Clearwire Sued Over ETFs, Poor Service > it's okay

it's okay

The old pre-WiMax Clearwire equipment is different, you are getting fixed wireless installed at the location for which the contract is signed. There are equipment and installation costs that Clearwire can't just absorb if a customer does not fulfill their contractual obligation. With the fixed pre-WiMax service, Clearwire has every right to charge and NOT waive ETF's. I realize things do come up and people are forced to move, but how is that Clearwire's fault? It's not. The customer signs the contract committing to a set term and must pay up if they can't fulfill it.

Clearwire can justify the ETF since they probably have to pay employees or contractors to come out and uninstall the fixed wireless equipment when someone breaks their contract. That costs $$$.

so shit happens and ur screwed? it's one thing if they dont get equipment back in usable shape but come on. how about being reasonable?

i had the service now i may be doing an apples to oranges but mine wasn't portable it had to be plugged in and the service sucked.

edit: they didnt install anything. in fact once i had the thing home it took i want to say three days to provision. whats that all about?

they on the phone at least claim to be jsut like cable or dsl or even better except when it comes to turn in of equipment.

i did read the contract but it's been a while and i didnt then and dont now recall anything about once contract is up we will charge you first. then refund, once hardware shows up. which is what they told me. so i asked about local turn in to the guy i got it from to begin with claim its not possible etc.
--
my site

If they cannot provide the service that was specified in the contract, then they should consider letting customers OOC for a reduced ETF as long as they get their equipment back. I'm not against working with the customer, especially if they aren't receiving the service at a level that was sold to them. That's different than just up and moving and expecting them to waive the ETF. The big cell phone companies can afford to do that, but not a much smaller company like Clearwire.

im sorry because they are a smaller nationwide company they get a pass?

i realize that's not exactly what you meant but being as though i am a customer that they did dirty im a bit sensitive to them in particular.

truly that's what i would be and am after is for companies regardless of size to be reasonable
--
my site

reply to boogi man
So you are saying contract law should be discarded because it's not convenient to certain customers? If Clearwire holds up their end, why should they take the hit because a customer wants to break a contract they entered into willingly?
--
Out the 10BaseT, through the modem, down the co-ax, over the fiber, across the backhaul, past the edge router, off the network...nothing but net

reply to boogi man
mitigating circumstances. the contract is to stiff. if i have to move due to some unforeseen issue. why does that mean that i have to pay extra? the point i think of etf's isnt to punish someone who moves but rather to keep a person from being a service provider butterfly. because that would be costly to the company.
--
my site

If the contract is too stiff, then the consumer should not have signed it in the first place. Yes, you should have to pay "extra" if you move to an unforeseen issue; paying the ETF is what you agreed to do after all. An ETF is not about punishment but about recouping certain costs, although refusing to prorate is probably used primarily as a way to prevent churn.

Contract law is pretty specific. Under which part of the law do you think the contract should me cancelled? (Hint: "mitigating circumstances" is not a legitimate reason) »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contract_l···contract
--
Out the 10BaseT, through the modem, down the co-ax, over the fiber, across the backhaul, past the edge router, off the network...nothing but net

reply to boogi man
so this law then is absolute?

last time i looked it was these companies not being willing to meet the customer that cause lawsuits like these in order to get the law changed to reflect the current reality that these companies operate in.

because they are so big they have to work in numbers only which dehumanizes them. these suits force them to correct albeit not perfectly but better than before.
--
my site

When a company is sued it is done within the confines of contract law.

Again, under what part of contract law do you think applies if one wishes to cancel because they move? What law gives someone the right to break a contract in this situation?
--
Out the 10BaseT, through the modem, down the co-ax, over the fiber, across the backhaul, past the edge router, off the network...nothing but net