fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
| reply to Goober
Re: Is Arris Telephony modem really not Comcast compatible ?
Goob, can't agree with your application of the law here. If what you are arguing is fact, then why isn't the cable company charging you "rent" on that equipment up until the date you allegedly "purchased" the equipment?
There's also an obligation to "rent" that equipment as long as you have it, right? To be honest, it's never been defined as to "WHEN" you are renting it.. ie: when the service is active or when you simply have possession.
In car rental companies, if you wreck the car, they consider the time the car is in the shop to be lost rental and you're held accountable for it. During that time, they may not have always rented that care, but they will charge you for it anyway.. not to mention, they rarely are ever out of rent able cars..
It COULD be argued in court and you know that...
Also.. you still missed one key point.. you never agreed to "purchase" the equipment.. you "agreed" to pay an unreturned equipment fee.. again, and you should know this.. it comes down to the words when in court.. and the words you are arguing is "did I agree to purchase it" or "did I agree to pay a penalty/fee for not returning it"...?
Cable is, and does, argue that the fee is for damages.. for the time it takes to actively collect it.. for the tech truck rolls to get it, the time and expense to put people on the phone to track you down, and finally, the group of people that have to send you to collections.
And, you, of all people, should avoid saying "that's all a cost of business and costs near nothing" when you charge for every single thing you do with your clients.. ie: I know you're billing by the minute when you talk to your clients.. so every amount of time spent working on a case/client is charged to them.. so why can't cable? |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | reply to Goober
Goob.. you didn't waste 13 years of your life.. what you didn't probably do was look at the 'other areas' of what you spent 13 years of your life for.
I'm sure you know about laws that pertain to specific issues, right? Have you looked at the communication laws that govern the industry...? and what it says when it comes to equipment?
Cable boxes are not available for retail purchase in the US.. well, not the ones you are talking about anyway. They are always the property of the company.. what you pay for is liquidated damages.. but you still don't own the box. You didn't even pay the full price of the box.. step one, the consumer "stole" the box by not returning it. Step two, the company attempts to get it back.. ie: the box is still unreturned/stolen. Step three, they go after the sub to get it.. step four, they charge against your account - sometimes they get paid, often, they don't.
Again, that fee you are charged is not for the property.. and if you want to get technical, it's a 'fee' for not returning the equipment.. not an agreement to "sell" you the equipment.
I respect what you do.. but as you well know, you often fight your own kind and many times, ok, you ALWAYS disagree and are on opposite sides with them.. so you have to say that you don't always know what you're talking about.. well, let me restate that too.. you may know what you're talking about.. but does the man in the black robe and the walnut crusher agree with you? 
edit: you didn't promise to return it or purchase it. You also promised that you'd not remove it from the service address with out permission from the provider too. I believe that section of the contract holds weight. As for your shopping example, you violated the contract when you removed the equipment from the property. And where you get permission to move the box is if you call up and transfer service.. otherwise, if you're not going to transfer, yet move, you're then asked to bring it back, or allow the company to retrieve it. But at no time did you agree to return it or purchase it. HD DVR boxes, for example, cost about $650 to purchase.. the company charges you an unreturned equipment fee of $250. I suppose when you walk out of Wal-Mart with goods you put in your cart, but didn't purchase that when they catch up to you, you're only going to get charged 40%? |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL | reply to captain364
lol. I guess I wasted 13 years of my life then. Thanks for the legal advice. |
|
captain364
@gci.com
 from:
Cabal 
| reply to Goober
said by Goober :You still aren't getting it. When you sign up for the service, you promise to either return the equipment or pay for it. It's contractual. Stealing merchandise isn't contractual. The store has no agreement with you to charge your card if you walk out with merchandise for which you haven't paid. I swear, schools should have basic contract and torts law classes for you guys before letting you out of high school. No, your the one who doesn't get it. You are obligated to return the equipment. Just because they charge you that does not relieve the obligation. It is still stolen property and it still is COMCAST'S property. This is pretty basic stuff in our legal system, it is the same in just about all stolen property situations. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
 ·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to rody_44
You still aren't getting it. When you sign up for the service, you promise to either return the equipment or pay for it. It's contractual.
Stealing merchandise isn't contractual. The store has no agreement with you to charge your card if you walk out with merchandise for which you haven't paid.
I swear, schools should have basic contract and torts law classes for you guys before letting you out of high school. |
|
rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
·Comcast
3 edits | reply to Goober
by your theory i can go and shoplift and if i get caught i just have to pay for the stolen merchandise and everythings fine. sorry but in the real world its stolen until returned to the original owner. even when a cars stolen and recovered 5 years later the original owner gets first crack at the car if he wants it. he just has to pay a settlement to the insurance company to cover what they paid. notice the modem sold for 9.99 |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to rody_44
said by rody_44 :4 of them on ebay now and the price is 9.99. yea they are not stolen are they. 10 percent of what you would get from them for returning it. im thinking about buying some so i can get the free months cable for returning stolen property that they usually give out. » cgi.ebay.com/ARRIS-Touchstone-TM···ViewItem Free money. Go for it if you believe in your position. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to rody_44
It's not Comcast's beef if the modem is stolen from a subscriber as long as the modem has been paid for. That's all this is about. Nobody cares if the first person got ripped off. That's a different issue. Comcast got it's money. It doesn't matter if the person returning it gets his money back. Even if he doesn't, Comcast has been made whole. They have no claim to the equipment unless it's in an agreement that regardless of the payment that Comcast owns rights to the property until returned at which time they will refund the money. Maybe iot's there somewhere. I have never seen that though.
A person agrees to the charges during sign up as a condition of service. I did with WOW. I don't think the credit card company would reverse. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to Madcap
said by Madcap :Where have you been living? America is taking the stand of guilty until proved innocent in 4 trials. Right. Okay. Whatever. |
|
rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to Madcap
4 of them on ebay now and the price is 9.99. yea they are not stolen are they. 10 percent of what you would get from them for returning it. im thinking about buying some so i can get the free months cable for returning stolen property that they usually give out. »cgi.ebay.com/ARRIS-Touchstone-TM···ViewItem |
|
rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA
·Comcast
3 edits | reply to Goober
what i mean is lets say person one has a modem stolen from him and person one pays comcast for the modem. the modem is still stolen property even tho person number 2 sold it on ebay. your scenario just makes no sense at all as why would person one sell it on ebay for probably 40 dollars when he could get his 250 back from a cable company. i dont think phone modems are as cheap as a regular modems but the same holds true for all leased equipment across the board. its not like someone is going to say i think i will sell it on ebay for 20 percent of the value. just no logic in your thinking. and yea once returned you get a refund. its standard policy that once the accounts shut off the sub gets billed for the modem. its also standard policy to issue a credit when returned. i dont know of any cable company that automatically charges a credit card tho for equipment and it could be reversed by the card holder anyway since its not a approved charge. |
|
Madcap
Reformed Forum Troll
Premium
join:2004-06-26
Kenosha, WI
clubs: | reply to Goober
Where have you been living? America is taking the stand of guilty until proved innocent in 4 trials. |
|
Goober
Premium
join:2000-12-17
Naperville, IL
·Comcast
·WOW Internet and C..
| reply to rody_44
I don't know. In the US I thought people were innocent until proven otherwise.
And, what are you going on about "its stolen if its stolen from someone and its payed for by that person its still stolen." If the cable company charges me for a non-returned box, then they have been made whole. Both of us walk away with the contract having been honored.
I've never been told "We're keeping your credit card on file so that we can charge you in case you don't return the equipment, and even after we do, the equipment will be considered stolen and will still need to be returned to us."
Now, if they say that once the equipment is returned, then a refund will be issued, then maybe that's a different inquiry. Otherwise, it's unjust enrichment on the part of the cable company. No court likes that. |
|
