayin'.

    Ileen
  8. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:12:34 GMT, "ileen"
    <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> posted in
    alt.cellular.verizon:

    >Once again, there is no way you or anyone can convince me that it is FAIR
    >for Verizon to give you LESS minutes than you originally contracted for in a
    >month that you UPGRADED your plan.


    You have the old plan for 30% of the month, so they credit you with
    30% of the minutes on the old plan. You have the new plan for 70% of
    the month, so they credit you with 70% of the minutes on the new plan.
    That's not only fair, it's precisely what you're asking for.

    >I'm not arguing that I didn't know about it. I was told. I am saying that
    >not everyone has it spelled out for them (and I know this for a fact because
    >it happened to me personally on a different occasion), and that if
    >Verizon's definition of proration isn't spelled out, it *is not intuitively
    >obvious*.


    Since that's exactly what proration means, it's very obvious to anyone
    who knows what proration means. I assumed that's how it worked before
    I found out that it does work that way.

    >Apparently, it isn't obvious for some people even when it IS explained. So,
    >Verizon should make it part of its practices to provide customers with
    >written documentation of the proration deal and have customers sign off on
    >it. Just like they do with their contracts.


    Which probably no more than 30% of their customers understand.
  9. CharlesH

    CharlesH Guest

    In article <b84c00d584ppd9miidi9eqbua8ci3p691j@Pern.rk>,
    Al Klein <ehxong@bcgbayvar.arg> wrote:
    >On Tue, 13 Jan 2004 20:12:34 GMT, "ileen"
    ><ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> posted in
    >alt.cellular.verizon:
    >
    >>Once again, there is no way you or anyone can convince me that it is FAIR
    >>for Verizon to give you LESS minutes than you originally contracted for in a
    >>month that you UPGRADED your plan.

    >
    >You have the old plan for 30% of the month, so they credit you with
    >30% of the minutes on the old plan. You have the new plan for 70% of
    >the month, so they credit you with 70% of the minutes on the new plan.
    >That's not only fair, it's precisely what you're asking for.
    >
    >>I'm not arguing that I didn't know about it. I was told. I am saying that
    >>not everyone has it spelled out for them (and I know this for a fact because
    >>it happened to me personally on a different occasion), and that if
    >>Verizon's definition of proration isn't spelled out, it *is not intuitively
    >>obvious*.

    >
    >Since that's exactly what proration means, it's very obvious to anyone
    >who knows what proration means. I assumed that's how it worked before
    >I found out that it does work that way.


    To me, proration means that if I use some service for X% of some term,
    that I will pay X% of the charge for that term. For example, if I am in
    the middle of my yearly auto insurance policy period, and I change some
    coverage limit, what I get back or have to pay depends on how much of the
    year the change applies to, proportional to how long I have particular
    coverage. In terms of how much I end up paying for service in the
    month in which the change occurs, VZW proration works exactly like that.
    But the part which is NOT intuitive to me is that just by changing the
    number of minutes on my plan, that I have partitioned the month into
    two disjoint buckets of minutes, and if I go over the limit in *either*
    of these buckets, I pay overage charges. I already know that *months* are
    disjoint buckets, but the split of the month into two disjoint buckets,
    caused by just changing the number of minutes, is what confuses a lot
    of people.

    But VZW CSRs apparently have some discretion to issue adjustments if
    the proration really screws over a customer.
  10. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "CharlesH" <hoch@exemplary.invalid> wrote

    > In terms of how much I end up paying for service in the
    > month in which the change occurs, VZW proration works exactly like that.
    > But the part which is NOT intuitive to me is that just by changing the
    > number of minutes on my plan, that I have partitioned the month into
    > two disjoint buckets of minutes, and if I go over the limit in *either*
    > of these buckets, I pay overage charges. I already know that *months* are
    > disjoint buckets, but the split of the month into two disjoint buckets,
    > caused by just changing the number of minutes, is what confuses a lot
    > of people.


    Why thank you CharlesH! Well said.

    >
    > But VZW CSRs apparently have some discretion to issue adjustments if
    > the proration really screws over a customer.


    Yes, they appear to be more sympathetic to this issue than some of the
    people here.

    Ileen
  11. ileen <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote:

    > Yes, they appear to be more sympathetic to this issue than some of the
    > people here.


    I think part of the reason some people *here* are less sympathetic is because
    they've explained what's going on and you stubbornly insist that you are
    getting screwed anyhow. And you keep on insisting that, and people get tired
    of hearing it.

    Yes, in certain situations proration might cost you money.

    It's not true in all situations, and in the situations where it is, as
    CharlesH said, you may be able to call *611 and get some relief from Customer
    Service.

    The best thing, of course, is to call and ask on which day of the month your
    billing cycle ends, and make sure to wait to switch until that day.

    I personally like the flexibility of being able to switch anytime. Sprint
    makes you wait until the end of the billing cycle (my wife's phone is a
    Sprint phone). You do have to be careful, though, ESPECIALLY if you're
    switching to a plan with fewer minutes than your current plan.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED
  12. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote

    > I think part of the reason some people *here* are less sympathetic is

    because
    > they've explained what's going on and you stubbornly insist that you are
    > getting screwed anyhow.


    Um, either have low reading comprehension skills or you
    have mistaken me for someone else. I haven't even once said that I had a
    billing problem due to proration, much less insisted on it.

    >And you keep on insisting that, and people get tired
    > of hearing it.


    Nah, people are not tired of hearing it. If that were true, they'd just
    skip this bloated thread. Newsgroupies tend to like to argue; haven't you
    noticed?

    Ileen
  13. "ileen" <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote in message
    news:IdHNb.7181$Su5.1328@twister.nyroc.rr.com...

    > Nah, people are not tired of hearing it. If that were true, they'd just
    > skip this bloated thread. Newsgroupies tend to like to argue; haven't you
    > noticed?


    Nah- we are tired of hearing it. It was fun for a couple of days, but it is
    now quite boring.
  14. ileen <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote:
    >
    > "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote
    >
    >> I think part of the reason some people *here* are less sympathetic is

    > because
    >> they've explained what's going on and you stubbornly insist that you are
    >> getting screwed anyhow.

    >
    > Um, either have low reading comprehension skills or you
    > have mistaken me for someone else. I haven't even once said that I had a
    > billing problem due to proration, much less insisted on it.


    OK, I misspoke. Replace "you are" with "prorated customers are" in the
    portion of my message that you quoted. You do insist that the pro-ration
    is unfair:

    http://tinyurl.com/2vufq

    > Nah, people are not tired of hearing it. If that were true, they'd just
    > skip this bloated thread. Newsgroupies tend to like to argue; haven't you
    > noticed?


    From what I can see, when you started posting, John had already said the
    same thing over and over again. It does tend to piss people off when they
    explain something multiple times and the original poster doesn't listen.

    You entered the thread and contributed something that wasn't exactly the
    same (obviously), but it was pretty similar. I congratulate you for at least
    being original in the way you said it, though.

    BTW, you're right about people here (on Usenet) liking to argue. I've been
    newsgrouping since '89 and have found that there is only one truism about
    Usenet: ain't no such thing as a consensus. And people obviously like to
    argue about the subject at hand (almost 200 posts in this thread since its
    inception). However, there are a fair number of people who got tired of the
    thread real quickly, IMHO....

    I don't see what the point is of the ongoing arguments. It's not like anyone
    is going to change anyone else's mind.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED
  15. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote


    > OK, I misspoke. Replace "you are" with "prorated customers are" in the
    > portion of my message that you quoted. You do insist that the pro-ration
    > is unfair:


    OK, then you are saying:

    >> I think part of the reason some people *here* are less sympathetic is
    > > because
    > >> they've explained what's going on and you stubbornly insist that

    prorated customers are
    > >> getting screwed anyhow.


    Well, fwiw, I still think you are missing my point. I don't think any
    customer who has proration *properly* explained to them is "getting
    screwed." This is the way Verizon does things and if a customer doesn't
    like it they can take their business somewhere else. What I object to is
    the notion that if a customer is told "your minutes will be prorated" they
    should intuitively understand what's going to happen. I gave examples
    several times of how proration might be differently interpreted. In those
    examples, I showed how a fairer, more sensible, amount of minutes could be
    calculated. A few people have written about their experiences in getting
    phony "overage" credited back to them, so clearly Verizon CSRs are empowered
    to make up for the fact that their proration policy can sometimes be unfair.


    > From what I can see, when you started posting, John had already said the
    > same thing over and over again. It does tend to piss people off when they
    > explain something multiple times and the original poster doesn't listen.


    I only read three of John's posts. I had already participated in a
    discussion on the exact same thing at Howard Forums and felt like
    reiterating my thoughts here. By the way, the poster on HoFo did get the
    overcharges credited back to him. There were a few members there that were
    quick to say, in effect, "what do you think proration means, idiot?" but
    fortunately there were plenty of others who encouraged him to fight for
    what's right.

    > However, there are a fair number of people who got tired of the
    > thread real quickly, IMHO....


    Aw c'mon, the people who truly got tired of it stopped posting. We're
    beating a dead horse. You know it, I know it, Verizon should come out with
    a new plan so that we can talk about something else.

    > I don't see what the point is of the ongoing arguments. It's not like

    anyone
    > is going to change anyone else's mind.


    Hey, we agree on something!

    Ileen
  16. ileen <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote:
    > OK, then you are saying:
    >
    >>> I think part of the reason some people *here* are less sympathetic is
    >> > because
    >> >> they've explained what's going on and you stubbornly insist that

    > prorated customers are
    >> >> getting screwed anyhow.


    Right.


    > Well, fwiw, I still think you are missing my point. I don't think any
    > customer who has proration *properly* explained to them is "getting
    > screwed." This is the way Verizon does things and if a customer doesn't
    > like it they can take their business somewhere else. What I object to is
    > the notion that if a customer is told "your minutes will be prorated" they
    > should intuitively understand what's going to happen.


    That's not quite what I got from reading some of your posts, but if that's
    what you meant, well, I agree with you 100%.

    >> However, there are a fair number of people who got tired of the
    >> thread real quickly, IMHO....

    >
    > Aw c'mon, the people who truly got tired of it stopped posting. We're
    > beating a dead horse. You know it, I know it, Verizon should come out with
    > a new plan so that we can talk about something else.


    Yup. I really tried to stay out of this thread altogether, AAMOF, but didn't
    succeed...

    >> I don't see what the point is of the ongoing arguments. It's not like

    > anyone
    >> is going to change anyone else's mind.

    >
    > Hey, we agree on something!


    Hey, we agree on more than one thing, even! :)

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
    PGP: C57E 8B25 F994 D6D0 5F6B B961 EA08 9410 E3AE 35ED

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?