 
spike010101
Premium
join:2003-11-28
Lacey, WA | hmm why dont they have n isp move there? like road runner | |
|  | 
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Re: hmm I've looked over the contract they used. (got a few calls when they went under, people desperate for new service)
I guess greed is blinding for far too many ordinarily intelligent business people, because reading through this thing, I constantly heard SCAM being shouted from a bull horn in my head. So much so that I had to re-read several lines just to make sure it actually said what I thought it did, because I couldn't believe anyone with half a brain would sign such a thing.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | | 
DaSneaky1D
one wall to block them all
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-29
The Lou
 ·Charter Pipeline
| Re: hmm I've never seen their contract, but you wouldn't believe what people are willing to sign to. A little off topic, but:
While working at a police station, a lady had come in to complain about her landlord "breaking in" to her rented house. Well the wording on the contract she signed basically said that the he (the landlord) could come in anytime for any purpose he wanted. Well, this guy would come in while she was gone and during "indecent" times.
The police questioned him, but there was nothing they could do. Well, he turns around and offers her to sign another contract that said he could never be sued by her and can't be held liable for any past/future damages...she actually took a second before deciding not to sign it.
Greed is quite powerful.
--
] :: my trivial ramblings :: [ | |
| | | | | | | | |
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Re: hmm Yeah, the problem is, Norvergence covered their butts in Florida, at least with the clients I've been working with.
They didn't sign the equipment lease with the customer and then sell it like they did in other states. Here they actually had the customer go and sign a separate lease on the equipment itself, completely independent from their "service" contract. Essentially, they sold the equipment to local banks, who in turn leased it to local companies. Sure, the companies signed these leases with the understanding they would be getting the service end UBER cheap, but there is nothing in the lease contract that says as much, or anything close. They do specify however that the lease is independent of any service agreements.
Since the equipment works with other service providers, the only thing unconscionable about it is the price. But it is perfectly legal to sell a Pinto for $500,000, if you can find a buyer who agrees to pay that much.
I'm afraid the people they screwed will remain screwed, despite the legal efforts to fight it.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | | | | | JPCass
join:2001-01-23
Denver, CO
| Re: hmm said by Camelot One  :
Sure, the companies signed these leases with the understanding they would be getting the service end UBER cheap, but there is nothing in the lease contract that says as much, or anything close.
Does this reveal how the scam was based? That they made a lot of money selling the equipment up front, and then were able to charge very cheap rates for the service end - at least for a while? It sounds to me like people who bought into this, just looked at the cheap per-minute rate or whatever, and forgot to factor into that the exhorbitant leasing cost of the equipment - or the possible problem that a company charging below-market rates might not be able to keep up the cheap rates or even stay in business. Presumably they burned up the money they got selling the equipment - or siphoned off a lot of it - and then ran out of money to keep supporting below-market service rates. Like the Juice scam, it lures people with the promise that some sort of new technology will allow them to get something for less than the going rate. | |
| | | | | | |
Camelot One
Premium,MVM
join:2001-11-21
Sarasota, FL
clubs:
| Re: hmm Well, I can tell you exactly how this scam was based, at least here.
Norvergence would send in a sales rep, who would look over the customers previous 6 months worth of phone bills. They would then offer them a package of equipment + service that totaled 80% of what they had been paying. The average service rate here was $250 per month, with the difference being the equipment lease. So if a company had been paying $1000 a month for phone service, they were now paying $250 for the service, and $550 per month on the lease. (5 year lease by the way)
This is why no two companies are out the same amount of money, the lease value is variable.
Just the T1 loops run around $450 here, so they were offering the "service" end at a loss. And yes, to me this proves it was an obvious scam right from the start, not a company that went under due to bad management.
What I'd like to know is where all the lease money went. Take the above example.....the client signed a lease with the bank, the bank cut NorVergence a check for $33,000. ($550x60 months) Even deducting funds to cover the remaining T1 loop charge for a few months, someone is sitting on some fat cash.
--
AMD A64 3200+/ MSI K8N Neo/ 2x 512Mb Kingston HyperX PC4000/ WD 74Gb Raptor/ Gainward GF4 4600/Gainward 5200PCI/ Antec 550 True Control/Custom water cooler | |
| | | | | | | 
Ricks au
@direcpc.com
| We were one of the "scammed" companies. The paperwork we signed was in very small print, the salesperson was instructed to veer our attention elsewhere so we wouldn't read the details. It was very confusing even when you do have time to read it. It was titled "Equipment Rental", not lease, with Norvergence as the Renter. The deal was never described to us as a 2 part service and equipment rental. It was presented in one lump sum. Several months later we received equipment leasing bills. I actually had to call the leasing company to find out what it was for. | |
| | | | | | |
C B Signs
@aol.com
| I have a sign company in Boca Raton, FL. Have you obtained a lawyer on your own or have you gone with a class action? Our leasing company is IFC Credit Corp.(out of Morton Grove, IL) Is this the same lease holder that you have? Being we are in Florida, they are saying it would not be wise to join a class action with a lawyer out of New Jersey. Have you heard anything regarding this? Please let me know how you are handling this mess we have gotten into.
Thanks | |
| 
Voyager2K2
join:2001-10-04
Wayne, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
| These Were Some Bad Guys! Hope the law catches up with them and gives them a good spanking for every crime they committed.
I feel bad for all those folks stuck paying those leases, but your lease has nothing to do with Norvergence IMHO.
Hopefully the courts will see differently.
Good luck!!!!  | |
| 
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB
2 edits | Maybe the leasing companies are ones fleeced I'm not a lawyer, but if I recall correctly, for a contract to be valid and enforceable in most jurisdictions:
- there has to be offer and acceptance
- there has to be consideration (i.e. both sides have to exchange something of value)
- the contract cannot be for an illegal activity
- the parties have to be legally competent (i.e. over 18, not drunk, etc.)
- no party may conceal a material fact from the other parties
So it might turn out that the leasing companies are the ones who have been fleeced.
It depends on what the judges say on the day they make the ruling, but it could be readily argued that:
1. A contract to collect money for fraud is a contract for an illegal activity.
In this case it would not matter whether the leasor knew that the activity was illegal or not -- the contract they have to collect the money would be void.
2. The leasees didn't know the devices were unnecessary, but the party arranging the contracts with the leasing companies did. In this case also it also might not matter that the leasing companies didn't know that material facts were being concealed -- their agents did.
Maybe the leasing companies are the ones who "took advantage of an offer too good to be true."
Like I said above, I'm not a lawyer, and I think it would come down to what a judge rules on the day.
That partly comes down to who is prepared to spend the most money on lawyers: The companies defrauded, or the leasing companies? And can the leasing companies lobby elected officials to direct law enforcement to end its participation on the side of the leasees. | |
| | hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY
| Re: Maybe the leasing companies are ones fleeced If the lease had a clause that it could be sold as many financial contracts do (ie mortgage companies sell mortgages all the time). If the contracts stated they would not resell the paper then that would make the bank dumber than the people who got taken. A bank would have lawyer review any paper they are buying. | |
|
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB
| To good to be true in telecommunications? In fields with rapidly changing prices and products, like telecommunications, "Too good to be true" is virtually impossible for for small business owners and individuals to evaluate.
A few years ago $40 a month DSL and 5 cent per minute phone calls would have been "too good to be true".
A few months ago 3Mbps residential DSL would have been "too good to be true".
And yet these offers turned out to be legitimate offers.
The top 4 reasons cops say victims should have known than to believe an "offer too good to be true":
1. Victims should blame themselves for being dumb, rather than the police for being incompetent at stopping these criminals year after year after year.
2. You want us to go out in this weather and question people?
3. Don't get between me and my donuts!
4. I've got more important things to do (like talk about last night's game with the guys in the lunch room).
--
(Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
| jester121
join:2003-08-09
Lake Zurich, IL
 ·surpasshosting
 ·ViaTalk
| It's well known... The whole Norvergence thing was a pyramid scheme. I dealt with them on behalf of a couple clients and smelled a rat right away -- in large part due to some gigantic broadbandreports.com threads.
If anyone's really interested, go to the VOIP forum here and do a search. You have to be a premium member to find the threads, cause this was almost a year ago. | |
| hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY
| Norvergence fooled many I had the displeasure of speaking with Norvergence workers, they were idiots. They were scammers from the start. in NY they would have the customers phone bill sent to Norvergence but the billing name was still the customers, then Norvergence got the customers to pay them and did not pay the telco. Then the customers would get disconnected and call to find out that they were responsible for a large bill and to get their phones turned back on they would have to pay again. Norvergence screwed everyone they did business with.
----Caveat emptor----- | |
| 
NS4683
join:2000-08-25
Hoboken, NJ | Nothing but a scam... We said it was a scam back in Dec 2003 when this thread was posted. People defended the company so adamantly and look what happened. We told you so. | |
| alexm999
join:2003-01-25
Vernon Hills, IL
| A Response I've been studying the Norvergence model and have been reading up on all the messages on these and many other forums. What looked like a scam at the end actually started up as a very smart business model. I've crunched all the numbers with multiple scenerios and it always comes up the same: You can make money.
The only problem was greed and building out too fast. The upper management knew that they made a mistake and that their sales machine would run out of gas. Instead of closing markets and going back to their core business plan, they continued building out.
Alot of people are putting this company down, but in reality they did help start the "Unlimited" fixed cost Local and LD packages. It was just a few really bad eggs at the top who crushed this company and the many individuals who put their blood and sweat into a product that did work... | |
|
Israel Gomez
@birch.net |  Bankruptcy court
| |
| John Milne
join:2004-09-22
Saint Petersburg, FL
|  What is Norvergence sowing?
| |
| | | |
|
|
