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:3FF78038.50008@earthlink.net...
    > you obviously failed fifth grade math. an average between 300 and 400
    > CANNOT be less than 300.
    >
    > What is your Verizon badge number? I'll let them know you have been
    > a good Pavlov dog.
    >


    I think his badge number is the same as yours at Assholes 'R' Us. You must
    work in the back, though- even they have minimum requirements for customer
    interaction, which you fail to meet.



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

    Jack Jackson Guest

    John,

    Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for each
    segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated the
    minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For example,
    if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day billing
    cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated for
    that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were 100
    minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of your
    usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the cycle. I
    doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain how
    this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right that the
    monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the two
    plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and never
    had the problem you experienced.

    Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly or
    properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot more
    trouble.

    Good luck to you.


    "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    > finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >
    > It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >
    > NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    > 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >
    > John
    >
    > JG wrote:
    > > I think you guys are missing the point.
    > > What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first

    and he
    > > switched half way through the month, he can't have less time

    than
    > > before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this way,

    if you
    > > switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you

    should get
    > > 150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200 minutes

    from the
    > > new 400 minute plan.
    > > Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    > > Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were

    allowed.
    > >
    > > HomieG wrote:
    > >
    > >> Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math

    doesn't add
    > >> up?
    > >> You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated and

    112 peak.
    > >> That equals 290 minutes.
    > >> If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing

    to the
    > >> plan,
    > >> you should have asked then.
    > >> Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case of

    ready,
    > >> shoot, aim...
    > >> -HomieG
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > >> news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > >>
    > >>> Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > >>> Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities

    in the
    > >>> US):
    > >>> Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank

    phone
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> providers):
    > >>
    > >>> Dear FCC:
    > >>> Dear Department of Commerce:
    > >>> Dear FTC:
    > >>> Dear Online Newsgroups:
    > >>>
    > >>> It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    > >>>
    > >>> I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to a

    400 peak
    > >>> monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and

    unlimited
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> night
    > >>
    > >>> and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    > >>>
    > >>> They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    > >>>
    > >>> In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They

    somehow
    > >>> prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for 112

    peak
    > >>> time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    > >>>
    > >>> I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT

    get a
    > >>> number
    > >>> less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics!

    So this
    > >>> is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to

    secure unfair
    > >>> or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on

    google!
    > >>>
    > >>> I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They refused

    to refund
    > >>> my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    > >>>
    > >>> I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of

    it. And
    > >>> the fact that they are ripping off people all across the

    nation with the
    > >>> same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be

    stopped, they
    > >>> need
    > >>> to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    > >>>
    > >>> I assume that a class action suit and investigation will ensue

    and
    > >>> return
    > >>> the money to all those who have been ripped off in this

    manner, and
    > >>> with a
    > >>> substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to

    discourage
    > >>> such practices in the future.
    > >>>
    > >>> I look forward to hearing from you that action is being taken.

    Any
    > >>> lawyer
    > >>> or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact me

    for
    > >>
    > >>
    > >> complete
    > >>
    > >>> details.
    > >>>
    > >>> Sincerely,
    > >>>
    > >>> John
    > >>>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>

    > >

    >
  3. John

    John Guest

    you are the stupid one!


    Justin wrote:
    > John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:15:54 GMT]:
    >
    >>I cannot accept stupidity. theirs or yours!
    >>

    >
    >
    > Yet you accept your own
  4. John

    John Guest

    thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!


    Jack Jackson wrote:
    > John,
    >
    > Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for each
    > segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated the
    > minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For example,
    > if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day billing
    > cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated for
    > that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were 100
    > minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of your
    > usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the cycle. I
    > doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain how
    > this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right that the
    > monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the two
    > plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    > calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    > upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and never
    > had the problem you experienced.
    >
    > Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly or
    > properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot more
    > trouble.
    >
    > Good luck to you.
    >
    >
    > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    >
    >>finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >>
    >>It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >>
    >>NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    >>300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>
    >>Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>
    >>thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>
    >>and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >>
    >>John
    >>
    >>JG wrote:
    >>
    >>>I think you guys are missing the point.
    >>>What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first

    >
    > and he
    >
    >>>switched half way through the month, he can't have less time

    >
    > than
    >
    >>>before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this way,

    >
    > if you
    >
    >>>switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you

    >
    > should get
    >
    >>>150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200 minutes

    >
    > from the
    >
    >>>new 400 minute plan.
    >>>Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    >>>Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were

    >
    > allowed.
    >
    >>>HomieG wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math

    >
    > doesn't add
    >
    >>>>up?
    >>>>You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated and

    >
    > 112 peak.
    >
    >>>>That equals 290 minutes.
    >>>>If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing

    >
    > to the
    >
    >>>>plan,
    >>>>you should have asked then.
    >>>>Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case of

    >
    > ready,
    >
    >>>>shoot, aim...
    >>>>-HomieG
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>>news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    >>>>>Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities

    >
    > in the
    >
    >>>>>US):
    >>>>>Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank

    >
    > phone
    >
    >>>>
    >>>>providers):
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Dear FCC:
    >>>>>Dear Department of Commerce:
    >>>>>Dear FTC:
    >>>>>Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to a

    >
    > 400 peak
    >
    >>>>>monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and

    >
    > unlimited
    >
    >>>>
    >>>>night
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >>>>>
    >>>>>They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They

    >
    > somehow
    >
    >>>>>prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for 112

    >
    > peak
    >
    >>>>>time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT

    >
    > get a
    >
    >>>>>number
    >>>>>less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics!

    >
    > So this
    >
    >>>>>is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to

    >
    > secure unfair
    >
    >>>>>or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on

    >
    > google!
    >
    >>>>>I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They refused

    >
    > to refund
    >
    >>>>>my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of

    >
    > it. And
    >
    >>>>>the fact that they are ripping off people all across the

    >
    > nation with the
    >
    >>>>>same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be

    >
    > stopped, they
    >
    >>>>>need
    >>>>>to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I assume that a class action suit and investigation will ensue

    >
    > and
    >
    >>>>>return
    >>>>>the money to all those who have been ripped off in this

    >
    > manner, and
    >
    >>>>>with a
    >>>>>substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to

    >
    > discourage
    >
    >>>>>such practices in the future.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>I look forward to hearing from you that action is being taken.

    >
    > Any
    >
    >>>>>lawyer
    >>>>>or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact me

    >
    > for
    >
    >>>>
    >>>>complete
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>details.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Sincerely,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>John
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>

    >
    >
  5. "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78631.20709@earthlink.net...
    > oh, and I HAVE SUED people in tha past. 100% success rate!
    >


    And we're so happy for you- I'm sure being able to supplement your welfare
    check comes in handy from time to time.
  6. "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    > thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >


    Can I vote too? I vote that you are the most obnoxious thing to hit Usenet
    in a while.
  7. "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    > thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >


    Can I vote too? I vote that you are the most obnoxious thing to hit Usenet
    in a while.
  8. John

    John Guest

    oh, and the NJ Attorney General has always responded postively to my pointing
    out of fraud. This time I'll go to all 50 states since the same practices are
    no doubt involved in all 50 states.

    John

    John wrote:
    > finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >
    > It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >
    > NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    > 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >
    > John
    >
    > JG wrote:
    >
    >> I think you guys are missing the point.
    >> What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first and he
    >> switched half way through the month, he can't have less time than
    >> before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this way, if
    >> you switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you
    >> should get 150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200
    >> minutes from the new 400 minute plan.
    >> Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    >> Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were allowed.
    >>
    >> HomieG wrote:
    >>
    >>> Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math doesn't
    >>> add up?
    >>> You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated and 112
    >>> peak.
    >>> That equals 290 minutes.
    >>> If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing to the
    >>> plan,
    >>> you should have asked then.
    >>> Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case of ready,
    >>> shoot, aim...
    >>> -HomieG
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>> news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    >>>
    >>>> Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    >>>> Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities in
    >>>> the US):
    >>>> Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank phone
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> providers):
    >>>
    >>>> Dear FCC:
    >>>> Dear Department of Commerce:
    >>>> Dear FTC:
    >>>> Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >>>>
    >>>> It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    >>>>
    >>>> I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to a 400 peak
    >>>> monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and unlimited
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> night
    >>>
    >>>> and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >>>>
    >>>> They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >>>>
    >>>> In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They somehow
    >>>> prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for 112 peak
    >>>> time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT get a
    >>>> number
    >>>> less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics! So this
    >>>> is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair
    >>>> or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on google!
    >>>>
    >>>> I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They refused to
    >>>> refund
    >>>> my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >>>>
    >>>> I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of it. And
    >>>> the fact that they are ripping off people all across the nation with
    >>>> the
    >>>> same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be stopped,
    >>>> they need
    >>>> to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >>>>
    >>>> I assume that a class action suit and investigation will ensue and
    >>>> return
    >>>> the money to all those who have been ripped off in this manner, and
    >>>> with a
    >>>> substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to discourage
    >>>> such practices in the future.
    >>>>
    >>>> I look forward to hearing from you that action is being taken. Any
    >>>> lawyer
    >>>> or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact me for
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> complete
    >>>
    >>>> details.
    >>>>
    >>>> Sincerely,
    >>>>
    >>>> John
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>

    >
  9. Justin

    Justin Guest

    John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:30:41 GMT]:
    > you are the stupid one!


    IKYABWAI

    >
    >
    > Justin wrote:
    >> John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:15:54 GMT]:
    >>
    >>>I cannot accept stupidity. theirs or yours!
    >>>

    >>
    >>
    >> Yet you accept your own

    >
  10. "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    > thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >


    Can I vote too? I vote that you are the most obnoxious thing to hit Usenet
    in a while.
  11. "Justin" <nospam@insightbb.com> wrote in message
    news:slrnbvf2mm.3uv.nospam@debian.dns2go.com...
    > John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:30:41 GMT]:
    > > you are the stupid one!

    >
    > IKYABWAI


    lmao
  12. John

    John Guest

    I've been on a first name basis with 15 to 20 Natural Science Nobel prize
    winners over the past 30 years. I'm not ashamed to admit I don't know
    something less than their work.

    What does IKYABWAI mean?

    I'm sure that I will be less than impressed by it.

    John

    Justin wrote:
    > John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:30:41 GMT]:
    >
    >>you are the stupid one!

    >
    >
    > IKYABWAI
    >
    >
    >>
    >>Justin wrote:
    >>
    >>>John wrote on [Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:15:54 GMT]:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>I cannot accept stupidity. theirs or yours!
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Yet you accept your own

    >>
  13. Jack Jackson

    Jack Jackson Guest

    John,

    For the record, I never suggested, nor do I believe, there is any
    fraud involved here. I tried to explain a rational way of
    calculating the bill that could have resulted in your problem, but
    you chose to just ignore the possibility that Verizon might have had
    some rational way of accounting that could have resulted in your
    billing problem.

    What I said was that I wished you luck and thought you were neither
    properly informed nor treated well -- not that I thought you were
    right about your charge of fraud.

    Actually, I think your abusive attitude is the biggest obstacle to
    your getting this issue resolved to your own satisfaction. Calling
    everyone who responds to you in this news group stupid is not a
    smart way to get help, and it certainly would not be a good way to
    get help from a CSR.

    Billions involved? Surely, you jest.

    JJ


    "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    > thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >
    >
    > Jack Jackson wrote:
    > > John,
    > >
    > > Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for

    each
    > > segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated

    the
    > > minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For

    example,
    > > if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day

    billing
    > > cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated

    for
    > > that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were

    100
    > > minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of

    your
    > > usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the cycle.

    I
    > > doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain how
    > > this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right that

    the
    > > monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the

    two
    > > plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    > > calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    > > upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and

    never
    > > had the problem you experienced.
    > >
    > > Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly

    or
    > > properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot

    more
    > > trouble.
    > >
    > > Good luck to you.
    > >
    > >
    > > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > > news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    > >
    > >>finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    > >>
    > >>It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    > >>
    > >>NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    > >>300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>
    > >>Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>
    > >>thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>
    > >>and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    > >>
    > >>John
    > >>
    > >>JG wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>I think you guys are missing the point.
    > >>>What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first

    > >
    > > and he
    > >
    > >>>switched half way through the month, he can't have less time

    > >
    > > than
    > >
    > >>>before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this

    way,
    > >
    > > if you
    > >
    > >>>switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you

    > >
    > > should get
    > >
    > >>>150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200 minutes

    > >
    > > from the
    > >
    > >>>new 400 minute plan.
    > >>>Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    > >>>Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were

    > >
    > > allowed.
    > >
    > >>>HomieG wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math

    > >
    > > doesn't add
    > >
    > >>>>up?
    > >>>>You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated

    and
    > >
    > > 112 peak.
    > >
    > >>>>That equals 290 minutes.
    > >>>>If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing

    > >
    > > to the
    > >
    > >>>>plan,
    > >>>>you should have asked then.
    > >>>>Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case

    of
    > >
    > > ready,
    > >
    > >>>>shoot, aim...
    > >>>>-HomieG
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > >>>>news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > >>>>>Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100

    cities
    > >
    > > in the
    > >
    > >>>>>US):
    > >>>>>Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank

    > >
    > > phone
    > >
    > >>>>
    > >>>>providers):
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>Dear FCC:
    > >>>>>Dear Department of Commerce:
    > >>>>>Dear FTC:
    > >>>>>Dear Online Newsgroups:
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to

    a
    > >
    > > 400 peak
    > >
    > >>>>>monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and

    > >
    > > unlimited
    > >
    > >>>>
    > >>>>night
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They

    > >
    > > somehow
    > >
    > >>>>>prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for

    112
    > >
    > > peak
    > >
    > >>>>>time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT

    > >
    > > get a
    > >
    > >>>>>number
    > >>>>>less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics!

    > >
    > > So this
    > >
    > >>>>>is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to

    > >
    > > secure unfair
    > >
    > >>>>>or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on

    > >
    > > google!
    > >
    > >>>>>I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They

    refused
    > >
    > > to refund
    > >
    > >>>>>my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of

    > >
    > > it. And
    > >
    > >>>>>the fact that they are ripping off people all across the

    > >
    > > nation with the
    > >
    > >>>>>same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be

    > >
    > > stopped, they
    > >
    > >>>>>need
    > >>>>>to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>I assume that a class action suit and investigation will

    ensue
    > >
    > > and
    > >
    > >>>>>return
    > >>>>>the money to all those who have been ripped off in this

    > >
    > > manner, and
    > >
    > >>>>>with a
    > >>>>>substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to

    > >
    > > discourage
    > >
    > >>>>>such practices in the future.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>I look forward to hearing from you that action is being

    taken.
    > >
    > > Any
    > >
    > >>>>>lawyer
    > >>>>>or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact

    me
    > >
    > > for
    > >
    > >>>>
    > >>>>complete
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>details.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>Sincerely,
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>John
  14. John

    John Guest

    there is right
    and there is stupid

    there is no no rational way that a weighted average of 300 and 400
    can be less than 300. Q.E.D.

    a class action suit of fraud can easily total a billion if they have to
    pay lawyer fees and refund what they have ripped off from unsuspecting "customers"

    John

    Jack Jackson wrote:
    > John,
    >
    > For the record, I never suggested, nor do I believe, there is any
    > fraud involved here. I tried to explain a rational way of
    > calculating the bill that could have resulted in your problem, but
    > you chose to just ignore the possibility that Verizon might have had
    > some rational way of accounting that could have resulted in your
    > billing problem.
    >
    > What I said was that I wished you luck and thought you were neither
    > properly informed nor treated well -- not that I thought you were
    > right about your charge of fraud.
    >
    > Actually, I think your abusive attitude is the biggest obstacle to
    > your getting this issue resolved to your own satisfaction. Calling
    > everyone who responds to you in this news group stupid is not a
    > smart way to get help, and it certainly would not be a good way to
    > get help from a CSR.
    >
    > Billions involved? Surely, you jest.
    >
    > JJ
    >
    >
    > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    >
    >>thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >>
    >>
    >>Jack Jackson wrote:
    >>
    >>>John,
    >>>
    >>>Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for

    >
    > each
    >
    >>>segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated

    >
    > the
    >
    >>>minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For

    >
    > example,
    >
    >>>if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day

    >
    > billing
    >
    >>>cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated

    >
    > for
    >
    >>>that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were

    >
    > 100
    >
    >>>minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of

    >
    > your
    >
    >>>usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the cycle.

    >
    > I
    >
    >>>doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain how
    >>>this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right that

    >
    > the
    >
    >>>monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the

    >
    > two
    >
    >>>plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    >>>calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    >>>upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and

    >
    > never
    >
    >>>had the problem you experienced.
    >>>
    >>>Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly

    >
    > or
    >
    >>>properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot

    >
    > more
    >
    >>>trouble.
    >>>
    >>>Good luck to you.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >>>>
    >>>>It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >>>>
    >>>>NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    >>>>300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>John
    >>>>
    >>>>JG wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>I think you guys are missing the point.
    >>>>>What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first
    >>>
    >>>and he
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>switched half way through the month, he can't have less time
    >>>
    >>>than
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this

    >
    > way,
    >
    >>>if you
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you
    >>>
    >>>should get
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200 minutes
    >>>
    >>>from the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>new 400 minute plan.
    >>>>>Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    >>>>>Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were
    >>>
    >>>allowed.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>HomieG wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math
    >>>
    >>>doesn't add
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>up?
    >>>>>>You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated

    >
    > and
    >
    >>>112 peak.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>That equals 290 minutes.
    >>>>>>If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing
    >>>
    >>>to the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>plan,
    >>>>>>you should have asked then.
    >>>>>>Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case

    >
    > of
    >
    >>>ready,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>shoot, aim...
    >>>>>>-HomieG
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>>>>news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    >>>>>>>Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100

    >
    > cities
    >
    >>>in the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>US):
    >>>>>>>Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank
    >>>
    >>>phone
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>providers):
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Dear FCC:
    >>>>>>>Dear Department of Commerce:
    >>>>>>>Dear FTC:
    >>>>>>>Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to

    >
    > a
    >
    >>>400 peak
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and
    >>>
    >>>unlimited
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>night
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They
    >>>
    >>>somehow
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for

    >
    > 112
    >
    >>>peak
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT
    >>>
    >>>get a
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>number
    >>>>>>>less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics!
    >>>
    >>>So this
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to
    >>>
    >>>secure unfair
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on
    >>>
    >>>google!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They

    >
    > refused
    >
    >>>to refund
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of
    >>>
    >>>it. And
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>the fact that they are ripping off people all across the
    >>>
    >>>nation with the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be
    >>>
    >>>stopped, they
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>need
    >>>>>>>to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I assume that a class action suit and investigation will

    >
    > ensue
    >
    >>>and
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>return
    >>>>>>>the money to all those who have been ripped off in this
    >>>
    >>>manner, and
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>with a
    >>>>>>>substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to
    >>>
    >>>discourage
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>such practices in the future.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I look forward to hearing from you that action is being

    >
    > taken.
    >
    >>>Any
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>>lawyer
    >>>>>>>or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact

    >
    > me
    >
    >>>for
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>>complete
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>details.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>Sincerely,
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>John

    >
    >
    >
  15. Previously on alt.cellular.verizon, John said:

    ; If they prorate the old and new plan which is the non-deceptive way, then
    ; that CANNOT BE LESS than 300 minutes. If they do not do that... IT IS DECEPTIVE!!!
    ;
    ; sorry, this is very clear,

    What is clear is that you don't understand what "prorate" means. It
    means that your plan gets changed, and for the remainder of the current
    billing cycle, they divide the number of minutes by the number of days
    in the cycle, and then you get however many minutes the number of days
    left equals.

    400 minutes divided by 30 days is 13.3 minutes/day. So, 178 minutes
    left divided by 13.3 minutes/day equals 13 days.

    If you were unclear on what prorating your account means, you should
    have asked the salescritter when you changed your plan. You should
    have actually read the contract and any other information provided for
    changing plans prior to committing to the change and asked for
    clarification.

    In other words, it's your own fault, and your own problem. If you call
    a Verizon center and are +polite+ about it, and you get someone
    different this time, and if "Cattrell" didn't note down in their
    records that you're a jerk, you might be able to convince them to
    forgive some or all of the overage charges.

    Otherwise, learn from your mistake, pay the bill, and move on with your
    life.

    --
    Jeffrey Kaplan <*> www.gordol.org
    The from userid is killfiled <*> Send personal mail to gordol

    "What?" yelped Vordarian in astonishment. "You're a Betan! You can't
    do--" (Vidal Vordarian's last words [Lois McMaster Bujold,
    "Barrayar"])
  16. John

    John Guest

    sorry, there is no mathematical basis for any averaging between 300 and 400
    that is less than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    sorry you failed math!

    John

    Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
    > Previously on alt.cellular.verizon, John said:
    >
    > ; If they prorate the old and new plan which is the non-deceptive way, then
    > ; that CANNOT BE LESS than 300 minutes. If they do not do that... IT IS DECEPTIVE!!!
    > ;
    > ; sorry, this is very clear,
    >
    > What is clear is that you don't understand what "prorate" means. It
    > means that your plan gets changed, and for the remainder of the current
    > billing cycle, they divide the number of minutes by the number of days
    > in the cycle, and then you get however many minutes the number of days
    > left equals.
    >
    > 400 minutes divided by 30 days is 13.3 minutes/day. So, 178 minutes
    > left divided by 13.3 minutes/day equals 13 days.
    >
    > If you were unclear on what prorating your account means, you should
    > have asked the salescritter when you changed your plan. You should
    > have actually read the contract and any other information provided for
    > changing plans prior to committing to the change and asked for
    > clarification.
    >
    > In other words, it's your own fault, and your own problem. If you call
    > a Verizon center and are +polite+ about it, and you get someone
    > different this time, and if "Cattrell" didn't note down in their
    > records that you're a jerk, you might be able to convince them to
    > forgive some or all of the overage charges.
    >
    > Otherwise, learn from your mistake, pay the bill, and move on with your
    > life.
    >
  17. John

    John Guest

    gad I hate how stupid the masses are!

    prorating means between the 300 minute plan AND the 400 minute plan
    thus the weighted average, even the relativistic Einstein average
    CANNOT be less than 300!!!!

    You and they are certainly not an
    Einstein!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    John

    John wrote:
    > sorry, there is no mathematical basis for any averaging between 300 and 400
    > that is less than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    > sorry you failed math!
    >
    > John
    >
    > Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
    >
    >> Previously on alt.cellular.verizon, John said:
    >>
    >> ; If they prorate the old and new plan which is the non-deceptive way,
    >> then
    >> ; that CANNOT BE LESS than 300 minutes. If they do not do that... IT
    >> IS DECEPTIVE!!!
    >> ; ; sorry, this is very clear,
    >>
    >> What is clear is that you don't understand what "prorate" means. It
    >> means that your plan gets changed, and for the remainder of the current
    >> billing cycle, they divide the number of minutes by the number of days
    >> in the cycle, and then you get however many minutes the number of days
    >> left equals.
    >>
    >> 400 minutes divided by 30 days is 13.3 minutes/day. So, 178 minutes
    >> left divided by 13.3 minutes/day equals 13 days.
    >>
    >> If you were unclear on what prorating your account means, you should
    >> have asked the salescritter when you changed your plan. You should
    >> have actually read the contract and any other information provided for
    >> changing plans prior to committing to the change and asked for
    >> clarification.
    >>
    >> In other words, it's your own fault, and your own problem. If you call
    >> a Verizon center and are +polite+ about it, and you get someone
    >> different this time, and if "Cattrell" didn't note down in their
    >> records that you're a jerk, you might be able to convince them to
    >> forgive some or all of the overage charges.
    >>
    >> Otherwise, learn from your mistake, pay the bill, and move on with your
    >> life.
    >>

    >
  18. Jack Jackson

    Jack Jackson Guest

    Jack,

    I agreed with you about the minutes allocation, but I suggested that
    the minutes used might have been accounted on an absolute basis
    during a portion of the billing cycle -- which could indeed
    rationally result in charges for excess minutes used. My suggestion
    had nothing to do with the weighted average of the allocation, but
    with the method by which the minutes used were subtracted.
    Consider the following hypothetical equation:

    (Prorated Minutes in first 15 days - Minutes Used in first 15
    days)+(Prorated Minutes in second 15 days - Minutes Used in second
    15 days) = Excess Minutes Billable

    You seem to be focusing on only one element of the equation, the
    prorated allocation(s).

    (Now I don't think my hypothetical equation reflects how Verizon
    actually bills, but it is possible and would explain how you could
    have accrued excess minutes despite the total prorated allocation's
    being some number between 300 and 400.)

    JJ

    "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF78D31.2020005@earthlink.net...
    > there is right
    > and there is stupid
    >
    > there is no no rational way that a weighted average of 300 and 400
    > can be less than 300. Q.E.D.
    >
    > a class action suit of fraud can easily total a billion if they

    have to
    > pay lawyer fees and refund what they have ripped off from

    unsuspecting "customers"
    >
    > John
    >
    > Jack Jackson wrote:
    > > John,
    > >
    > > For the record, I never suggested, nor do I believe, there is

    any
    > > fraud involved here. I tried to explain a rational way of
    > > calculating the bill that could have resulted in your problem,

    but
    > > you chose to just ignore the possibility that Verizon might have

    had
    > > some rational way of accounting that could have resulted in your
    > > billing problem.
    > >
    > > What I said was that I wished you luck and thought you were

    neither
    > > properly informed nor treated well -- not that I thought you

    were
    > > right about your charge of fraud.
    > >
    > > Actually, I think your abusive attitude is the biggest obstacle

    to
    > > your getting this issue resolved to your own satisfaction.

    Calling
    > > everyone who responds to you in this news group stupid is not a
    > > smart way to get help, and it certainly would not be a good way

    to
    > > get help from a CSR.
    > >
    > > Billions involved? Surely, you jest.
    > >
    > > JJ
    > >
    > >
    > > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > > news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    > >
    > >>thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>Jack Jackson wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>John,
    > >>>
    > >>>Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for

    > >
    > > each
    > >
    > >>>segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated

    > >
    > > the
    > >
    > >>>minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For

    > >
    > > example,
    > >
    > >>>if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day

    > >
    > > billing
    > >
    > >>>cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated

    > >
    > > for
    > >
    > >>>that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were

    > >
    > > 100
    > >
    > >>>minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of

    > >
    > > your
    > >
    > >>>usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the

    cycle.
    > >
    > > I
    > >
    > >>>doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain

    how
    > >>>this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right

    that
    > >
    > > the
    > >
    > >>>monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the

    > >
    > > two
    > >
    > >>>plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    > >>>calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    > >>>upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and

    > >
    > > never
    > >
    > >>>had the problem you experienced.
    > >>>
    > >>>Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly

    > >
    > > or
    > >
    > >>>properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot

    > >
    > > more
    > >
    > >>>trouble.
    > >>>
    > >>>Good luck to you.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > >>>news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    > >>>>300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    > >>>>
    > >>>>John
    > >>>>
    > >>>>JG wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>I think you guys are missing the point.
    > >>>>>What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the

    first
    > >>>
    > >>>and he
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>switched half way through the month, he can't have less time
    > >>>
    > >>>than
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this

    > >
    > > way,
    > >
    > >>>if you
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you
    > >>>
    > >>>should get
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200

    minutes
    > >>>
    > >>>from the
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>new 400 minute plan.
    > >>>>>Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    > >>>>>Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were
    > >>>
    > >>>allowed.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>HomieG wrote:
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math
    > >>>
    > >>>doesn't add
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>up?
    > >>>>>>You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated

    > >
    > > and
    > >
    > >>>112 peak.
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>That equals 290 minutes.
    > >>>>>>If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of

    agreeing
    > >>>
    > >>>to the
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>plan,
    > >>>>>>you should have asked then.
    > >>>>>>Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case

    > >
    > > of
    > >
    > >>>ready,
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>shoot, aim...
    > >>>>>>-HomieG
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > >>>>>>news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > >>>>>>>Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100

    > >
    > > cities
    > >
    > >>>in the
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>US):
    > >>>>>>>Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank
    > >>>
    > >>>phone
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>providers):
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>Dear FCC:
    > >>>>>>>Dear Department of Commerce:
    > >>>>>>>Dear FTC:
    > >>>>>>>Dear Online Newsgroups:
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in

    fraud.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch

    to
    > >
    > > a
    > >
    > >>>400 peak
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and
    > >>>
    > >>>unlimited
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>night
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They
    > >>>
    > >>>somehow
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for

    > >
    > > 112
    > >
    > >>>peak
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you

    CANNOT
    > >>>
    > >>>get a
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>number
    > >>>>>>>less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade

    mathematics!
    > >>>
    > >>>So this
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to
    > >>>
    > >>>secure unfair
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up

    on
    > >>>
    > >>>google!
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They

    > >
    > > refused
    > >
    > >>>to refund
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle

    of
    > >>>
    > >>>it. And
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>the fact that they are ripping off people all across the
    > >>>
    > >>>nation with the
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be
    > >>>
    > >>>stopped, they
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>need
    > >>>>>>>to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I assume that a class action suit and investigation will

    > >
    > > ensue
    > >
    > >>>and
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>return
    > >>>>>>>the money to all those who have been ripped off in this
    > >>>
    > >>>manner, and
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>with a
    > >>>>>>>substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages

    to
    > >>>
    > >>>discourage
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>such practices in the future.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>I look forward to hearing from you that action is being

    > >
    > > taken.
    > >
    > >>>Any
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>>lawyer
    > >>>>>>>or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact

    > >
    > > me
    > >
    > >>>for
    > >>>
    > >>>
    > >>>>>>complete
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>details.
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>Sincerely,
    > >>>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>John

    > >
    > >
    > >

    >
  19. John

    John Guest

    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.

    John

    John wrote:
    > there is right
    > and there is stupid
    >
    > there is no no rational way that a weighted average of 300 and 400
    > can be less than 300. Q.E.D.
    >
    > a class action suit of fraud can easily total a billion if they have to
    > pay lawyer fees and refund what they have ripped off from unsuspecting
    > "customers"
    >
    > John
    >
    > Jack Jackson wrote:
    >
    >> John,
    >>
    >> For the record, I never suggested, nor do I believe, there is any
    >> fraud involved here. I tried to explain a rational way of
    >> calculating the bill that could have resulted in your problem, but
    >> you chose to just ignore the possibility that Verizon might have had
    >> some rational way of accounting that could have resulted in your
    >> billing problem.
    >>
    >> What I said was that I wished you luck and thought you were neither
    >> properly informed nor treated well -- not that I thought you were
    >> right about your charge of fraud.
    >>
    >> Actually, I think your abusive attitude is the biggest obstacle to
    >> your getting this issue resolved to your own satisfaction. Calling
    >> everyone who responds to you in this news group stupid is not a
    >> smart way to get help, and it certainly would not be a good way to
    >> get help from a CSR.
    >>
    >> Billions involved? Surely, you jest.
    >>
    >> JJ
    >>
    >>
    >> "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >> news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    >>
    >>> thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Jack Jackson wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> John,
    >>>>
    >>>> Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for

    >>
    >>
    >> each
    >>
    >>>> segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated

    >>
    >>
    >> the
    >>
    >>>> minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For

    >>
    >>
    >> example,
    >>
    >>>> if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day

    >>
    >>
    >> billing
    >>
    >>>> cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated

    >>
    >>
    >> for
    >>
    >>>> that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were

    >>
    >>
    >> 100
    >>
    >>>> minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of

    >>
    >>
    >> your
    >>
    >>>> usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the cycle.

    >>
    >>
    >> I
    >>
    >>>> doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain how
    >>>> this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right that

    >>
    >>
    >> the
    >>
    >>>> monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the

    >>
    >>
    >> two
    >>
    >>>> plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    >>>> calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    >>>> upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and

    >>
    >>
    >> never
    >>
    >>>> had the problem you experienced.
    >>>>
    >>>> Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly

    >>
    >>
    >> or
    >>
    >>>> properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot

    >>
    >>
    >> more
    >>
    >>>> trouble.
    >>>>
    >>>> Good luck to you.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>> news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>> finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    >>>>> 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> John
    >>>>>
    >>>>> JG wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> I think you guys are missing the point.
    >>>>>> What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the first
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> and he
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> switched half way through the month, he can't have less time
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> than
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this

    >>
    >>
    >> way,
    >>
    >>>> if you
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> should get
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> 150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200 minutes
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> from the
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> new 400 minute plan.
    >>>>>> Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    >>>>>> Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> allowed.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> HomieG wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> doesn't add
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> up?
    >>>>>>> You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated

    >>
    >>
    >> and
    >>
    >>>> 112 peak.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> That equals 290 minutes.
    >>>>>>> If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of agreeing
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> to the
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> plan,
    >>>>>>> you should have asked then.
    >>>>>>> Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case

    >>
    >>
    >> of
    >>
    >>>> ready,
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> shoot, aim...
    >>>>>>> -HomieG
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    >>>>>>>> Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100

    >>
    >>
    >> cities
    >>
    >>>> in the
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> US):
    >>>>>>>> Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> phone
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> providers):
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Dear FCC:
    >>>>>>>> Dear Department of Commerce:
    >>>>>>>> Dear FTC:
    >>>>>>>> Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to

    >>
    >>
    >> a
    >>
    >>>> 400 peak
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> unlimited
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> night
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> somehow
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for

    >>
    >>
    >> 112
    >>
    >>>> peak
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> get a
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> number
    >>>>>>>> less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics!
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> So this
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> secure unfair
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> google!
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They

    >>
    >>
    >> refused
    >>
    >>>> to refund
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> it. And
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> the fact that they are ripping off people all across the
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> nation with the
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> stopped, they
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> need
    >>>>>>>> to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I assume that a class action suit and investigation will

    >>
    >>
    >> ensue
    >>
    >>>> and
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> return
    >>>>>>>> the money to all those who have been ripped off in this
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> manner, and
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> with a
    >>>>>>>> substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> discourage
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> such practices in the future.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I look forward to hearing from you that action is being

    >>
    >>
    >> taken.
    >>
    >>>> Any
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>>> lawyer
    >>>>>>>> or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact

    >>
    >>
    >> me
    >>
    >>>> for
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>>> complete
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> details.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Sincerely,
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> John

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
  20. John

    John Guest

    I focus on what a reasonable man (legal criterion) would accept as
    non fraudlent billing.

    John

    Jack Jackson wrote:
    > Jack,
    >
    > I agreed with you about the minutes allocation, but I suggested that
    > the minutes used might have been accounted on an absolute basis
    > during a portion of the billing cycle -- which could indeed
    > rationally result in charges for excess minutes used. My suggestion
    > had nothing to do with the weighted average of the allocation, but
    > with the method by which the minutes used were subtracted.
    > Consider the following hypothetical equation:
    >
    > (Prorated Minutes in first 15 days - Minutes Used in first 15
    > days)+(Prorated Minutes in second 15 days - Minutes Used in second
    > 15 days) = Excess Minutes Billable
    >
    > You seem to be focusing on only one element of the equation, the
    > prorated allocation(s).
    >
    > (Now I don't think my hypothetical equation reflects how Verizon
    > actually bills, but it is possible and would explain how you could
    > have accrued excess minutes despite the total prorated allocation's
    > being some number between 300 and 400.)
    >
    > JJ
    >
    > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:3FF78D31.2020005@earthlink.net...
    >
    >>there is right
    >>and there is stupid
    >>
    >>there is no no rational way that a weighted average of 300 and 400
    >>can be less than 300. Q.E.D.
    >>
    >>a class action suit of fraud can easily total a billion if they

    >
    > have to
    >
    >>pay lawyer fees and refund what they have ripped off from

    >
    > unsuspecting "customers"
    >
    >>John
    >>
    >>Jack Jackson wrote:
    >>
    >>>John,
    >>>
    >>>For the record, I never suggested, nor do I believe, there is

    >
    > any
    >
    >>>fraud involved here. I tried to explain a rational way of
    >>>calculating the bill that could have resulted in your problem,

    >
    > but
    >
    >>>you chose to just ignore the possibility that Verizon might have

    >
    > had
    >
    >>>some rational way of accounting that could have resulted in your
    >>>billing problem.
    >>>
    >>>What I said was that I wished you luck and thought you were

    >
    > neither
    >
    >>>properly informed nor treated well -- not that I thought you

    >
    > were
    >
    >>>right about your charge of fraud.
    >>>
    >>>Actually, I think your abusive attitude is the biggest obstacle

    >
    > to
    >
    >>>your getting this issue resolved to your own satisfaction.

    >
    > Calling
    >
    >>>everyone who responds to you in this news group stupid is not a
    >>>smart way to get help, and it certainly would not be a good way

    >
    > to
    >
    >>>get help from a CSR.
    >>>
    >>>Billions involved? Surely, you jest.
    >>>
    >>>JJ
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>news:3FF78934.4080603@earthlink.net...
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>thank you for the vote of FRAUD!!!!!!!
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Jack Jackson wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>John,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Is it possible that Verizon prorated the minutes allocation for
    >>>
    >>>each
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>segment of the billing cycle (old and new plans) but allocated
    >>>
    >>>the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>minutes used within each specific segment absolutely? For
    >>>
    >>>example,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>if you had used 250 minutes in the first 15 days of a 30-day
    >>>
    >>>billing
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>cycle on a 300-minute plan but the prorated minutes allocated
    >>>
    >>>for
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>that 15-day segment were 150, Verizon might argue that you were
    >>>
    >>>100
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>minutes over allocation for that 15 day period -- regardless of
    >>>
    >>>your
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>usage and minutes allocation in the second segment of the

    >
    > cycle.
    >
    >>>I
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>doubt that is the way the system works, but it would explain

    >
    > how
    >
    >>>>>this billing problem could happen. Of course, you're right

    >
    > that
    >
    >>>the
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>monthly proration cannot be less than the lower minutes of the
    >>>
    >>>two
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>plans, but it may be that Verizon's usage accounting is simply
    >>>>>calendar based. I don't know how Verizon does this, but I've
    >>>>>upgraded plans two or three times in the past few years and
    >>>
    >>>never
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>had the problem you experienced.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Whatever happened here, it's clear you were not treated fairly
    >>>
    >>>or
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>properly informed. I hope you get this resolved without a lot
    >>>
    >>>more
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>trouble.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Good luck to you.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>>>news:3FF78337.5000505@earthlink.net...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>finally, someone with a BRAIN!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>It never ceases to amaze me how stupid most people are!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>NO AVERAGE PRORATE between 300 and 400 can be LESS THAN
    >>>>>>300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Unless FRAUD is involved!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>thank you. one person understands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>and laywers will jump on it... billions to be made here!!!!!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>John
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>JG wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>I think you guys are missing the point.
    >>>>>>>What he is saying is that if his billing cycle was on the

    >
    > first
    >
    >>>>>and he
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>switched half way through the month, he can't have less time
    >>>>>
    >>>>>than
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>before. It has to be more time than before. Or put it this
    >>>
    >>>way,
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>if you
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>switch from a 300 minute plan half way through the month, you
    >>>>>
    >>>>>should get
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>150 minutes prorated from that 300 minute plan and 200

    >
    > minutes
    >
    >>>>>from the
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>new 400 minute plan.
    >>>>>>>Thus 350 minutes should have been available during the month.
    >>>>>>>Yet the total monthly minutes used were 292 and only 178 were
    >>>>>
    >>>>>allowed.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>HomieG wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>Hmmm, you expect them to take you seriously when your math
    >>>>>
    >>>>>doesn't add
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>up?
    >>>>>>>>You say they billed you for 292 peak minutes, 178 pro-rated
    >>>
    >>>and
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>112 peak.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>That equals 290 minutes.
    >>>>>>>>If you didn't understand the pro-rate at the time of

    >
    > agreeing
    >
    >>>>>to the
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>plan,
    >>>>>>>>you should have asked then.
    >>>>>>>>Sorry, they are not going to take you seriosly. More a case
    >>>
    >>>of
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>ready,
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>shoot, aim...
    >>>>>>>>-HomieG
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>"John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    >>>>>>>>>Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100
    >>>
    >>>cities
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>in the
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>US):
    >>>>>>>>>Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank
    >>>>>
    >>>>>phone
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>providers):
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Dear FCC:
    >>>>>>>>>Dear Department of Commerce:
    >>>>>>>>>Dear FTC:
    >>>>>>>>>Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in

    >
    > fraud.
    >
    >>>>>>>>>I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch

    >
    > to
    >
    >>>a
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>400 peak
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and
    >>>>>
    >>>>>unlimited
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>night
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They
    >>>>>
    >>>>>somehow
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for
    >>>
    >>>112
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>peak
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you

    >
    > CANNOT
    >
    >>>>>get a
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>number
    >>>>>>>>>less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade

    >
    > mathematics!
    >
    >>>>>So this
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to
    >>>>>
    >>>>>secure unfair
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up

    >
    > on
    >
    >>>>>google!
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They
    >>>
    >>>refused
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>to refund
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle

    >
    > of
    >
    >>>>>it. And
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>the fact that they are ripping off people all across the
    >>>>>
    >>>>>nation with the
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be
    >>>>>
    >>>>>stopped, they
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>need
    >>>>>>>>>to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I assume that a class action suit and investigation will
    >>>
    >>>ensue
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>and
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>return
    >>>>>>>>>the money to all those who have been ripped off in this
    >>>>>
    >>>>>manner, and
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>with a
    >>>>>>>>>substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages

    >
    > to
    >
    >>>>>discourage
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>such practices in the future.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>I look forward to hearing from you that action is being
    >>>
    >>>taken.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>Any
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>lawyer
    >>>>>>>>>or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact
    >>>
    >>>me
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>for
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>>>complete
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>details.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>Sincerely,
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>John
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >
    >

Welcome to VerizonForums!

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


Forgot your password?