Ahh, we don't care about you residential customers > I am considering a Class Action Lawsuit......

I am considering a Class Action Lawsuit......

This kind of stuff really aggravates me.
These companies treat us like dirt and don’t really care about our satisfaction because no one of us really results in very many dollars.
For those of us who are in a position at work to choose service providers, and I would guess that there are a lot of us here, I say don’t give the account to the companies that screw us on a personal level. That’s what I do.
Unfortunately, I’m running out of companies to do business with and not enough people are doing it with me.

Chris

reply to connely5
I'm with you. And even though I have no idea what legal ground exists here, I think that someone should do somthing to make this company feel the pain. There is no way we are even heard by Phoenix. They shut off their phone lines, don't respond to email, are bursting at the seams to break contracts. And what do they so? Brush us off. I don't care what people say about residential customers. We are not half as picky as they would like us to believe. We wouldn't have anyhting to complain about if they just paid attention to us. I'll sign on the dotted line. Tell me where.

GO 4 IT! They need to be punished, and be made to pay for our new installs with other ISPs!
--
JRamos
------------------------------
HOME: Phoenix/Northpoint SDSL - Bergenfield, NJ
784/392 get 800/800, but only when it works!
WORK: Verizon Infospeed DSL - Ridgefield, NJ
640/90 ADSL PPPoE I am lucky if I get 520/80 on a good day!

reply to connely5
i posted the article originally. i am in on anything you are trying to do. let me know, my email is acepoint84@hotmail.com

reply to connely5
Get out your Law for Dummies book, no pun intended. You do not decide if you get class action status, a judge does, and its damn hard to meet the criteria for that status. If you were able to get it, and you won, you would get exactly or less of what you paid for and didn't get, like a buck and some change a day, incidential damages are not able to be collected under the terms of the contract. Unless you have a different one than I do. The so called, I lost money because I run a business at home doesn't work. Its clearly stated in the contracts, as mine says, that its in violation of the contract to run a business off of a residential line. Also, if you are in a residential zoned area, do you want to open that can of worms with you city gov, that you were in violation of the zoning laws and running a business, without a license, etc.. I would just change ISP's, its the easiest and most effective way to fix the problem. My line in NY is down right now, but Im told its due to an upgrade that Northpoint is doing nationwide. Im told it will be fixed tonight. We will see..

If you were able to get it, and you won, you would get exactly or less of what you paid for and didn't get, like a buck and some change a day,...

Maybe not even that. If MegaPath's and PhoenixDSL's land sharks were smart, what remains of PhoenixDSL is separately incorporated as a wholly-owned subsidiary (? division?) of whatever entity owns MegaPath. (If they were really smart: both operations are built that way, held by yet another company.)

Now IANAL, but it seems to me highly unlikely that a Court would transfer the burden from one Corporation to another. (Tho it did happen in the Dow Chemical/breast implant case.)

So even were the Class successful in pursuing its action: one suspects they'd simply join PhoenixDSL's existing Creditors in line. And since it's reasonable to assume that what remains of PhoenixDSL has negative net worth...

Like I said: IANAL. Nor am I privy to the business structures of MegaPath, PhoenixDSL or any related operations. So this is all just wild speculation on my part. Perhaps a Real Lawyer can comment?

--
Jim Seymour & Karel the Computer Cat

The point is not the money, not soley, but to stand up for one's rights. We have become a passive nation of take whatever we get dished out consumers. The media and the government bow to business to keep in its favor and to keep those dollars rolling in. Resentment over this worship of the business at the expense of the consumer has been festering for years, and it keeps on growing.

Internet companies in particular have been given a lot of leeway and have gotten away with a lot of abuses in the name of fostering 'e-commerce'. It's time we stood up and demanded our rights. We won't get them any other way!

Dear Sadowski and Friends,
Here. Here.
The CLECs, and ILECs, in particular, feel we have nowhere else to go. There is, of course, the voting booth. But, although I oppose all frivolous litigation, and it is, by the way, unlawful in Scotland and England, every disgruntled customer ought, as of right, to file for either damages, or mandamus. If companies ride roughshod over their contracts, let them pay legal fees until their cash flow looks like Covad's. In most jurisdictions, an ILEC has five days to repair a line. On the sixth day, file. If Megapath does not answer the phone, file for breach in your local court. They still have to defend or face a default judgment. Then, there is always the FCC, PUC, and your state Attorney General. As I have said, far too often, we must hang together.
By the way, if the dummy corporation exists for the sole purpose of shielding from liability, the shield does not stand the incorporation argument. Thus, you cannot buy Phoenix, and tell their residential customers to take a hike, then argue that you are not responsible, as the contract lies principally elsewhere. Remember Corning?
Also, in regards to corporate shielding, the assets of principals are not always protected, particularly in cases of gross negligence or outright fraud. Where is my friend Klambert, by the way?

All good wishes,
Martin

reply to sadowski

The point is not the money, not soley, but to stand up for one's rights.

Yes, but lawyers like to get paid for their time, as a rule. Particularly if the case is difficult .

We have become a passive nation of take whatever we get dished out consumers.

Who's "we", white man? (From the Lone Ranger/Tonto joke.) Just kidding. I know what you mean. But I happen to be one that does not fit into that group.

Internet companies in particular have been given a lot of leeway...

I had a conversation regarding that very same issue with the "technical head" of the TelCom division (?) of the MI PSC not long ago. Thing is: "consumer broadband" is still in early adopter phase. The FCC's concern is that if they impose too many rules & restrictions on the market too soon: they will choke-off growth. Think of it this way: if todays environmental and zoning restrictions had been in place at the time The West was being explored and settled: how far do you think that would've gotten? (I can hear the Native American audience thinking "Now why didn't we think of that?" ) Well, "consumer broadband" is kind of like the Wild, Wild West right now.

It's time we stood up and demanded our rights. We won't get them any other way!

I can't argue that! But I think what we have here with PhoenixDSL really has little or no bearing on the unregulated-ness of xDSL. See my comments to the other person for what I mean by that.

--
Jim Seymour & Karel the Computer Cat

reply to yazdzik

Remember Corning?

Yes. I mentioned it.

Also, in regards to corporate shielding, the assets of principals are not always protected, particularly in cases of gross negligence or outright fraud.

I wouldn't know, since IANAL. However, there is no proof of negligence or fraud here. If MegaPath purchased PhoenixDSL on the verge of their going under (and there is some evidence that such is the case), and they are making a "good faith" effort to do the best they can to keep the subsidiary going (which, personally, I suspect to be the case), I would guess that not much more can be expected of them.

Or do you believe a Court would expect them to destroy a healthy business in a vain attempt to save a failing one?

--
Jim Seymour & Karel the Computer Cat

reply to jseymour8
I never mentioned any special regulation. I simply argue that they like any other company must conform to basic universal business practices. Nothing more than that.

Special protections are not enforcing standard rules against those that violate rules and regulations. It's the DOJ not releasing the names of 'Internet Retailers' from whom 250K credit card numbers were stolen even when the DOJ admits it was due to the comp's own negligence saying "... we don't want to damage their business." (Implied, to hell with the consumer who may be damaged by loss of credit or identity, protect the business no matter what.)

The protection to inspire new tech. argument is not viable. We are not talking about technology but standard business practice. It is the same type of abuse that has lead to (not hindered) regulation of cable billing practices and other industries as well. It is these same abuses that lead the previous AG of NYS (Vacco - not sure of spelling) to have a special ISP investigation running. Etc. Etc.

No, the idea of a class-action suit is not viable, but the spirit that lead to this thread is well encouraged in my opinion.

reply to jseymour8
Dear Jimseymour,
You last point is fascinating. If a healthy business buy an ailing business, to accept its assets, then, try to shield the healthy business from the liabilities of the sick one, at what point will a court take equity into account? Is the equity on the side of the original promisees? The clearest answer is yes. Megapath either buys Phoenix, or it does not. If business a buys business b, for $10, when business b has $50 minus $100 liabilities(and remember, SAP considers contractual promises which must be performed liabilities, not contingencies)business a has -10 +50 - 100, or a new negative net of 60. There is no longer the easy way of looking at the situation of having bought $50 of assets for $10. If the company then says it refuses to honour those promises, the risk undertaken is that the promisees will attempt to enforce. If, however, in the real world, the likelihood of that enforcement is slim, we return slowly to the original premise of assets bought cheaply. That is, the buyer undertook a business risk.
One would hope that the courts would rule only upon law, and see the equities arising from the first standing contract. But as you point out, since the court may take into account equitable matters, it may in fact allow a company such as Megapath to deny tech support, on various grounds. However, I doubt it, since, the thing that made the company sick was its overextension, the remedy of first resort is chapter 11, and therefore, more likely, if judgments were enforced, the healthy company would require, ultimately, protection. I know it may sound confusing, but in a civilised society, the law does not allow only survival of the fittest, but requires performance of obligations. In my opinion, as uninformed as it may be, no Phoenix customer should be made to suffer for the benefit of Megapath. That is both inequitable, and unjust. To accept the screwing of the consumer for the advancement of business interests has generally proven unpalatable to the courts. To accept the screwing of the consumer for the advancement of business interests ought to be unacceptable to all of us, precisely because it is inequitable and unjust. Law exists not to protect the strong from the weak. Our current laws, if strictly enforced, would require performance, the risk assumed at the time of original purchase. The party responsible for the maintenance of similar performance is the current equitable owner of the contract's benefits. Short answer, the courts ought to enforce contracts, and if you buy a sick business, you know that to begin with. You also know that few have the resources to enforce, so you take the risk of remaining healthy. But, the risk is clear: the ailing company may get well, or, the healthy company infected. In this case, there is no win-win. It is either Megapath, or Phoenix residential customers.
I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of firms who could win a case for ex-Phoenix customers. Frankly, I know not even one person personally who could pay the retainer of any of those firms. Megapath knew this, we all know this. It does not make it right.

reply to sadowski
Dear Sadowski,
Vacco's name is spelled correctly. It's about all I am still sure of.
Best,
Martin

reply to sadowski

I never mentioned any special regulation. I simply argue that they like any other company must conform to basic universal business practices. Nothing more than that.

Well then we're saying much the same thing, just in different ways.

In short, my point was precisely this: that the current un-regulatated-ness of the broadband industry is entirely a separate issue from MegaPath's responsibilities vis-a-vis PhoenixDSL (residential) customers.


The protection to inspire new tech. argument is not viable.

That's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. The FCC sees it differently. Oddly enough, the MPSC dude to whom I previously referred saw it completely your way, as well. At the beginning of our conversation. He wasn't quite so positive, I think, by the end of our conversation. I believe that certainly some additional regulation is in order. I think that the industry has come along quite far enough to tolerate that without the entire thing falling down like a house-of-cards. The trick is determining that fine line, at this still-early stage of development, between too little and too much.

I certainly feel that this precise moment would be a Very Bad Time to impose any new rules. There's enough upset at the moment as it is--what with ISPs, CLECs and dot-coms merging & dying right-and-left.

--
Jim Seymour & Karel the Computer Cat

reply to yazdzik

You last point is fascinating.

Thank you.

And thank you for the thoughtful and detailed discussion. Your points make sense. And obviously you're more learned in this arena than I. I must admit that I was functioning under the apparently false assumption that "corporate brethren", perhaps even a parent, enjoyed some protections from the liabilities of a poorly subsidiary. The Dow case notwithstanding.

I do believe one of my original points still stands (and one of your comments seems to indicate you agree): depending on how the deal between MegaPath and PhoenixDSL was "rigged", a court case could be very messy and quite time-consuming. Given that there may not be all that much to be gained from a successful fight (monetarily): I'm hard-put to imagine a lawyer willing to take it on.

--
Jim Seymour & Karel the Computer Cat

reply to jseymour8

said by jimseymour:

---

The protection to inspire new tech. argument is not viable.

That's your opinion and you're certainly entitled to it. The FCC sees it differently. Oddly enough, the MPSC dude

---