| |
Hemp Shampoo
Anon
2013-Dec-11 6:21 pm
Guys House burns down. No cable for months. Rogers bills him $1.2KRogers charges ailing man $1.2G for cable at home destroyed in fire » www.torontosun.com/2013/ ··· -in-fireAn Ottawa man wants answers after being hit with a huge Rogers bill for services that stayed active at his house months after it burned to the ground.
Still reeling from the loss of his home in March and almost everything in it, Gary Cartwright was shocked when a collections agency called him and said he owed $1,288 on a delinquent Rogers bill.
He was also told his cable had been shut off because of non-payment in September, months after his home was destroyed. ...Continues...I'm a little dense so maybe someone here can explain to me how a Rogers tech disconnects their cable from a non-existent house? Maybe Rogers will file with the CRTC to increase prices for truck rolls to invisible houses now too? The possibility is there... |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 6:21 pm · (locked) |
 pnjunctionTeksavvy Extreme
Premium Member
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
2 edits
1 recommendation |
Gary Cartwright, who suffers from multiple sclerosis and is battling cancer ...should have cancelled his cable after his house burned down. I don't like Rogers but how are they supposed to know he wasn't using the service anymore. AFAIK they get no automatic update that a house is destroyed someone needs to tell them. Rogers could be a bro and forgive the bill...but this is Rogers and I don't think they are obligated. The reason for including the quote is that it doesn't matter how many sicknesses this guy has Rogers still didn't know his house burned down if he didn't tell them. I hate those emotional appeals. "Disabled war vet with many horrible diseases angry that everything didn't go their way" Stuff it. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 6:46 pm · (locked) |
| |
Hemp Chips
Anon
2013-Dec-11 7:04 pm
said by pnjunction:...should have cancelled his cable after his house burned down. Apparently he did. AND, let us assume he didn't. Just to play along with this. How exactly does a tech disconnect a cable from a non-existent house? |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 7:04 pm · (locked) |
| |
said by Hemp Chips :said by pnjunction:...should have cancelled his cable after his house burned down. Apparently he did. AND, let us assume he didn't. Just to play along with this. How exactly does a tech disconnect a cable from a non-existent house? Or what about the returned to sender bills? I'm sure there was no one at the address to receive the mail..... |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 7:31 pm · (locked) |
| |
to Hemp Chips
said by Hemp Chips :said by pnjunction:...should have cancelled his cable after his house burned down. Apparently he did. AND, let us assume he didn't. Just to play along with this. How exactly does a tech disconnect a cable from a non-existent house? The house burned, not the pole, so the technician disconnect the cable at the tap on the pole. It's important particularly if the cable is cut near the pole and it is still connected to the tap, the cable has to be disconnected to avoir signal leakage and also avoid interferences on the cable plant. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 7:52 pm · (locked) |
| |
to Hemp Shampoo
I bet he was under a contract. I don't think there are provisions under a contract that negates him having to pay his bills. Plus wouldn't he have called rogers to say that he's moving to a new address and they'd just transfer his account to another address till he can move back in and then charge him for all the equipment as lost? Sure his house burned down, but he's not going to use cable/internet/home phone anymore in the mean time? |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 8:49 pm · (locked) |
| |
Hemp Balm to cielbleu
Anon
2013-Dec-11 8:54 pm
to cielbleu
said by cielbleu :The house burned, not the pole, so the technician disconnect the cable at the tap on the pole. It's important particularly if the cable is cut near the pole and it is still connected to the tap, the cable has to be disconnected to avoir signal leakage and also avoid interferences on the cable plant. I guess that's a good reply. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 8:54 pm · (locked) |
 Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON |
to Hemp Shampoo
I suspect this is something his insurance would cover, so long as he has it. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 8:58 pm · (locked) |
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON |
to aereolis
said by aereolis:I bet he was under a contract. I don't think there are provisions under a contract that negates him having to pay his bills. Plus wouldn't he have called rogers to say that he's moving to a new address and they'd just transfer his account to another address till he can move back in and then charge him for all the equipment as lost? Sure his house burned down, but he's not going to use cable/internet/home phone anymore in the mean time? There's provisions in the Telecommunications act: quote:
27. (1) Every rate charged by a Canadian carrier for a telecommunications service shall be just and reasonable.
After Rogers has been informed it's impossible for the person to receive service due to the home burning down, and the person being in the hospital and having no permanent home, Rogers can't legally keep charging him for the service they're not providing. It's why if you're under contract and you move into an area that doesn't have Rogers service, they legally can't make you keep paying for it. They MIGHT be able to charge ETF however, but usually they'll waive it. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 9:15 pm · (locked) |
|
| |
Hemp Soap to aereolis
Anon
2013-Dec-11 9:22 pm
to aereolis
said by aereolis:Sure his house burned down, but he's not going to use cable/internet/home phone anymore in the mean time? Nope. His house insurance has been paying him to live in a hotel all this time. |
actions · 2013-Dec-11 9:22 pm · (locked) |
taraf
join:2011-05-07
Ottawa, ON |
to aereolis
said by aereolis:I bet he was under a contract. I don't think there are provisions under a contract that negates him having to pay his bills. Plus wouldn't he have called rogers to say that he's moving to a new address and they'd just transfer his account to another address till he can move back in and then charge him for all the equipment as lost? Sure his house burned down, but he's not going to use cable/internet/home phone anymore in the mean time? I know this thread is about Rogers, but I'm pretty sure that Bell would let somebody out of a contract for something like that.... At the very least, they'd let you have a seasonal suspension of services, which amounts to the same thing. Can Rogers not see that there was no usage on the account during that period, and void the bill? I know that Bell can do that... I have a feeling that there's more to the story that isn't reported. I have a seething hatred for Rogers (to the point that if I ever did live in an area where Rogers was the only option, I'd get Inmarsat), but I have a hard time believing that they're *that* incompetent. |
actions · 2013-Dec-12 7:54 am · (locked) |
 LazMan
Premium Member
join:2003-03-26
Beverly Hills, CA |
to Hemp Shampoo
Every once in a while, one of these stories bubbles up...
Rogers (and Bell, and I imagine most other companies) are typically very reasonable in these situations; and generally do the right thing.
If Rogers wasn't informed the house burned (and often they aren't - notifying the cable company after a major fire isn't at the top of the list for most people) - the bills continue to build up... When the bill ages "x" amount, it's automatically sent to collections.
As for 'disconnection' - rarely do they send a tech - most often, they just disable the digital terminals remotely.
I'm guessing had the homeowner called Rogers, they would have waived the bills and back charges (although they usually want a police or fire report, just for documentation), and let him out of any contract terms left... If there were any digital terminals involved; they would charge the homeowner's insurance policy for the equipment lost. |
actions · 2013-Dec-12 8:10 am · (locked) |
mr weather
Premium Member
join:2002-02-27
Mississauga, ON |
said by LazMan:Rogers (and Bell, and I imagine most other companies) are typically very reasonable in these situations; and generally do the right thing. Except in this case it's being handled by a piece of shit collections agency who doesn't care. |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 11:36 am · (locked) |
yyzlhr
join:2012-09-03
Scarborough, ON |
to LazMan
said by LazMan:Every once in a while, one of these stories bubbles up...
Rogers (and Bell, and I imagine most other companies) are typically very reasonable in these situations; and generally do the right thing.
If Rogers wasn't informed the house burned (and often they aren't - notifying the cable company after a major fire isn't at the top of the list for most people) - the bills continue to build up... When the bill ages "x" amount, it's automatically sent to collections.
As for 'disconnection' - rarely do they send a tech - most often, they just disable the digital terminals remotely.
I'm guessing had the homeowner called Rogers, they would have waived the bills and back charges (although they usually want a police or fire report, just for documentation), and let him out of any contract terms left... If there were any digital terminals involved; they would charge the homeowner's insurance policy for the equipment lost. In the article the customer claims that he did contact Rogers to cancel the service. Either Rogers screwed up the cancellation or the customer is lying about the extent of his communications with Rogers. |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 2:50 pm · (locked) |
MaynardKrebsWe did it. We heaved Steve. Yipee.
Premium Member
join:2009-06-17 |
said by yyzlhr:In the article the customer claims that he did contact Rogers to cancel the service. Either Rogers screwed up the cancellation or the customer is lying about the extent of his communications with Rogers. Or Rogers just didn't do what they agreed to do. A family member contacted Bell recently to install an internet-only connection at a 2nd residence he has just acquired. He has a full suite of Bell services (phone/internet/tv/cell) at his primary address. He wanted the bill for the 2nd residence tacked onto his primary bill. No problem, said Bell. You're a customer of long standing, never missed a payment, great credit rating. We'll see you on the 10th to do the install. The 10th rolls around and the 8am-noon install window comes and goes. No tech, no internet. He calls Bell and is told that they need to do a credit check before they can do an install. He goes ballistic on Bell. The Bell rep then checks the account and sees that it was all previously done - credit check, etc.... Some mumbled apology, and the install is rescheduled. The family member is a lawyer, who bills out @ $800/hr. Bell is going to be sued in small claims court for 4 hours of time, just on principle. |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 3:20 pm · (locked) |
taraf
join:2011-05-07
Ottawa, ON |
taraf
Member
2013-Dec-13 3:47 pm
said by MaynardKrebs:The family member is a lawyer, who bills out @ $800/hr. Bell is going to be sued in small claims court for 4 hours of time, just on principle. Amusing. I wish him luck. Doubt it'll go very far, as Bell offers install windows outside of normal working hours specifically so that customers don't have to miss time. For him to have missed work during that install window, he had to elect to have the install at that time: he could easily have had it in the evening or on the weekend, or delegated an agent to stay at the address to receive the tech instead of himself (Bell doesn't require the homeowner, only somebody over the age of 18 with the permission of the homeowner). It's also in the terms&conditions that Bell disavows any liablity for lost work/time. Any lawyer worth their salt would tell your friend that it's a fool's errand, and not worth the time to file. You sure your family member is actually worth $800/hr? |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 3:47 pm · (locked) |
| |
ta yeule to yyzlhr
Anon
2013-Dec-13 4:46 pm
to yyzlhr
said by yyzlhr:In the article the customer claims that he did contact Rogers to cancel the service. Either Rogers screwed up the cancellation or the customer is lying about the extent of his communications with Rogers. A little while ago my wife was sitting next to me when called rogers to cancel her cell. They tried to give her a new phone and stuff to keep her, but she refused. It went smooth. It was cancelled. HEH. After her call I told her to call back the next day to confirm it, because Bell and Rogers are, well, Bell and Rogers. So the next day she does. She finds out the guy she spoke to cancel put her in a 3 year contract (with her old cell). She passed me the phone and after swearing at the rogers monkey at the other end it was gone (was a 25-minute ordeal where I was transferred and they pulled the call from the previous day). So.... Yup. I have absolutely zero doubts this guy didn't lie. Not one. Matter of fact, I bet Rogers put all and any of his services on a renewed 3 year contract when he called to cancel due to his house no longer existing. |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 4:46 pm · (locked) |
| |
said by ta yeule :said by yyzlhr:In the article the customer claims that he did contact Rogers to cancel the service. Either Rogers screwed up the cancellation or the customer is lying about the extent of his communications with Rogers. A little while ago my wife was sitting next to me when called rogers to cancel her cell. They tried to give her a new phone and stuff to keep her, but she refused. It went smooth. It was cancelled. HEH. After her call I told her to call back the next day to confirm it, because Bell and Rogers are, well, Bell and Rogers. So the next day she does. She finds out the guy she spoke to cancel put her in a 3 year contract (with her old cell). She passed me the phone and after swearing at the rogers monkey at the other end it was gone (was a 25-minute ordeal where I was transferred and they pulled the call from the previous day). So.... Yup. I have absolutely zero doubts this guy didn't lie. Not one. Matter of fact, I bet Rogers put all and any of his services on a renewed 3 year contract when he called to cancel due to his house no longer existing. After my longstanding battle with Rogers a few years ago, they dropped me as a customer. How is this relevant, you ask? They kept sending me bills, even though my account was paid in full when they dropped me. They kept charging me for a service, they, themselves refused to give me. At one point I even had collections calling to try and retrieve the money which had grown to several hundred dollars at this point. It took the Office of the President almost a year to get it straightened out. Did this guy actually call and cancel his services. I would bet my kids that he did. |
actions · 2013-Dec-13 5:03 pm · (locked) |
 elwoodbluesElwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in |
to taraf
They won't even show up, it's cheaper to pay the 3200 bucks then show up in court. |
actions · 2013-Dec-14 5:25 pm · (locked) |
| |
to rednekcowboy
It's over. » cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Can ··· 861.html"Thank you for bringing this to our attention," Luiza Staniec, Roger's public relations manger, said in an e-mail.
She said the company had reviewed Cartwright's file and would "be contacting him to offer our apologies and to discuss the steps we've taken to resolve the matter." ...
"(The VP) said he was going to erase everything," Cartwright said of the charges. ...
He had said he wasn't going to give the collections agency a dime, but was concerned about how easily it seemed somebody's credit could be damaged by an erroneous cable bill.
"It's not just me, other people are dealing with it," he said. Indeed. The CCTS stated the same thing. |
actions · 2013-Dec-15 10:49 pm · (locked) |
| |
to resa1983
What roger did is just and reasonable. Pay up or get sued by collection agency and then get money taken by them from your bank. Next time i am sure he will keep paying his bill monthly. |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 4:41 pm · (locked) |
elwoodbluesElwood Blues
Premium Member
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in |
said by 40757180:What roger did is just and reasonable. Pay up or get sued by collection agency and then get money taken by them from your bank. Next time i am sure he will keep paying his bill monthly. #1 never let anyone near you bank account, because when they mess up (and they do) they have almost zero incentive to fix it. However when you owe them money, they'll do what they can to fix the problem. |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 4:43 pm · (locked) |
1 recommendation |
Crack heads to 40757180
Anon
2013-Dec-17 6:23 pm
to 40757180
Pay up or get sued? Crack 2for1 over there? He was paid up. Zero owing. Did you even read the link? House burned down. What does Rogers want? 30-days advance notice prior to your house burning down? |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 6:23 pm · (locked) |
| |
said by Crack heads :Pay up or get sued? Crack 2for1 over there? He was paid up. Zero owing. Did you even read the link? House burned down. What does Rogers want? 30-days advance notice prior to your house burning down? Wouldn't surprise me if they have a hidden clause in their TOS that actually says something like that.... |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 6:54 pm · (locked) |
resa1983
Premium Member
join:2008-03-10
North York, ON |
to Crack heads
said by Crack heads :Pay up or get sued? Crack 2for1 over there? He was paid up. Zero owing. Did you even read the link? House burned down. What does Rogers want? 30-days advance notice prior to your house burning down? Its pretty stupid that I can 'dislike' an anon's comments if I want, but I can't 'dislike' a registered user's comments for not bothering to read what the thread was about. |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 7:45 pm · (locked) |
| |
Pot brownies
Anon
2013-Dec-17 11:27 pm
Dislike me. I DARE YOU! *flexes muscles and IP's*  |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 11:27 pm · (locked) |
 HiVolt
Premium Member
join:2000-12-28
Toronto, ON |
to resa1983
said by resa1983:Its pretty stupid that I can 'dislike' an anon's comments if I want, but I can't 'dislike' a registered user's comments for not bothering to read what the thread was about. DSLR had a thumbs down for a little while... not sure why it was removed. |
actions · 2013-Dec-17 11:32 pm · (locked) |
| |
to Hemp Shampoo
corporate greed knows no bounds |
actions · 2013-Dec-18 11:38 pm · (locked) |
loyd
join:2012-09-24
Toronto, ON |
to MaynardKrebs
The install window is not a legal contract. Secondly, you can request to be called when they leave for your house, so you can come and meet them at premises. Third, a $800/hr lawyer can do a whole lot work sitting at home (or sitting anywhere) as most of the lawyer's job consists of sitting and reading/writing, does not need to be waiting idle for 4hrs for the tech to show up to install $40/m line.
I wish people did not file frivolous lawsuits, it's just so annoying. Apparently 80% of all lawsuits in Canada are thrown out. |
actions · 2013-Dec-27 3:58 am · (locked) |
Gone
Premium Member
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON |
Gone
Premium Member
2013-Dec-27 9:42 am
said by loyd:Third, a $800/hr lawyer can do a whole lot work sitting at home (or sitting anywhere) as most of the lawyer's job consists of sitting and reading/writing No. A legal assistant's job consists of sitting and reading/writing. A lawyer is in the business of selling time to clients. If they are unable to sell that time, they lose money. |
actions · 2013-Dec-27 9:42 am · (locked) |
