Search:  

 
 
   All ForumsHot TopicsGallery






how-to block ads


 
Forums » Exposing Verizon's FiOS Fine Print Trickery » Nothing new
Search Topic:
Share Topic:
RSS topic:
toggle:
flat / full
normal / watch
Post a:
Post a:
« Verizion et al  
AuthorAll Replies


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
reply to vpoko
Re: Nothing new

I would love nothing more than a loser pays system. It will fix everything from heathcare to patent trolling.


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA

reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather See Profile :

As I stated, just because the company pays them doesn't automatically mean they aren't neutral. In the course of my business pay auditors (the closest think to arbitrators I use) who are neutral. No problem.
Sure it's a problem, remember Arthur Anderson? That's why we have the Sarbanes-Oxley Act now, to try to prevent auditors from getting in bed with the companies they're hired to audit. We need the same thing for arbitration.

Would you be opposed to the consumer choosing the arbitrator, with the loser paying the costs?


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP

reply to vpoko
As I stated, just because the company pays them doesn't automatically mean they aren't neutral. In the course of my business pay auditors (the closest think to arbitrators I use) who are neutral. No problem.

No double standard. I always follow the money. Arbitration is far better that subscribers giving millions to greedy bloodsucking lawyers because the ISP blows up a notebook.


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA

reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather See Profile :

Meanwhile I always follow the money no matter who is telling their story.
No, you're obviously not following the money going to arbitrators. Why can an arbitrator remain neutral, even though it's in their interest to rule towards the company that hires them, but a think tank must have an agenda influenced by the source of their funding.

Sounds like you have a double standard when it comes to following the money.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP


1 edit
reply to KraziJoe
said by KraziJoe See Profile :

said by Dogfather See Profile :

This »www.informationweek.com/news/sho···06504123 is why Verizon has to have arbitration clauses.
Verizon will fix my notebook?
If they're responsible for destroying it. »www.macwork.com/2006/11/28/pics-···inferno/


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP


3 edits
reply to vpoko
said by vpoko See Profile :

Why don't you spend some time wondering who funds the arbitrators? And how can an arbitrator that's paid BY a company be neutral when handling that company's disputes?
Cause I know who funds them (arbitrators) and its' easy to be neutral.

In my business I pay my worker's comp auditor, ISO auditor, and a few others and they tell me to fix stuff and I don't fire them for it.

Meanwhile I always follow the money no matter who is telling their story.

KraziJoe

join:2006-09-08
Alexandria, VA
·Comcast

reply to Dogfather
said by Dogfather See Profile :

This »www.informationweek.com/news/sho···06504123 is why Verizon has to have arbitration clauses.
Verizon will fix my notebook?


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA
reply to Dogfather
Why don't you spend some time wondering who funds the arbitrators? And how can an arbitrator that's paid BY a company be neutral when handling that company's disputes?


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
reply to vpoko
I wonder who funds that think tank.


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA

reply to Dogfather
The study is here »www.citizen.org/documents/Final_wcover.pdf and it was 94%, not 97 - my mistake.

I have no problem with mandatory arbitration - if the company handling the arbitration doesn't have a relationship with either party.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP

reply to vpoko
Just because Comcast won doesn't mean they weren't justified in winning 97% of the time and it depends on what is defined as winning. I would like to see that study if you have a link to it.

And arbitration is a far better solution than having a subscriber funded bottomless trough for the bloodsucking lawyers.

I'm no fan of corporations, I just hate the blood sucking vampire lawyers who are ruining this country.


vpoko
Premium
join:2003-07-03
Jamaica Plain, MA

reply to Dogfather
How about that study that showed that Comcast wins 97% of their arbitration cases? Remember, the arbitator is NOT neutral, they're hired by the company. If a high enough percentage of cases don't go their way, they can be replaced. That's not what arbitration is supposed to be.


Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA
·Cox HSI
·Verizon FIOS
·Cox VOIP
·ViaTalk
·RoadRunner Cable
·MegaPath
·Verizon west (ex G..
·Time Warner VOIP


2 edits
reply to Skippy25
Let's get some facts straight, juries, not courts decide awards and that is why corporations have to have arbitration.

Arbitration doesn't mean immunity or automatic victory for corporations. It just means that the chances of avoiding a multi million dollar payout for something stupid like losing a notebook is far less likely.

To some here at DSLR, anything short of $50 million for a fried laptop is the corporation screwing over the customer.

This »www.informationweek.com/news/sho···06504123 is why Verizon has to have arbitration clauses.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

reply to Dogfather
Lets get some facts straight.

First and foremost it is the courts that should decide if a case has merit or not. If it doesn't, then it should be tossed. EVERY lawsuit should be reviewed by a panel and have the "Duh!" factor applied to it before even considering any evidence to allow it to proceed.

Second, if a company wants to do it then there are 2 things for sure. First, it hurts the consumer more than them. Second, it adds to their bottom line.

Third, companies like Verizon have a full time staff of lawyers that are paid regardless of whether or not they are sued.

Fourth, companies like Verizon use arbitration because it restricts the consumer's right to bring a true hearing against them which would be public record and put the consumer on a somewhat even playing field.

Lastly, companies like Verizon use arbitration because they know without question they will win virtually every case.
Forums » Exposing Verizon's FiOS Fine Print Trickery« Verizion et al  


Sunday, 29-Nov 16:12:52 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.
page compression OFF
Most commented news this week
· [124] Time Warner Cable Fires Broadside At Broadcasters
· [112] New AT&T Ad Campaign Hits Back At Verizon
· [96] Apple Joins AT&T Verizon Snark Fest
· [87] New Bill Takes Aim At Higher Verizon ETFs
· [80] TiVo Sees Record Customer Losses
· [78] Verizon CEO: Hulu Will Be Dead Soon
· [77] Weekend Open Thread
· [69] In-Flight Internet Headed For Bumpy Landing?
· [63] Thanksgiving Open Thread
· [41] ICANN Slams DNS Redirection
Most people now reading
· Is Easynews down? [Filesharing Software]
· Are GPS's better today? [General Questions]
· Windows 7 boot manager editing questions [Microsoft Help]
· Grey Cup on the Web? [Canadian Chat]
· What is the spell hit cap for a lvl 80 full arcane spec mage [World of Warcraft]
· Surfers beware !!! [TekSavvy]
· 3.x Feral Druid - Bear Tanking Guide [World of Warcraft]
· [Snow Leopard] NFS Mounts - no more Directory Utility [All Things Macintosh]
· Windows 7 - Dell ALPS Touchpad driver [Microsoft Help]
· Anyone have a problem [Software]