 LinklistPremium
join:2002-03-03
Longport, NJ
kudos:5 | reply to moonpuppy
Re: O.k. stuff like this has to stop said by moonpuppy:Seriously, threatening someone in an active litigation should be grounds for criminal prosecution. ATT has no right to threaten someone for not sitting down to talks.
The ATT lawyers involved need to have their licenses suspended or revoked.
Threatening someone with BUSINESS & SERVICE consequences isn't a crime. That is just doing business and happens everyday in thousands of lawsuit negotiations. Now if they threatened to break his legs, that would be a crime.
--
The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, I'm from the government and I'm here to help.
»www.politico.com/2012-election/
|
|
 DaveDudeNo Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey
kudos:1
 ·ViaTalk
·Vonage
| reply to Linklist
Re: O.k. stuff like this has to stop said by Linklist:said by moonpuppy:Seriously, threatening someone in an active litigation should be grounds for criminal prosecution. ATT has no right to threaten someone for not sitting down to talks.
The ATT lawyers involved need to have their licenses suspended or revoked.
Threatening someone with BUSINESS & SERVICE consequences isn't a crime. That is just doing business and happens everyday in thousands of lawsuit negotiations. Now if they threatened to break his legs, that would be a crime. It is retaliatory, and in reaction to a present case of litigation. So its very relevant. Its not just some user, breaking TOS.
--
They Live... We Sleep...
“Spreading the wealth around” never results in a better outcome for people. It always results in destruction.
|
|
Reviews:
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Mediacom
 ·T-Mobile US
| reply to Linklist
I support that. Moreover imagine I am unfairly suing you for molesting mr in court which I loose . Then imagine u can't sue me back for frivolous litigation.
Or maybe something more in line with AT&T, I stop providing tutoring to your kids because u sued me for dog bite when u taunted him. Fair and square and I don't see anything wrong with that! |
|
| reply to DaveDude
said by DaveDude:said by Linklist:Threatening someone with BUSINESS & SERVICE consequences isn't a crime. That is just doing business and happens everyday in thousands of lawsuit negotiations. Now if they threatened to break his legs, that would be a crime.
It is retaliatory, and in reaction to a present case of litigation. So its very relevant. Its not just some user, breaking TOS. BINGO! It is retaliatory and strong arm. |
|
| reply to Linklist
Re: O.k. stuff like this has to stop The difference is that negotiations are over. The court has already issued a decision and the case is therefore settled unless the guy voluntarily wants to reopen it. AT&T can appeal the decision but until an appeal is granted, the decision stands. This sort of thing does happen all the time in legal proceedings PRE-TRIAL. This is post trial. I agree. This action crosses the line into extortion. |
|
 vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | reply to Linklist
Re: O.k. stuff like this has to stop They can probably cancel his service, either at the end of his contract or because he admittedly violated the TOS by tethering, but "meet with us or we'll cancel your service" might well fall under the crime and tort of extortion.
What's more serious for them is the PR hit. They obviously did not want him going to the AP with their threat. |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | said by vpoko:What's more serious for them is the PR hit.
Like they ever cared about that. |
|
vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | Of course they do, else they wouldn't have asked him not to disclose the letter. |
|
RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | said by vpoko:Of course they do, else they wouldn't have asked him not to disclose the letter.
No, that's standard procedure. |
|
vpokoPremium
join:2003-07-03
Boston, MA | It's standard procedure that exists due to PR reasons. |
|
| reply to Anon
He never said anything useful to begin with smart one! READ! |
|
|
|
RobIn Deo speramus.Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:3 | reply to vpoko
said by vpoko:It's standard procedure that exists due to PR reasons.
I think it's more for legal and not PR. |
|
 skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| reply to Linklist
I think their liability would be limited to any consequential damages stemming from the disconnect, such as if the cell phone number were used by a salesperson and the disconnection precluded porting to a different carrier (the lost revenue of sales).
As we all know, just because some escape clause may be buried in a contract doesn't mean it would be enforceable.
And all AT&T needs is to get a judge who has crappy AT&T service to refuse to enforce arbitration and get it get in front of a jury of people with crappy AT&T service. |
|
skeechanAi OtsukaholicPremium
join:2012-01-26
AA169|170
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Clear Wireless
| reply to Anon
No it doesn't. People getting pissed about AT&T (like I did) but staying with them anyway (like I did) are the ones who propagate these practices. I can cry until I'm blue in the face, but so long as I keep cutting checks I have no one to ultimately blame but myself.
If EVERYONE who complained would cancel for change in terms of service (thereby avoiding the ETF) they wouldn't pull this crap.
Simply put, AT&T will do this stuff so long as subs tolerate it. |
|
 KristopherI got a 4Premium
join:2002-10-11
Tyrinaria
kudos:4 | But with the duopolies that exist, or just plain lack of viable alternatives, ditching one bad carrier for another is pointless. So, laws are in place, and politicians are paid off, to keep things as they are. The only real way to make a difference is to cut off service. If everyone would just cancle their data phones, and cut out their cable, then maybe changes would be made due to lack of demand. Moving that demand from one asshole to another doesn't really do jack shit.
--
Play DSLr Mafia: »Pub Games |
|
Reviews:
·WOW Internet and..
 ·AT&T Midwest
·AT&T U-Verse
| reply to Linklist
Threatening to breach a contract IS NOT just doing business. Just because they're mad that he won in small claims court (which he has the right to take them to BY LAW), does not give them any legal reason to not meet their obligations under the contract. In fact, if they did terminate, he would have grounds to sue for breach of contract and seek recoupment of damages. |
|
 Steve BPremium
join:2004-08-02
Seattle, WA | reply to Kristopher
said by Kristopher:But with the duopolies that exist, or just plain lack of viable alternatives, ditching one bad carrier for another is pointless. So, laws are in place, and politicians are paid off, to keep things as they are. The only real way to make a difference is to cut off service. If everyone would just cancle their data phones, and cut out their cable, then maybe changes would be made due to lack of demand. Moving that demand from one asshole to another doesn't really do jack shit.
ding ding ding! We have a winner. That's exactly it! Plus, people lives have evolved now around these things and getting rid of it isn't a viable alternative either. Its easy for the corporate kiss asses to make such judgements because they don't feel affected the way regular consumers do. |
|
