NY AGs Office: Verizon to Reimburse $1 million for Deception

Polaro · Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 6:50 pm Post subject: LOL

To all you Verizon apologists who said they would get away with their lying, I guess I was right and you were wrong. Nice to see someone sticking up for truth in advertising. Unlimited means unlimited. I almost can't believe this happened because it is so right. Laughing

_________________
Victor

southsanfran · EVDO User Joined: 21 Apr 2007 Posts: 55

Given that some of the most affluent and influential people in the world live in NY and would be naturally attracted to EVDO, it's no surprise Verizon was held accountable.

Alex · Posted: Tue Oct 23, 2007 9:13 pm Post subject:

Here's a thought... will other states follow suit? will FCC get involved?

southsanfran · EVDO User Joined: 21 Apr 2007 Posts: 55

According to the press release, Verizon has provided restitution nationally, not just for NY. This probably is because the cost of doing so is trivial to Verizon.

jackrodgers · EVDO Addict Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 1131

Alex · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 6:14 am Post subject:

I'm going to put a lot of focus on this phrase in that release:

"Verizon Wireless has voluntarily ceased cutting off customers based on their data usage and no longer prohibits common internet uses."

The legal department would not allow that to have been published exactly that way, unless they were willing to get sued over it.

This explains why 3gstore has not heard of any verizon customer being terminated for 'abuse' in so long, even though they know they routinely transfer in excess of 5gb per month.

In my mind, the "5GB Issue" is a moot point, henceforth.

Alex · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 8:34 am Post subject:

Upon careful re-analysis of the NYAG release, I've come to form another opinion. (shocking. i know. go figure.)

During the past few months, I've had many potential verizon customers who fear the 5Gb threshold express concern that they would be subjected to an 'early termination fee' (ETF) if they were terminated for abuse. Some would mention reading on this forum or another, conflicting information about whether or not verizon charged an ETF to those they terminated for abuse.

The way I read it, the settlement clearly stated that the reimbursements were for the cost of equipment that customers were unable to get refunds on after being terminated.

There was never a mention of any ETF reimbursements, and in my mind they would have had to mention it, if thats what any of the reimbursements were for.

This leads me to form the opinion that customers who were terminated for abuse were never charged an ETF.

Polaro · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 10:57 am Post subject: Re: LOL

Jack, man, I know guys like you - who will make an argument out of anything and the more obscure the point the happier they are. If you're going to ramble on at least stop talking in circles trying to find silly ways to dissect the issue to support your losing point. Lying is lying and deceptive advertising = lying. Advertising does not equal lying as you state.

And if you think it is just having a better lawyer, want to bet Verizon does not appeal this decision. They got called on their BS and now they are paying their punitive fine and marching forward. It cost them a million bucks to basically keep everyone else in line out of fear. Guess it actually was a good investment for them. Shame it reinforces the stereotypical bumbling, inept utility view many people have. All they had to do in the beginning was to not put "Unlimited" in 40 pt type in their ads when they had no intention of honoring it.
_________________
Victor

bradsjm · EVDO User Joined: 05 May 2005 Posts: 29

rwithers · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm Post subject:

Alex · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:37 pm Post subject:

headcase · Posted: Wed Oct 24, 2007 4:10 pm Post subject:

But in any case, their *existing* terms clearly state that:

"Data Plans and Features (such as NationalAccess, BroadbandAccess, GlobalAccess, and certain VZEmail services that do not include a specific monthly MB allowance or are not billed on a pay-as-you-go basis) may ONLY be used with wireless devices for the following purposes: (i) Internet browsing; (ii) email; and (iii) intranet access (including access to corporate intranets, email, and individual productivity applications like customer relationship management, sales force, and field service automation). These Data Plans and Features MAY NOT be used for any other purpose. Examples of prohibited uses include, without limitation, the following: (i) continuous uploading, downloading, or streaming of audio or video programming or games; (ii) server devices or host computer applications, including, but not limited to, Web camera posts or broadcasts, automatic data feeds, automated machine to-machine connections or peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing; or (iii) as a substitute or backup for private lines or dedicated data connections. This means, by way of example only, that checking email, surfing the Internet, downloading legally acquired songs, and/or visiting corporate intranets is permitted, but downloading movies using P2P file-sharing services and/or redirecting television programming content for viewing on laptops is prohibited."

Revised 7/24/07.
http://b2b.vzw.com/broadband/bba_terms.html

Some things never change... thank goodness Sprint isn't so ridiculous.

mhtyler · EVDO Heavy User Joined: 01 Jul 2007 Posts: 143

The issue of right or wrong is key in the case. I would never have chosen Verizon because the most casual information I gathered about their plan showed a fair usage clause. So I do wonder how ignorance can be claimed in New York.

I've never been impressed with Verizon and fair usage is a poor policy, but when you're not reading what your signing who is deceiving who? My sympathy is with the subscribers, but I wonder if the law will be ultimately.

mark
_________________
Mostly Harmless

clownz · EVDO Fledgling Joined: 23 Sep 2007 Posts: 21

If you read the last part where it says "common internet usage", who's not to say in a few months P2P will be labeled uncommon internet usage. See, that statement can also be deceptive. I had a friend who walked back into a Verizon store and asked them specifically, if I use Verizon's EVDO for gaming will I get termed', the rep adv him yes, he would get termed eventually.

Are they going to redisclose for new customers?, and maybe the agreement will only hold true for prev existing customers.

Verizon is a very smart company legally and is held together by many great investors (especially with FIOS) and has also cooperated in the past with turning info over against the ACLU's thoughts of customers privacy.

The questions is : Are their spying eyes with Verizon's new "unlimited usage" and is it good only for prev customers. Time will tell.