JKOSS00@ricevm1.rice.edu (Jordan Kossack) (10/26/90)
In article <13795@accuvax.nwu.edu>, Patrick writes:
- [Moderator's Note: Except some legal beagles contend that by lifting
- the phone receiver and dialing the desired digits you were in fact
- requesting or soliciting the service. By failing to dial the 10xxx
- code on the front, you are requesting the service from the 'default'
- carrier, which might not be the carrier you want. To insure you get
- the one you want, you can always dial 10xxx. So, the legal beagles say
- you can sue the carrier who wrongfully took over the default on your
- line, but they in turn can sue you for not paying for the calls they
- handled for you. I guess it washes out. PAT]
I wonder if anyone has tried to sue and if so, whether they won
the case. I suppose the best course of action would be to:
1) Pay the bill but write "Paid under protest" or something similar
on the check so they couldn't use the fact that you paid the bill
as 'evidence' that you want their 'service'.
2) Sue the long distance carrier for the amount of the bill as well
the cost of returning to your chosen carrier. In addition, sue
for an even $1000 in punitive damages. This should keep the $$$
low enough that one can sue in small claims court, which means
that you don't need a lawyer, although legal counsel IS useful
at times. Heck, even if you lose the case, the revenge value of
dragging them into court may be worth the effort. The real trick
would to get an injunction to prevent them from providing your
residence(s) with long distance service at ANY time in the future
without your express written permission, although I guess THAT is
too much to expect, right? ;-)
jkoss00@ricevm1.rice.edu | Jordan Kossack | +1 713 799 2950 | n5qvichris@com50.c2s.mn.org (Chris Johnson) (11/01/90)
Does anyone have an address, or a contact where I could get the address, of someone at AT&T who might be interested in seeing evidence of repeated slamming of its customers by MCI? I thought I read in the news that AT&T was suing MCI for that specific reason in court. MCI has slammed me twice, the second time against my specific instructions to leave my service exactly as it was and not to touch or change anything. I'm writing to the FCC and others about it, but I thought AT&T might be interested since it's they who have lost revenue from a paying customer (me) in both cases. ...Chris Johnson chris@c2s.mn.org ..uunet!bungia!com50!chris Com Squared Systems, Inc. St. Paul, MN USA +1 612 452 9522
ch@dce.ie (Charles Bryant) (11/03/90)
In article <13795@accuvax.nwu.edu>, Patrick writes: > [Moderator's Note: Except some legal beagles contend that by lifting > the phone receiver and dialing the desired digits you were in fact > requesting or soliciting the service. By failing to dial the 10xxx > code on the front, you are requesting the service from the 'default' > carrier, which might not be the carrier you want. I don't see how anyone can claim that I owe them for service which they provided without my consent. It is up to the service provider to get my consent - not up to me to actively deny it. Charles Bryant ch@dce.ie [Moderator's Note: But their service is providing long distance connections between telephones. They did not provide this service by connecting your telephone with another telephone until you 'asked' them to do so by going off-hook and dialing a number. You'll not find a single charge from the long distance company on your bill until you actively request their service by dialing a number. A local telco service charge, yes -- a long distance call charge, no. Let the lesson be this: ALWAYS verify that your carrier of choice is the default carrier by checking with 1-700-555-4141 once a month or so. PAT]