dslreports logo
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery


how-to block ads

Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

Sudbury, ON
reply to MaynardKrebs

Re: Incompetent technician cut off my Internet!

said by MaynardKrebs:

said by nitzguy:

Listen, unless you can prove GROSS NEGLIGENCE on the part of Bell/Tech its a moot point, it was a simple accident, these things happen...

Just because 'accidents happen' does not mean that the victim is SOL.

You rear-end somebody in your car and what happens to the victim's repair costs? Either your insurance company pays, or you do out-of-pocket. Bell is self-insured & TSI is self-insured.

TSI is responsible to directly compensate the customer as they are the so called 'service provider'. Bell is responsible for contributory negligence in the same way that jerkass parents are if their kid leaves the moveable basketball post/net in the street at night and you drive down the road and smack into it (happens in Forest Hill where some people think they own the road too).

Yes....but in this case you're equating a car accident with a service interruption....the 2 are not the same.

TSI would have to provide restitution up to and including the days they are without service, so you take whatever rate he pays, and if its a 30 day billing cycle or a 31 day billing cycle, you divide accordingly, so 6 days in 30 days would be 1/5th of the months service...

So in an example, lets say he had unlimited DSL 25.... it would be 1/5th of 77.99/month...or a credit of roughly $15.59 on his account, not this $100/day from both TSI and Bell...if anything the TSI case would be thrown out as its not their technician and they wouldn't be found negligent...

Even in a small claims court, the burden of proof is still on the Plantiff to PROVE that there was negligence on the part of the Tech that he didn't want to do his job or actively cut the line, there again are these things called mistakes, but its not about insurance...

Again, you're trying to equate Car rules with service interruption rules and the 2 are mutually exclusive, he agreed when he signed on for the service to agree to the Terms and Conditions...he had an out, if he didn't want to exercise that out, that's his perogative...

Again I wish the OP luck.....but as others have said, maybe someone else would be happy to have his service....