David Pogue, in cooperation with the New York Times has once again exposed Verizon's attempts to gouge the consumer. Verizon Wireless to Pay Millions in Refunds (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/technology/04webphone.html?ref=technology) and Verizon Comes Clean (http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/04/verizon-comes-clean/).

David Pogue quoted Verizon" "“Approximately 15 million customers who did not have data plans were billed for data sessions on their phones that they did not initiate,” the company said on Sunday."

David also noted that: "As Times reporter Edward Wyatt reported Monday, the company now acknowledges the $2 accidental-key-press problem — the same one it denied last December" (emphasis added)

While there is nothing really new with the claim that cell phone companies are mugging their customers, there is a deeper issue. Cell phone companies are technological companies. Cell phones are feature rich with all sorts of applications that require an amazing amount of programming and can do amazing things. Yet the simple concept of a "safety switch" that would prevent "accidental" access to a service that you don't want isn't provided! Clearly, if Verizon's programmers can develop applications they can develop a "safety switch". The fact that they did not implies duplicity. :mad:

By implication, the management of Verizon is willfully and purposely creating situations where the customer will have an "accident" that results in the unintended transfer of money to Verizon. I will even opinion that the management style of Verizon is very similar to the unethical corporate executives who provided us with the housing bubble. Maximize profits even it it means destroying the economy.

For Verizon management to claim over an extended period of time that nothing was wrong is clear indication of stonewalling. Its unfortunate that we don't seem to have real substantive penalties for penalizing this type of abuse. Get caught, issue an apology, implement a new scam.

Finally, if companies are not honest with their customers, why should the customer be honest with the company? Do companies really want to operate in a state of anarchy?

Unbelievable Steve! It makes you wonder whether things like this happen on purpose or not, doesn't it? :laugh:

You know they should really give that type of news to Sprint. I'll tell you, I live in a town of 50000 people and everyday I can drop a call if I'm in the right place in town, and there's about 100 'right' places. Sprint has the worst service I have ever seen. It's a darn good thing they've got "the only 3G Wireless speed in the country" because they're phone service will never reach above a D+ in my book. Ebert would give it 4 thumbs down I'm sure.

You know they should really give that type of news to Sprint. I'll tell you, I live in a town of 50000 people and everyday I can drop a call if I'm in the right place in town, and there's about 100 'right' places. Sprint has the worst service I have ever seen. It's a darn good thing they've got "the only 3G Wireless speed in the country" because they're phone service will never reach above a D+ in my book. Ebert would give it 4 thumbs down I'm sure. Ah!! My segue to Sprint. We had Sprint six years ago. They had one of those billing "errors" were the subscriber was overcharged. This was settled through a class action lawsuit that highlights the absurdity of class action lawsuits. Seems that only the lawyers supposedly representing the subscribers made money.

In the settlement, Sprint would refund the overcharges as a credit to future billings. By that time, we had dropped Sprint so we were not directly entitled to a refund. To get the refund, we would have to re-enroll for a new two year plan. No way.

Basically Sprint gets caught ripping the subscriber off and gets to keep the money. Some settlement.:mad:

Ah!! My segue to Sprint. We had Sprint six years ago. They had one of those billing "errors" were the subscriber was overcharged. This was settled through a class action lawsuit that highlights the absurdity of class action lawsuits. Seems that only the lawyers supposedly representing the subscribers made money.

In the settlement, Sprint would refund the overcharges as a credit to future billings. By that time, we had dropped Sprint so we were not directly entitled to a refund. To get the refund, we would have to re-enroll for a new two year plan. No way.

Basically Sprint gets caught ripping the subscriber off and gets to keep the money. Some settlement.:mad:Yep! The big corporations always get there way. Isn't that incredible? And the other thing ..... they always lie about the real cause. By lets get real.....they can't possibly tell the truth. And let the stock price fall 50%? NO WAY.

golden rule of large business = if it's between stock price falling and lying, LIE.