  Brianv5Low Level FunctionaryPremium
join:2001-01-20
Keyser, WV |  How do you arrest a company?
--
Its not a bug.. Its a "feature" | |
|
 |  John GaltForward, MarchPremium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
kudos:3 | Re: How do you arrest a company? said by Brianv5:Who exactly would they march off in handcuffs? Their network...you know, all of those people in the background in the ads.
--
A is A | |
|
| | That'd be a sight.... How can you issue a warrant to a company? Are they gonna arrest the building? That'd be one heckuva big set of handcuffs.  | |
|
| | | Re: That'd be a sight.... Well that will be the Owner of the company in this case the CEO that is in charge, somebody is getting is going to lose his/her job. | |
|
| | Reviews:
 ·Bright House
| Re: That'd be a sight.... said by donjuan2002:Well that will be the Owner of the company in this case the CEO that is in charge, somebody is getting is going to lose his/her job. Umm, who would they take. Certainly not the CEO. The whole purpose of getting a corporate license is so no one is personally held responsible for damages/lawsuits. It's likely if handcuffs would be issued, the people who handled the guys business would be under fire, not the CEO. I doubt anyone would be in cuffs, however. Nice to see a person taking it to court when they refused to resolve it. I DO hate when companies bill you, screw up your credit, and refuse to fix things, when it's not you who was in error. I try to handle those situations one on one, so this scenario doesn't happen.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
|
| | |  pb5kCan't TriforcePremium
join:2005-11-16
Glendale, AZ | Re: That'd be a sight.... said by phattieg:said by donjuan2002:Well that will be the Owner of the company in this case the CEO that is in charge, somebody is getting is going to lose his/her job. Umm, who would they take. Certainly not the CEO. The whole purpose of getting a corporate license is so no one is personally held responsible for damages/lawsuits. I think you're confusing stockholder liability with that of management liability. While it is true that shareholders can not be held responsible for a corporation's actions, its ethically challenged employees most definitely can be.
--
"When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.'" --
Theodore Roosevelt | |
|
| | | | Reviews:
·Bright House
| Re: That'd be a sight.... said by pb5k:said by phattieg:said by donjuan2002:Well that will be the Owner of the company in this case the CEO that is in charge, somebody is getting is going to lose his/her job. Umm, who would they take. Certainly not the CEO. The whole purpose of getting a corporate license is so no one is personally held responsible for damages/lawsuits. I think you're confusing stockholder liability with that of management liability. While it is true that shareholders can not be held responsible for a corporation's actions, its ethically challenged employees most definitely can be. Please read the post. I already said what you said, only I chose different wording which may have confused my point. The whole reply says the CEO won't go to jail, but whoever managed his account will be the likely culprit. It's probably not well documented as to who exactly handled his issue, so there was no one to send to court.
--
SIPPhone/Gizmo # 17476200648 / PIMPNET Chatline / Ran by Asterisk & Slackware 10.1. | |
|
| | | | | pb5kCan't TriforcePremium
join:2005-11-16
Glendale, AZ | Re: That'd be a sight.... Please learn to write a more cogent post before criticising another's reading abilities.
said by phattieg:The whole purpose of getting a corporate license is so no one is personally held responsible for damages/lawsuits. The wording in that post clearly implies that no one within a company may be held liable simply because of its corporate structure, which clearly isn't the case.
If you meant something else, it wasn't broadcast as clearly as you thought. My apologies.
--
"When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.'" --
Theodore Roosevelt | |
|
| Warez_ZealotRural land of the rising sun
join:2006-04-19
japan | said by captokita:How can you issue a warrant to a company? Are they gonna arrest the building? That'd be one heckuva big set of handcuffs. Corporation: any group of persons united or regarded as united in one body.
That's why a corporation is a joke.. They would have to arrest every single person who works there..
--
The meek shall inherit the earth but don't forget the poor are the ones who inherit the debt. | |
|
| | Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26
North Andover, MA | Re: That'd be a sight.... I believe SarbOx dumps it all on the CEO. | |
|
 intellerSociopaths always win.
join:2003-12-08
Tulsa, OK | the real news is Someone sued Verizon and won. | |
|
| | Verizon trash Can ya f****in hear me now?---what the hell i'll get Sprint | |
|
| | Yeah So they going to arrest the call center workers too who have nothing to do with it.
Yay! Go Go Gadget Court System! | |
|
 Subaru1-3-2-4Premium
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT | who posted this should clear Clear it up.. it makes it seem like the guy that says "can you hear my now" was going to get Arrested. | |
|
 vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | That's strange In Massachusetts, they don't issue bench warrants in civil trials, I didn't realize they did that anywhere in the US. Normally a court would just issue a default judgement, and if the company continued to refuse to pay they could order officers to go with the claimant to Verizon's offices (or one of their stores), and literally seize the money from the registers or petty cash. Usually doesn't come to that, but it usually doesn't come to a warrant either. | |
|
| | Telcos And you wonder why the Telcos have such a sh!t reputation with the average joe! | |
|
 tmccann11Who, Me?Premium
join:2001-06-10
Bayonne, NJ | Lawsuits In today's litigious society, it's nice to see that someone that sued a company sued for no more than the damages they were entitled to.
Tom | |
|
|  raydog1Feel SecurePremium
join:2003-07-10
La Vergne, TN | Re: Lawsuits With the time and effort he put into this (especially with their constant denials in the face of rock-solid documentation), I'd say he was entitled to a lot more.
Get enough people winning $10,000 or more judgements and all the bad press that comes along with that, and I'm sure Verizon would tighten up their billing policies and procedures. That reduces the chances that this happens to the rest of us. | |
|
 ShamayimI already have a Messiah.Premium
join:2002-09-23
1 edit | Rats Too bad Verizon just made it under the wire. All the fun we were cheated out of!
--
"tick...tick...tick..."
»www.jtf.org/
| |
|
| | Verizon's billing is awful I can relate to that guy's pain though. Verizon double billed me for months. I can't count the cell phone minutes I've wasted while on hold with them trying to get it figured out. By the time they finally straightened out my bill, I had a free month PLUS $95 of credit with them. | |
|
|  ropeguruPremium
join:2001-01-25
Mechanicsville, VA | Re: Verizon's billing is awful said by tamisa :
I can relate to that guy's pain though. Verizon double billed me for months. I can't count the cell phone minutes I've wasted while on hold with them trying to get it figured out. By the time they finally straightened out my bill, I had a free month PLUS $95 of credit with them.
While I agree that they can be a pain inthe ass to deal with at times, please tell me how you "wasted" cell phone minutes. Last time I checked, dialing 611 for customer service did not count against your minuites.
--
FWD#: 223611 | |
|
| |  BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL | Re: Verizon's billing is awful I've been charged minutes with Alltel when calling them before. | |
|
| | |  nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Verizon's billing is awful said by Boogeyman:I've been charged minutes with Alltel when calling them before. And that relates to calling Verizon's 611 from a Verizon cell, how?
-tom | |
|
| | | | BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL | Re: Verizon's billing is awful Hmm, a similar circumstance happening with a similar company... I dont know how that relates... | |
|
| | | | | nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Verizon's billing is awful said by Boogeyman:Hmm, a similar circumstance happening with a similar company... I dont know how that relates... Similar != same.
Different companies often have different policies.
Ergo: not relevant.
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis | |
|
| | | | | | BoogeymanDrive it like you stole itPremium
join:2002-12-17
Panama City, FL | Re: Verizon's billing is awful True, true. BUT... It seems to me to be an accounting error, and well, we all know Vz's track record there.
I'm just saying it happened to me with a different company, so it could happen with VZ too. | |
|
| | | | | | | nixenRockin' the BoxenPremium
join:2002-10-04
Alexandria, VA | Re: Verizon's billing is awful said by Boogeyman:True, true. BUT... It seems to me to be an accounting error, and well, we all know Vz's track record there. I'm just saying it happened to me with a different company, so it could happen with VZ too. Ah. Ok. Difference between saying it could happen because of Verizon's own record and similar experiences witha a different company than saying it could happen simply because of a similar experience had with a different company. I missed that linking piece. 
-tom
--
"Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficial. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding." -Louis D Brandeis | |
|
| | | At least with VZW calling customer service you actually get to talk to a live person in the US! And you do not pay air time charges as you suggest.
I couple of years ago I was actually charged for customer service from Sprint-NexTel! I'm not talking about airtime but actually billing me for the customer service.
That is a crime. I've since switched to VZW & have nothing but positive to say about them compared to my previous providers; AT&T/Cingular & Sprint-NexTel.
Oh, I should I also mention the network really does work when others fail during emergencies!
All billing sucks but VZW is the best by far; read Consumer Reports every year! | |
|
Reviews:
·Optimum Online
 ·Verizon FiOS
| unsightly mistake Once in a while, the little guy tries a legal kick in the balls to get a big company to twitch.. seldom does it actually work.. Hooray for the little guy! I only wish this were more possible in the days of corporate Monsters we've allowed to come together...
| |
|
|  KAD ImagingJust Shoot ItPremium
join:2002-09-21
Hialeah, FL | Re: unsightly mistake said by tmc8080:Once in a while, the little guy tries a legal kick in the balls to get a big company to twitch.. seldom does it actually work.. Hooray for the little guy! I only wish this were more possible in the days of corporate Monsters we've allowed to come together... Yep, sometimes a Chihuahua whoops a Rottweiler's ass! The rule is NEVER lay down to any Corporate BS. Bad publicity is like VD to mega corporations.
--
Like Cars? Visit:
SportCompactMiami.com
forums.sportcompactmiami.com
blog.sportcompactmiami.com | |
|
 en102Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | I went through the same thing in 2001 I've come close to suing Verizon Wireless for the same reasons. After I cancelled my contract on day 2 of the 14 day trial (to a Verizon Corporate store no less!), I kept getting billed for service. Verizon Wireless stated that they didn't have any cancellation on my account, and to contact the store. The store stated they sent the paperwork to the other corporate store which claimed they didn't have it. After 3 months of this, and receiving a letter about credit rating/collections, I called them back (again), and mentioned that I would take it to the Better Business Bureau and an attorney. That was the last I heard of it. | |
|
| | | Re: I went through the same thing in 2001 Try getting 2 sets of phones from them when only ordering one. Sending back the 2nd set only to be double-billed for 6 months running. Being accused of stealing the 2nd set of phones, although we had tracking information showing who at Verizon signed for the phones.
And during that 6 months of Verizon hell being first threatened by their phone monkeys when calling in with the issue that we were going to jail to ending with "We will take care of Everything".
I say good on the guy for sticking it up Verizons ass on this. | |
|
| | Everyone does it I was double billed for a Sprint phone and it took me more than two years to get it fixed. I spent hours calling them, writing to different BBBs etc. I should have sued them too since I had all documentation! | |
|
bmn? ? ?Premium,ExMod 2003-06
join:2001-03-15
hiatus | Just proves the problem with the US laws... Regarding corporations are fubar... Corporations are treated as legal persons with the same legal and Consitutional rights. That's the only way an arrest warrant could have been issue for something as esoteric as a corporation.
The laws need some serious revision.
--
Prove it... | |
|
lesopp
join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL | How is this possible? From the Warrant:
"The Court has not authorized an arrest under this capias to be made after sunset"
I always thought that's when the blood suckers came out!
I guess the Court wasn't really going after the executive leadership. | |
|
| | Anyone watch The Firm with Tom Cruise? Anyone see the movie The Firm with Tom Cruise? Anyone remember what he did toward the end to keep the mob off his back. The firm was over charging them and he got the firm in trouble for that. Mail Fraud. I wonder if being double billed would fall under mail fraud. Oh wait I'm stupid, I'm no lawyer either. Did that movie use a real law to nail the firm? | |
|
| | | Re: Anyone watch The Firm with Tom Cruise? Mail and wire fraud would cover any fraudulent deed carried out via the US mail (and other modes). Double billing someone would not constitute fraud. Intentionally overbilling someone over the course of days, weeks, months, or years, and using the mail to do so, would constitute mail and wire fraud. The case in the firm would have been legitimate, and it is how the government convicted Al Capone. Also, each mailing (or transfer), would be considered one count. | |
|
| | Reminds me of what happened 4 years ago When my wife and I merged our separate accounts into a family package, she paid her last bill at the company-owned store. Two weeks later, Verizon sent us a nastygram saying it was never paid. We called several times attempting to straighten it out. Each time we documented the call and provided a copy of the cashed check for $63. Verizon never did straighten it out, and instead sent our account to a collection agency. In our dispute to the collection, we challenged the validity of the bill and provided another copy of the cancelled check. We never received a response from that collection agency. Several weeks later, we received another collections notice for that same bill from ANOTHER collection agency. By this time I was fuming!! After doing some research I found out that I could sue Verizon for $1000 for their attempt to collect a debt after we legitimately disputed it.
Meanwhile, our credit was harmed because we took out a car loan during this period and could only qualify for higher interest loans because of Verizon's wrongful collection action. | |
|
|  NOCManMacChatterPremium
join:2004-09-30
Colorado Springs, CO | Re: Reminds me of what happened 4 years ago You did not have to pay the higher interest.. Just show your bank the cashed check and they'll ignore it.
--
Ubuntu Tips »www.ubuntutips.org | |
|
|  tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI | So, who's your carrier now? | |
|
| | | | Re: Reminds me of what happened 4 years ago Actually it is still Verizon. At the time I gave them a choice to make it right with us by giving us brand new, top of the line phones which was the LG VX4400 at the time. The other choice would be to let us out of our contract without penalty for their wrong-doing. The latter choice would have cost us to switch carriers, paying activation fees , buying new phones, accessories, etc. | |
|
| | | tc1uscg
join:2005-03-09
Saint Clair Shores, MI
1 edit | Re: Reminds me of what happened 4 years ago Sounds like you ended up with a better deal anyway. Though not in your case, I think, some people get stuck in the hype about problems with carriers and convince themselves that the grass is greener on the other side. I wish I had a dollar for everyone I've talked too who had one carrier, went to another and cried about service and problem more then they did before and wished they just stayed in one place. If people would take this same approach, say, when buying a car, I wouldn't have to convince myself I screwed up listening to consumer reports when it says my honda accord is the best car ever built, then I wouldn't have to watch it fall apart in the drive way (short def: It's a POS). Bottom line, verizon made things right for you. There are many they don't. Sprint has a habit of pissing off it's customers but makes things right with others. Virgin Moble always got good marks in customer service. Wonder why? Because most of it's users are young people who are more forgiving then us older types and their expectations are adjustable. But customer service is the human factor that can make or break a company. | |
|
approval from:
Shamayim 
| Unscrupulous Verizon is HARASSING US! Approximately 3 years ago I had a problem with what appeared to be deliberate harassment hang-up calls to my home (landline) phone number.
The calls were found to be from Verizon, and were being made for telemarketing purposes. I received these calls even though I was, and still am, on the state telemarketing "do not call" list. I am a Verizon customer,
so they may have been entitled to call me for business purposes. When contacted, Verizon told me that their computer makes the calls and then hangs up under certain circumstances, thus causing my answering machine to
record no message. This was happening a few times a day, and clearly constituted HARASSMENT. I told them this, and that they should change their calling methods.
I demanded that the calls stop, and was told I would be placed on Verizon's "do not call" list, but that it would take a few weeks to do this. Finally, the hang-up calls stopped. However, THESE CALLS RECENTLY BEGAN AGAIN, the
same as the last time, despite my supposedly being on their list of customers NOT to be called. Today I used the *69 service to discover that Verizon (309-820-9933) was again the source of these unwanted calls. I called this source number, and again was told I would be placed on their "do not call" list and it would take some time for this to be in effect.
I HAVE FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE FCC for the purposes of:
1) Punishing this arrogant corperation for its repeated harassment and disregard for and invasion of my privacy.
2) Assuring I will NOT be charged for my call to *69 and any other expenses incurred as a result of Verizon's actions.
3) Assuring that I will NEVER receive another telemarketing call from Verizon under any circumstances.
If you have a similar complaint, send it to donotcall@fcc.gov
Include your name, address, phone number, and the specifics of your problem with unscrupulous Verizon or whatever company is responsible. | |
|
| | | Re: Unscrupulous Verizon is HARASSING US! Verizon =/= Verizon Wireless...  | |
|
| | Don't bet they can't X a company 5 or 6 years ago, New Jersey sentenced a company to death.
In plain English, the corporation was forced to dissolve within some reasonable, but short, timeframe. | |
|
|
|
