Home  ›  News  ›

Verizon Wireless Dismisses $18K Cell Phone Bill

Article Comments  

all discussions

show all 51 replies

Verizon CEO Seidelberg.....

bluecoyote

May 18, 2010, 12:05 AM
Verizon CEO Seidelberg's nose shrunk ☹️
...
Jayshmay

May 18, 2010, 12:31 AM
🤣 🤣 🤣 !!!

Too bad BoA's CEO doesn't listen to congress like Vzn's CEO does!
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 12:48 AM
Like this bill was ever going to be collected in the first place.

Hope his credit isn't ruined for the next 7 years.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 2:03 AM
I hope it is.

I agree the 18k is a bit much. but what kind of person just assumes that tethering his phone is free (when he's not paying for data)
...
thebigsaxon

May 18, 2010, 5:39 AM
What kind of person assumes an $18k bill is acceptable when unlimited data plans are available at 100-150 per month.

Here in New Zealand we don't have unlimited plans; our infrastructure couldn't sustain it so if you pay for a 4 GB cap, you are metred and then cut off because if anybody tried anything like that it would simply be uncollected because we don't have oppressive credit systems like the US.

And if the carrier took to public a bill like this, both the Government & the public would laugh at the provider and tell em go suck an egg. Things like this are perceived much differently than the US where the general public happens to be public enemy number one.
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 6:10 AM
Unfortunately we had anti-consumer deregulation in the US. Your system is much better.
...
viperguy

May 18, 2010, 6:15 AM
wow....wow...wow...wow...they deemed it uncollectable..why doesnt verizon make his son work for their company in their call center for about a year so he knows the Sh!t we have to go through maybe then it'll sparks some common sense with the kid. haha 😈 I hope it does mess his credit up for 7 years..lol sorry you had a retarded son hahahaha
...
info411

May 18, 2010, 6:25 AM
If he is under age than it won't do anything on his credit. Would be under his parents credit depending on who signed up. Besides its VZW fault for not having counter-measures in place. VZW is greedy, you work for them so you know they are willing to take your first born son if there was any cash value to them for it. VZW is a very aggressive company if they can get away with it they will do it.. As for their credo hahahah whatever its full of BS..
...
viperguy

May 18, 2010, 8:18 AM
VALID CHARGES VALID CHARGES 🤤 VALID CHARGES ACROSS THE BOARD. i can only imagine the call. uhhh i didnt know my son didnt know he couldnt do that he thought it was free. i mean come on!! you pay for a cell phone service money out of your pocket and you didnt know what you were paying for. I wonder how this will affect his deposit fee when he tries to open another account with a different wireless carrier..mucho funny!
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 12:10 PM
But this was 4 years ago, and they were using the device ILLEGALLY to tether.

If they actually had a tethering plan, there is a cap safeguard in place (has been since 2008 when unlimited tethering went away)

But they were trying to use a service WITHOUT PAYING FOR IT in any way. Something that's clearly stated in the TOS will cause them to terminate your contract and charge you serious overages for.
...
thebigsaxon

May 18, 2010, 12:13 PM
Then VZW needs to term service, not charge an unrealistic service charge.

This would only happen in the USA. There are strict consumer laws in place like New Zealand any Europe (my home) that would prevent this from happening and if it did happen it would likely go to mediation.

Some money is better than none which is exactly what VZW is going to get. That and a lot of bad press.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 12:16 PM
There should not be provisions to help out consumers trying to cheat the system.

If you try and cheat the system and get caught, YOU PAY. Period.

The reason there is bad press is because people are idiots who will side against companies no matter what because it thinks it helps them.

And then those same consumers will bitch when their choices are removed and suddenly things like Data plans are REQUIRED because of idiots trying to cheat the system.
...
thebigsaxon

May 18, 2010, 6:11 PM
Menno said:
There should not be provisions to help out consumers trying to cheat the system.

If you try and cheat the system and get caught, YOU PAY. Period.

The reason there is bad press is because people are idiots who will side against companies no matter what because it thinks it helps them.

And then those same consumers will bitch when their choices are removed and suddenly things like Data plans are REQUIRED because of idiots trying to cheat the system.


Why are you assuming it is always the consumer trying to cheat the system? The consumer here (Europe or NZ) would have to pay. But the charges assumed would be sent to mediation because the 18,000 fee isn't a collectable debt.

That is t...
(continues)
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 6:18 PM
But this customer WAS and they freely admit it. The father knew EXACTLY what his son was doing, in fact they did it together.

Verizon offered to work on the debt with them, they outright refused to pay it, insisting it should be free. Verizon still cut it in half (they were NEVER asked to pay the full 18k that was sensationalism given by the media), and if they went to work with verizon, they could've had it solved. but instead they spent FOUR YEARS refusing to pay a cent, until some writer smelled a story and promised them publicity in exchange for an exclusive.

These people WERE at fault, and now they're getting off because all people see is the shock number, and not everything else, not even the other information OPENLY presented...
(continues)
...
TmobileCustomer83

May 18, 2010, 8:27 PM
I kinda have a two sided opinion on this issue. First I believe it's always good practice to keep track of your usage. I monitor mine almost every day along with my bank account. I tether my phone to my comp but I made sure it was allowed before preceded to do it. So second would be to use caution before doing something that could cost you money. Third make sure you read the fine print it might just save you a big headache in the end.

On the other side I will agree that 18K is steep they could have at-least prorated the charges over to a data plan I know their are limitations to that. They did try to work with them but since we get mostly one side of the story we don't know if he tried to work out anything with Verizon.

Fault index...
(continues)
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 10:35 AM
Keep in mind Verizon and all the carriers only sell bags of air.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 12:08 PM
oh wait, they do... but I didn't expect you to actually understand anything about business, so it's ok.

You are, after all, just a consumer who wants the government to hold your hand so you never have to claim responsibility for any of your actions, right?
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 12:22 PM
So I take it you never get any money from your carriers because it's not like you have bills to pay or things to purchase for the store, right?

That makes your ignorance a lot greater
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 2:31 PM
I was kidding..geez...you are the ignorant one. I do think there should be warnings from the carriers when your monthly bill or usage gets to a certain level to protect parents from their selfish stupid kids. They need all the help they can get since usually both parents have to work.. I give my customers free used phones when they aren't eligible for an upgrade and can't afford a new one and that pays for itself in customer loyalty. My customers become my friends because I go to bat for them when the carriers misbehave.How do you help people? Or are you a greedy capitalist?
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 2:37 PM
I help people.

There is a difference between helping people and encouraging bad behavior.
...
gldnhrtrblfst

May 18, 2010, 11:39 AM
lol new zealand lol
...
thebigsaxon

May 18, 2010, 12:08 PM
Its better than the US.
...
gldnhrtrblfst

May 18, 2010, 12:43 PM
in what way
...
bluecoyote

May 18, 2010, 11:45 AM
LOL New Zealand you're not even a real country, and your credit system isn't any better than ours.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 11:54 AM
I said that he shouldn't be let off the hook.

In this case, I hope his credit rating is shot. He waited FOUR YEARS to do anything about this bill
...
thebigsaxon

May 18, 2010, 12:11 PM
Menno said:
I said that he shouldn't be let off the hook.

In this case, I hope his credit rating is shot. He waited FOUR YEARS to do anything about this bill



I understand your point but keep in mind that that anti-consumer viewpoints no matter how retarded tend to come full circle.

Verizon Wireless is as responsible as the consumer. There is an effective limit as to potential charges and this is one of them.

Usuage charges are acceptable if they are reasonable. This situation they are not.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 12:13 PM
Verizon has NO responsibilities to a consumer that is using their devices in a way that is illegal.

In this case, tethering it to his computer WITHOUT paying for any data plan.

This isn't an anti-consumer viewpoint. This is an anti-moron standpoint.

Idiots shouldn't be cuddled, because it hurts ALL consumers eventually.
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 6:22 AM
A child. Kids do things behind their parents backs...remember? I have a neighbor who's kid got fined 20k for stealing (downloading) music. His father didn't even know you could do that, he works 2 jobs at 75 hours a week. The record company settled for 2k and I'll bet the kid never does that again..
...
Fredd

May 18, 2010, 10:03 AM
Not a child - the son was 22 when the usage occurred.
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 10:30 AM
Young and dumb then. I can barely remember 22..Deep purple and acid, things have changed.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 11:57 AM
Yes they have. kids at 12 now most likely understand more about technology than you did at 22 (not an insult.. technology is just a lot more prevalent)

The kid most likely knew exactly what he was doing. Kind of like the kids who torrent all their movies and music downloads and then try and cry wolf when someone calls them on it.

Kids that age assume everything is free because they're selfish, not because they're ignorant of the actual costs.
...
petlover1

May 18, 2010, 7:22 PM
And because far too many parents never hold them responsible when they do something wrong. Instead of teaching them a lesson during the years when they should be "parenting" they coddle them and make excuses for them. Its always someone else's fault. This moron will have learned absolutely nothing from this, in all likelihood he and his "proud dad" will boast how they pulled it off.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 11:53 AM
He wasn't a child.

He was old enough to get BEER, and yet you're still calling him a child?

and the father admitted that he and the son used the tethering TOGETHER. meaning he was totally aware.

Aka, the father and the son were idiots, they should have some consequences
...
jhr2112

May 18, 2010, 2:36 PM
Must have been a Jr tea partier
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 2:40 PM
They didn't exist in 2006. and I'm pretty sure his attitude would be more in line with the other side of the political spectrum
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 6:29 PM
Menno said:
I hope it is.

I agree the 18k is a bit much. but what kind of person just assumes that tethering his phone is free (when he's not paying for data)


It was his 22 yr old kid.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 6:31 PM
he was with his son when they were tethering
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 6:33 PM
Menno said:
he was with his son when they were tethering


But $18k? That's vulgar. I'd tell Verizon to blow a goat and then I'd hire a lawyer.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 6:36 PM
and again, I didn't say the 18k was proper.

FYI, verizon NEVER asked them to pay the 18k. the most they asked was for 9k (still high, I know, but the 18k is a fallacy)

And the key thing is, he DIDN'T hire a lawyer, he DIDN'T contact anyone (I'm willing to be the journalist offered to pay for the story) he just said NO and refused to pay anything, refused (as far as we know) to work out anything, or try to work out anything, with verizon.

He just sat on the charges expecting them to go away if he ignored them
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 6:40 PM
Menno said:
and again, I didn't say the 18k was proper.

FYI, verizon NEVER asked them to pay the 18k. the most they asked was for 9k (still high, I know, but the 18k is a fallacy)

And the key thing is, he DIDN'T hire a lawyer, he DIDN'T contact anyone (I'm willing to be the journalist offered to pay for the story) he just said NO and refused to pay anything, refused (as far as we know) to work out anything, or try to work out anything, with verizon.

He just sat on the charges expecting them to go away if he ignored them


Good for him. Sometimes I guess you've just gotta do nothing and hope for the best. And in this case it won out.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 7:26 PM
It's not right that he can use his device like that and then not pay a cent of it. Do I think he should have to pay the 9k? no. But he shouldn't get off because of mob mentality.
...
petlover1

May 18, 2010, 7:34 PM
Menno said:
It's not right that he can use his device like that and then not pay a cent of it. Do I think he should have to pay the 9k? no. But he shouldn't get off because of mob mentality.

Letting people get away with this kind of behavior which was and is illegal anyway just encourages the next would be criminal to go ahead and try, after all no one is held responsible in the end so what is to discourage the next one from trying a similar stunt? No one need take responsibility any more for their own actions since our culture apparently condones irresponsible behavior but where will it all end?
...
doodahii

May 18, 2010, 7:51 PM
It will end with OBAMA!!! Change we can believe in!!! haha yea right.
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 8:09 PM
Menno said:
It's not right that he can use his device like that and then not pay a cent of it. Do I think he should have to pay the 9k? no. But he shouldn't get off because of mob mentality.


He got off because even Verizon recognized the ridiculousness of $18k in data charges.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 8:37 PM
so what? so 18k was too high. why was it wiped clean?
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 9:31 PM
Menno said:
so what? so 18k was too high. why was it wiped clean?


1) Because Verizon knew it would never collect.

and

2) It was just bad publicity for Verizon.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 9:56 PM
1) Then go into mediate, as per the ToS

2) because the customer refused to go into mediation/arbitration for 4 YEARS until he could find someone to publish his selfish tale.

again, 9k was too high. Doesn't mean they should get off with no repercussions. all that is telling people is that as long as your mistake is LARGE enough, you'll never have to pay for it
...
muchdrama

May 18, 2010, 10:18 PM
Menno said:
1) Then go into mediate, as per the ToS

2) because the customer refused to go into mediation/arbitration for 4 YEARS until he could find someone to publish his selfish tale.

again, 9k was too high. Doesn't mean they should get off with no repercussions. all that is telling people is that as long as your mistake is LARGE enough, you'll never have to pay for it


Listen, the guy didn't want to pay and shouldn't have to pay. Screw Verizon for thinking it was going to squeeze $18k out of the guy.
...
Menno

May 18, 2010, 10:38 PM
So I can go into a store, burn the mens department, and then get out of assuming responsibility because I don't feel like paying, and I didn't know cloths burned that fast? Or refuse to pay because they are billing me the retail costs when I know they get the product cheaper. I can see that one working really well.

and again, they NEVER, let me repeat that, NEVER asked him for 18k. They offered to cut the rate in half to 9, he refused, but they cut it anyway and sent the 9 to collections.

They wanted him to go into arbitration to work something out. the end result would be a lot lower than the 9k they DID initially ask him for.

It's not an all or nothing thing. Just because he shouldn't have to pay the full amount doesn't mean ...
(continues)
...
muchdrama

May 19, 2010, 12:10 AM
Menno said:

So I can go into a store, burn the mens department, and then get out of assuming responsibility because I don't feel like paying, and I didn't know cloths burned that fast?



Burning down the men's department at JCPenney is a little different (loss of life).

Verizon charged this guy $18k for data. Ridiculous.
...
Menno

May 19, 2010, 12:16 AM
there doesn't need to be anyone in the store when it burns. It's not different. I destroyed (used) product without paying for it.

and how much they charged doesn't matter. again, all this is saying is that if you're going to get overages, make sure you go for the gold, cause you'll never be held responsible.

Not to mention that it's going to seriously backlash against people with smaller overages (tougher arbitration, mandatory data fees, etc)
...
muchdrama

May 19, 2010, 12:17 AM
Menno said:
there doesn't need to be anyone in the store when it burns. It's not different. I destroyed (used) product without paying for it.

and how much they charged doesn't matter. again, all this is saying is that if you're going to get overages, make sure you go for the gold, cause you'll never be held responsible.

Not to mention that it's going to seriously backlash against people with smaller overages (tougher arbitration, mandatory data fees, etc)


Buddy, we obviously don't agree. So let's just leave it at that, okay? Okay.
...

This forum is closed.

Please log in to report a message to the moderator.

This forum is closed.


all discussions

Subscribe to Phone Scoop News with RSS Follow @phonescoop on Threads Follow @phonescoop on Mastodon Phone Scoop on Facebook Follow on Instagram

 

Playwire

All content Copyright 2001-2024 Phone Factor, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Content on this site may not be copied or republished without formal permission.