Handset Lemon Law Passed in Illinois
Too much government!
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up. If a person isn't comfortable with a provider's policies or the risk of having to pay out of pocket for a new device outweighs the benefit received from the phone service, THEN DON'T GET THE CELL PHONE.
Government laws and regulations always have unintended consequences that usually hurt the very people the law was ostensibly designed to help. In this case, if government requires providers to replace more handsets and/or charge less fees, all cellphone users will end up paying the cost for this through higher sub...
(continues)
why would i want to pay more everymonth so someone else can get a new phone instead of a refurb?
skyjet15 said:
hey bud, if anything, the tech departments for these wireless carriers now have a greater incentive to wise up and fix your problems.
Yeah. And NOT screw us with a POS refurbed junker.
sprint_guy said:
not sure how other carriers do it,but i know for us,most of our refurbs are actually brand new phones we never sold. and the ones that are actually refurbe/returned really arent that bad...
um.... if they are brand new phone that were never sold, THEN THEY ARE NOT REFURBS!!!!!! 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄
If the Verizons, and the Motorolas in this world cannot oversee themselves any better, usually the government think they can. It is too bad that it has come to this, but all the people involved have no one to blame but themselves.
mogdog said:
My experience tells me that the refurbs are not tested all that well. If they were I would not see all the problems that we do.
Now THAT's very true. Back when I was a wireless manager with Circuit City (when CC was offering Sprint, ATT, and Cingular), I often got the feeling customers were receiving refurbs which weren't tested at all.
nuckingfuts said:sprint_guy said:
not sure how other carriers do it,but i know for us,most of our refurbs are actually brand new phones we never sold. and the ones that are actually refurbe/returned really arent that bad...
um.... if they are brand new phone that were never sold, THEN THEY ARE NOT REFURBS!!!!!! 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄
Uh, that's actually a pretty good point.
sprint_guy said:
not sure how other carriers do it,but i know for us,most of our refurbs are actually brand new phones we never sold. and the ones that are actually refurbe/returned really arent that bad...
Right, right, right..."refurbed phones are actually perfectly good phones that NEVER cause problems".
That's bull and you know it. Refurbed phones almost always cause problems.
hey bud, if anything, the tech departments for these wireless carriers now have a greater incentive to wise up and fix your problems.
Yeah. And NOT screw us with a POS refurbed junker.
No, what the tech departments will do is count the most minute scratch as "physical damage" and charge the customer full retail. If the carrier can "prove" physical damage, then they're in the free and clear from this ridiculous law. And since there is no way for the customer to get the handset back once it's sent in to the carrier, the customer is screwed.
whiskey7 said:
The government has to get involved in the minutiae of cell phone providers' policies now??? 🙄
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up.
Oh, that's brilliant.
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
No. This is supposed to protect us from the carriers and their stupidity.
I wouldn't mind seeing every carrier give up subsidies and require customers to either provide their own phone off the web, in a carrier store, or a true cell phone store (one that only sells phone, not service). You want service? Sure, go on across the street and get a phone, then come back n see me...
This would make people realize the true value of these pieces of electronics and maybe, just maybe they would treat them a little better.
colione112 said:
How is it carriers stupidity?
How? Carriers purposely bury key points in an endless sea of fine print. Any law that protects from this is a good one.
Which is why I'm a fan of ending subsidies (and contracts associated with subsidies).
Offer a basic plan, and if they want mobile to mobile, require a contract for that...
People now days hate long term commitments. As long as there are subsidies for new phones, there will be contracts. Do what the rest of the world does and let the customer pay the full price for equipment, that will show the true value of phones.
Subsidies were invented way back when cell phones were new and were a way to get people to try the service. This is so out dated, that it's ridiculous.
colione112 said:
There needs to be fine print. Just as there will be fine print in this law (if it passes).
Which is why I'm a fan of ending subsidies (and contracts associated with subsidies).
Offer a basic plan, and if they want mobile to mobile, require a contract for that...
People now days hate long term commitments. As long as there are subsidies for new phones, there will be contracts. Do what the rest of the world does and let the customer pay the full price for equipment, that will show the true value of phones.
Subsidies were invented way back when cell phones were new and were a way to get people to try the service. This is so out dated, that it's ridiculous.
Great post.
lancekalzas said:
Stupidity? Carriers sell service, manufacturers make phones. Can't take one thing and call it something else. Call it for what it is. This law is a very bad idea. Remember the law of unintended consequences. Government never takes it into consideration.
Unintended consequences? Us being protected from utter tomfoolery is an unintended consequence?
Yeah...YOU should definitely have to pay the outrageous fee.
muchdrama said:
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
Yes. Because anything that you sign, you should read. If it is as thick as a book, if you don't want to read through it, don't sign it. If you still want to sign it and don't want to read through it, don't complain when you get screwed. Because you just screwed yourself.
deliriumfrenzy said:muchdrama said:
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
Yes. Because anything that you sign, you should read. If it is as thick as a book, if you don't want to read through it, don't sign it. If you still want to sign it and don't want to read through it, don't complain when you get screwed. Because you just screwed yourself.
Blah, blah, blah...this law protects folks who didn't quite understand what they were told or read.
It happens. We're not all rocket scientists. Ever read the fine print? It can get pretty heady. This law protects us from carrier greed.
I'm not the smartest guy ever, but I'm not stupid. I like to know what I'm getting into, because it is my responsibility to understand what I am putting my signature on. It requires a little patience, but in the end it is worth it, because if there is a clause that screws me over, I'd like to know about it before I agree to be screwed over.
Yes, contracts should be easier to understand, but until that happens, I'm going to read everything before I sign it.
deliriumfrenzy said:
If I can't understand it, I don't sign it.
You're one in a million, then...'cause most of us just don't read every word.
muchdrama said:whiskey7 said:
The government has to get involved in the minutiae of cell phone providers' policies now??? 🙄
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up.
Oh, that's brilliant.
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
No. This is supposed to protect us from the carriers and their stupidity.
the carriers stupidity? how bout your stupidity?...signing a two year contract without reading the terms and conditions and then complaining about it later....with some carriers you even have 30 days to read ...
(continues)
attwork said:...muchdrama said:whiskey7 said:
The government has to get involved in the minutiae of cell phone providers' policies now??? 🙄
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up.
Oh, that's brilliant.
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
No. This is supposed to protect us from the carriers and their stupidity.
the carriers stupidity? how bout your stupidity?...signing a two year contract without reading the terms and conditions and then complaining about it later....with some carri
(continues)
muchdrama said:...attwork said:muchdrama said:whiskey7 said:
The government has to get involved in the minutiae of cell phone providers' policies now??? 🙄
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up.
Oh, that's brilliant.
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
No. This is supposed to protect us from the carriers and their stupidity.
the carriers stupidity? how bout your stupidity?...signing a two year contract without reading the terms and conditions and then complaini
(continues)
attwork said:...muchdrama said:attwork said:muchdrama said:whiskey7 said:
The government has to get involved in the minutiae of cell phone providers' policies now??? 🙄
It is an individual's personal responsibility to check a cell phone provider's policy on defective hardware before signing up.
Oh, that's brilliant.
So what are we supposed to do? Sit in the retail store for an hour and read 90 paragraphs of fine print?
No. This is supposed to protect us from the carriers and their stupidity.
the carriers stupidity? how bout your stupidity?...signing a two year contract without reading the terms
(continues)
I can't wait to see people with a wet phone say it isn't their fault and it's defective, then want an exchange...
What I also see happening is custies coming in with a BS problem over and over to get out of contract or a new phone. This will suck if it goes through.
Customer: My phone keeps dropping calls. I think it's defective.
Tech: Well, we know for a fact it isn't a problem with the network, but your phone seems to be working fine.
...then the classic line
I'm sorry, but we can't duplicate the problem so there is nothing that we can do
🤣 🤣 🤣
This forum is closed.