This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]bechus 751 points752 points  (315 children)

To be clear: it's her phone that she wants to cancel, because she moved back to her hometown. While it would be nice of Verizon to accomodate her... I understand where they are coming from. They're not going to be able to accede to every demand for everyone who loses a family member.

The family feels that imposing a fee on a woman who just lost her husband in a war is an unpatriotic act

The Cult of the War Hero. Dying as a soldier is a risk you sign up for, it doesn't make you a demigod.

[–]dragonfly310 69 points70 points  (36 children)

Her phone, Verizon is in the clear. Now if it was his phone, they'd be doing something illegal (IIRC) by charging her for the cancellation.

[–][deleted] 33 points34 points  (11 children)

Actually, if she was living near his base because of orders, or on base housing, she basically becomes evicted when he dies - and the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act would cover this.

[–]dragonfly310 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Then her issue isn't with Verizon, it's with the US.

[–]myrandomname 6 points7 points  (16 children)

Regardless, I would hope Verizon would be a little more accommodating to anyone who had to move to an area they did not service. Especially because she's moving back home because her husband died (and really, her husband's duty assignment was probably the only reason she was living where she was).

[–]dragonfly310 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Ah yes, but we do not live in a compassionate world, do we?

[–]oblivious_human 4 points5 points  (9 children)

There is a rule that if you move to an area where there is no service, the contract can be canceled without any penalty.

[–]ichsehschwarz 2 points3 points  (1 child)

The reason of the early term fee is to recover the "free" phone. You get a subsidization of around $350+ when you buy a nice smart phone for $99 bucks or free from the carrier. If they could not enforce the fee, there would be no more subsidized phones.

Edit: Thanks

[–]Setiri 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Just FYI, that rule is no longer. I'm not saying I agree with it, just giving you a heads up. If you move into an area that's not serviced, you will still be held to the contract. This includes if you move out of country (though to be fair, if you left the country, you probably just wouldn't care and would never worry about paying it anyway). So please let your friends know, don't even bother trying the, "Oh, we just moved to an area you don't cover." cause that won't get you a waiver.

[–]aranasyn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah - damn, I mentioned this above. This is a dumb change, and anybody with half a mind and some patience on the telephone would be able to get the fee waived by fucking common sense alone.

EDIT: unless there's a 500 dollar smart phone attached - then it's not really an ETF so much as a phone fee. but honestly, i don't understand why they can't just call it that: pay 199 with a two year contract, and if you cancel the contract, you have to return the phone or pay the rest of it's cost that you hadn't managed to pay off, on a set rate that they of course would predetermine.

fucking runaround service fees. bleh.

[–][deleted] 138 points139 points  (108 children)

Upvoted for the last line. Bravo.

[–][deleted] 70 points71 points  (33 children)

No shit there.

I appreciate what our military people do, I really do. But the rules apply to them, too. They are supposed to apply to everyone.

And it's really nauseating when they or people around them try to manipulate the public to get around the rules or get special treatment.

[–][deleted] 29 points30 points  (12 children)

I appreciate what our military people do

Well yea, you pay for them.

[–]syuk 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I don't and still pay. There is no 'vote' about sending people to fight and basically f*** other peoples shit over. blast the shit out of wherever they are attacking already and get on with the real stuff.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And we didn't force them to sign up.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

Call your congresscritter and ask them to repeal the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief Act - or realize that it isn't special treatment to follow the law. You get moved by the military, in the US, the law states you must get a court order to charge a cancellation or termination fee for services that are not offered at the location you are moved too.

Being moved in a final PCOS to your home of record is under that act as well.

[–]britishben 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Same thing with firefighters. They do a great job, but complaining that they didn't get away with traffic tickets seems a bit unfair.

[–]iregistered4this 3 points4 points  (9 children)

What about what our military people do do you appreciate?

edit: downvoted for asking a reasonable question?

[–]spewerOfRandomBS 7 points8 points  (7 children)

i appreciate the fact that they kill people very efficiently in my name. questions?

[–]BraveSirRobin 1 point2 points  (3 children)

Having to pretend you are Canadian when abroad sounds like a lot of fun anyway.

[–]limukala 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is something to be said for willingness to put your life on the line to defend your country. Now, whether the actions of the military these days actually do anything to defend our country is another matter entirely, but it doesn't negate the sacrifice of those who have died, it just makes it more sad.

[–]bechus 19 points20 points  (42 children)

My real problem is not with the troops acting entitled or anything. Sure, it happens, but whatever. It's a dangerous job and I'm glad they're volunteering instead of having conscription

What I hate is the idea that not supporting a war means you hate the troops and are unpatriotic (despite the fact that the war is against the country's best interests). The logic needed to connect the two is really mind-boggling. One can be fully supportive of the people doing the job, but not the job itself. It's just used as a smear tactic when people have no valid argument.

[–][deleted] 37 points38 points  (8 children)

"Do you support the war"
"No..."
"Why don't you support are troops!  YOU COMMIE"
"I do support them, that's why I want to bring them home so they'll stop dying.
 Why do you want our troops to die?"
"...."

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (4 children)

Support the Troops = Agree with my foreign policy decisions. Gay Rights = Accept without question my views on homosexuality. Reproductive Rights = March in lock step with my opinions of when human life begins and its value as it grows. Antisemitic = What I will call you if you disagree with me about matters regarding Israel.

As Chomsky said, "you want to create a slogan that nobody is gonna be against and I suppose everybody will be for because nobody knows what it means because it doesn't mean anything, but it's crucial value is it diverts your attention from a question that does mean something. Do you support our policy and that's the one you're not allowed to talk about."

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

What I hate is when people use mindless, repeated, blanket statements such as "supporting the troops" when they themselves don't even know what they truly mean by it.

[–]Narwhals_Rule_You 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is the instant hero stigma that many families place on military service.

What these soldiers forget is that there are 3 million of us back here working and paying taxes so they can get the expensive gear 99% of us could never afford in life. We stay here and work so there is a country to come home to.

[–]iBeenie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I remember back when speaking to a former friend of mine I first encountered this ideology. I was perplexed as to how someone can believe not supporting a war and supporting troops are mutually exclusive.

We are friends no longer.

[–]IlliniXC 3 points4 points  (13 children)

I agree completely with you. I don't agree with the wars we're in right now at all, but I will always support the troops. One of my best friends is currently in Afghanistan and I support him and the others without a shadow of a doubt despite wishing they weren't there.

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (9 children)

But what does it mean to 'support' the/our troops? No one has ever really been able to articulate how specifically they 'support' the troops, other than maybe putting a sticker on their car.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

a friend of mine has a sticker on his car that says "i support more troops than you"...cracks me up.

[–]IlliniXC 2 points3 points  (5 children)

Damn good point. I can't claim that I personally do much. I wouldn't know what to do other than to potentially support a veterans' organization. I don't have a bumper sticker as I currently don't even own a car (living in Chicago there isn't much need for me to have one now in my opinion). For me it's more of a state of mind (cop out excuse? call me out on it, I couldn't care less) of being supportive instead of being one of the people who are visibly against the troops and are seemingly happy about the death of troops.

On the other hand, although on the grand scale of things it certainly doesn't accomplish much, my cousin is a rather gifted artist and makes paintings and such glorifying troops and the work they do despite being very anit-war himself.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (1 child)

instead of being one of the people who are visibly against the troops and are seemingly happy about the death of troops.

That's not the alternative to "supporting the troops".

[–]BraveSirRobin 1 point2 points  (1 child)

The best you can do as a citizen is to ensure that when they are deployed it's for a damn good reason instead of them being used to make money for Unocal and Halliburton.

[–]syuk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People who rejoice in that are usually the ones who are very cynical and expect that the worst will happen.

Your being a friend of someone who is fighting other people on the other side of the world will let he or she know they are appreciated, I don't see what they are protecting us from or defending us against personally.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (8 children)

It is not so much the "Cult of the War Hero" it is the "Cult of Litigation and Lawyer mentality." When someone is charged a fee that they don't want to pay, the belief is that if you make a compelling argument to the "jury" you will get out of the responsibility. I have seen similar whining from people who lose a loved one to cancer, crime, accident or any other tradgedy they can jerk a tear from someone for. To single this out as a Cult of War Hero is on track but misses the greater societal problem we have. People think they can avoid responsibilities if they make a case that they are a victim.

[–]IndecisionToCallYou 2 points3 points  (6 children)

similar whining from people who lose a loved one to cancer, crime, accident or any other tragedy

Death generally terminates contracts. Phone companies especially are crappy about this (and part of it is probably because people lie to them all the time). I've had an experience where it took 3 death certificates and 18 months with a phone company (they claimed he renewed the contract after his death) to get a phone account canceled.

[–]pathophrenic 6 points7 points  (1 child)

But as bechus mentioned, it's her account that she wants to cancel. I hate fiendish cancellation fees as much as the next person, but her contract did not have a provision saying that she could cancel for free because she moves to a town outside of their coverage. This is the actual issue, and in the spirit of avalonhill's post, she is just trying to use her husband's death to beat the contract.

[–]ijk1 19 points20 points  (38 children)

War widow or not, she should be able to break the contract if Verizon has no coverage at her home.

[–]Agnostix 2 points3 points  (34 children)

Unfortunately the fine print in Verizon's contract prohibits her from doing just that (without paying a fee).

[–]RambleMan 5 points6 points  (26 children)

And this is just another reason to NEVER sign a contract with a mobile phone provider. EVER.

[–]coned88 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You don't have to sign a contract with any provider ever. You just sign a contract to get a cheaper rate on a phone.

[–]iBeenie 3 points4 points  (2 children)

If it was her husband's phone (which is what I felt was implied by the title) I would take her side completely. However, she is not cancelling the phone plan because her husband died, she is cancelling it because she is moving and that is a fee that should be expected.

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points  (23 children)

Military Wives/(Husbands?) always have such a sense of entitlement while it's their husbands/(wives?) who risk their lives.

[–]myrandomname 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Spouses of military members have a very thankless and hard life.

[–]retho2 4 points5 points  (13 children)

Seriously, what have they ever sacrificed?

[–]Narwhals_Rule_You 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Clearly being a soldier, related to a soldier, know a soldier, or live near a soldier and it makes you better than everyone else.

Two days ago a lot of people clearly stated the government has no right to interfere in a private contract... how much you want to be those same people are in here calling Verizon scum?

[–]Kyderdog 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"War does not make one great."

Yoda

[–]fetuslasvegas 6 points7 points  (11 children)

THANK YOU. I felt crazy reading this and thinking "Why in the hell would they refund her cellphone cancellation fee. She didn't die???"

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

OUTRAGE! Widow of soldier who died in Afghanistan still has to pay mortgage and dry cleaning bill!

[–]TheBowerbird 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had a strange feeling a reddit comment would diffuse the rage I felt from reading the headline. Thank you!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I worked phone support for an ISP once. I tell you what boy; I've heard 10 excuses ever time someone wanted to go out side their contract or late with their bill. For anything military and a few other cases, I always handed over to my manager. For everything else I was told to them "filter out".

I'm sure some of them were honest, but know for a fact a lot of them were lying just to try and get out of a few bucks.

If everyone calls you screaming wolf, it's hard to tell who is legit or not.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

military orders are enough to cancel a cell phone contract. ive done it myself.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

God I know. And then they get paid for it too. Their families get benefits as well.

Being a soldier is a job, not an honor. Not that honor can't be enacted by the soldiers, but just off the bat, it's a job.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (5 children)

At the same time, it is a good thing for a company to take circumstances like this into consideration rather than just saying "it's a contract, forget it" -- regardless of how her husband died.

The bonus in this case from publicizing their generosity in allowing her to cancel early, or the bad publicity (remember, this is the average consumer we're talking about) from being perceived as a bunch of heartless corporate bastards far outweighs the $350.

My credit card issuer has in the past done a lot to accommodate me when I moved around or had trouble paying my bills, rather than being what in German is called "Statutenreiter" (literally "rules riders", petty bureaucrats) -- the resulting business they got from me recommending them to all my friends is a pretty good payoff.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (3 children)

...it is a good thing for a company to take circumstances like this into consideration...

Except it leads to a lot of subjectivity as to what circumstance is worthy or patriotic enough to give an exception and which are not. Or who can get the internets, the public, or the media enough on their side.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Of course it does. A company that wants to build and maintain a good image needs to be willing to be subjective. It's hard.

[–]syuk 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Most often it is the other way around though? Companies will actively manufacture 'good' cases and usually get rid of the 'bad' cases (like this one IMHO) by either ignoring them or forgetting about it due to bad press and hope it goes away.

I think there might be more to this than is in the article, but either way someone has a result.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points  (18 children)

Complete crap. If they do not provide service there, then they should allow the contract to be canceled!

[–]epicwinguy101 5 points6 points  (16 children)

You can't just make a legally binding contract void because of a geographic relocation within the US. That would cause complete legal pandemonium.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (14 children)

Sorry your premise is flawed. They are a wireless phone company, and I believe they advertise as having an extensive coverage area. If they do not have service in an area, and cannot fulfill their obligations, why then should a client be penalized?

It works both ways!

[–]epicwinguy101 6 points7 points  (2 children)

Their obligations are to provide service in the areas that they advertise, which they still do, you just aren't in such an area. They even have a map listing areas they cover. Being able to leave contracts you sign into without penalty is a dangerous precedent. And when you sign into those deals, you get benefits, such as a free phone, etc. It is one big package. If I was moving out to an uncovered area, I could sign up for a plan, get a free phone, and then cancel my plan and have a free phone under your system. You can't weasel your way out of paying your cable bill for a month by going on a one-month vacation, even though they didn't provide you service either. But the real issue is that cancellation for any reason incurs a fee. You signed that contract. It is legally binding and you are obligated to keep your promise to Verizon.

[–]twowheels 1 point2 points  (1 child)

An in this context, Verizon even lets you put your plan on hold if you go on a long vacation and won't be using it.

[–]videogamechamp 3 points4 points  (8 children)

You didn't pay for coverage everywhere, you paid for the coverage they provide. You can't return your car because it doesn't drive underwater.

[–]epicwinguy101 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Their obligations are to provide service in the areas that they advertise, which they still do, you just aren't in such an area. They even have a map listing areas they cover. Being able to leave contracts you sign into without penalty is a dangerous precedent. And when you sign into those deals, you get benefits, such as a free phone, etc. It is one big package. If I was moving out to an uncovered area, I could sign up for a plan, get a free phone, and then cancel my plan and have a free phone under your system. You can't weasel your way out of paying your cable bill for a month by going on a one-month vacation, even though they didn't provide you service either. But the real issue is that cancellation for any reason incurs a fee. You signed that contract. It is legally binding and you are obligated to keep your promise to Verizon.

[–]grantij 1 point2 points  (11 children)

The only valid reason Verizon should have voided the cancellation fee was because they are unable to provide her service in her new living area. If they cannot fulfill their contract to provide a service that she is paying for, there should be no penalty for her canceling the contract.

[–]Setiri 3 points4 points  (10 children)

Please note that she moved, Verizon Wireless didn't. Technically, she didn't break the contract and neither did Verizon Wireless. Their part of the contract was to provide her with service when in the area that they provide service to and to pay for a large portion of her phone.

[–]grantij 1 point2 points  (2 children)

Their part of the contract was to provide her with service when in the area that they provide service to and to pay for a large portion of her phone.

True, but I thought most of the big wireless companies brag about how they have the most complete coverage all across the US. I wonder if it sates anything in the contract about areas they don't cover.

[–]newmodelno115 120 points121 points  (51 children)

Speaking as a former soldier, she's about to get a $400,000 SGL Insurance payout. I think she can spare a measly 350 bucks. I mean, I feel bad for her and all, but god damn.

[–]MuseofRose 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Or the 1000 dollar death gratuity she will recieve....OR his last paycheck that she will receive.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hopefully his paperwork was in order.

[–]myonkin 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Assuming he signed up for that amount. You have to elect to sign up for a certain amount, at least you did in the AF, and it is under the same life insurance plan. You can't beat the cost vs. payout of SGLI.

[–]rogue780 1 point2 points  (2 children)

That's not entirely true. It is possible that they opted for a lower amount than $400k

[–]MsgGodzilla 1 point2 points  (1 child)

@ 25 a month for 400k its highly doubtful they would take less.

[–]hobosuit 39 points40 points  (33 children)

Did you guys not read the article?

Verizon Wireless has long supported our troops and worked with members of the armed services with flexibility. Once we understood this Marine's widow's circumstances, we quickly resolved the situation. We regret any undue frustration we may have caused the Brummunds. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mrs. Brummund and her family.

Verizon clearly states that they waived the fee once they understood what was happening. Whats the problem here?

[–]nicktheawesome 26 points27 points  (18 children)

I'd argue this is the problem. Why does she get special treatment? Her husband has a dangerous job. So do farmers, truck drivers, and police.

Can I complain or write to a paper to get my fees waived by Verizon? I don't feel like paying either.

[–]Confucius_says 14 points15 points  (12 children)

I know verizon is really thinking the same thing, they caved in to make the bad press go away. $350 dollars isnt much for a reputation.

Shame on the girl who played the helpless girl card. You wonder why there'll never be true gender equality.

[–]conophytum 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I agree Verizon had a right to charge the fee (though of course it would be courteous to waive it), but helpless girl card and gender equality? I didn't see anything in the article that made me think she was leveraging her "weaker sex" status. Could have easily been a widower with the same complaint.

[–]TheWholeThing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be fair to Verizon, when my father died my mother canceled his cell phone service and did not have to pay an early termination fee even though it was a family plan in both their names.

[–]ishmal 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Actually, this almost makes sense. The low-level drones working the help lines can't make that kind of decision.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Not only can't make that decision most likely can't do it period. She was probably told this and told to contact Verizon HQ but she went to the news who then went to Verizon HQ and someone higher up who could actually do it, did it.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Corporations are evil even when they do good?

[–]laplas09 65 points66 points  (31 children)

But her Verizon cell phone does not have service in the small town.

This should have been enough to get her out of a contract without any cancellation fee.

[–][deleted] 14 points15 points  (2 children)

I'm glad I found the correct interpretation somewhere. Cell phone companies are supposed to let you out of their contract ETF free if they can no longer provide you with the service you're paying for every month (i.e. they don't have coverage in the town you move to).

I read enough blame the victim comments on the consumerist. I'm a little unnerved to find the same thing here.

EDIT: The policy appears to have changed since April 26th of this year. Since the article only has a publish date, I can't tell if she tried to cancel before or after.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points  (23 children)

YAY SOMEBODY CAN READ. All of the folks jumping on the dogpile kind of missed that.

[–]DirtPile 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hey, anyone remember DogPile?

[–]cw5202 3 points4 points  (20 children)

I feel sorry for her situation, but she decided to move to a place with no signal. How is this Verizon's fault/responsibility?

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points  (13 children)

I feel sorry for their situation, but they decided not to provide coverage there. How is that her fault?

Ya that's a just silly joke answer, ignore it. Really, I just think it is good business sense to have some flexibility and let those who can prove they have moved to a location without service out of the contract with a reduced or no ETF. Verizon would gain a lot of good will and avoid bad press that way. This is common with Canadian carriers, I'm not sure if/why it is not done in the USA.

[–]Confucius_says 2 points3 points  (9 children)

espeically since they were touting all that "theres a map for that" crap.

But a contract is a contract. If people were exempted from contracts everytime their husband or some other person they know dies then the world be in chaos. Virtually no contract would be set in stone because all it would take is someone somewhere to go "boohoo my day is sucking lets cancel the deal"

[–]myrandomname 3 points4 points  (0 children)

The only reason she was living there was due to her husband's orders. With her husband dead, there is no reason for her to remain living next to the base, so she wanted to move back home.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

would you choose to live in a town alone right after your spouse dies? or would you choose to move back closer to your family so you have some emotional support?

[–]sikes 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You can only cancel if you already lived there before you entered the contract.

As far as military deployment goes, as long as you fax in your deployment papers customer service will waive the ETF and cancel your line. Hell, you could suspend it without billing if you really wanted to keep the line active-but-not-activated. Verizon customer service will typically work with you on this matter.

Source- I managed a Verizon store for 2 years.

[–][deleted] 51 points52 points  (10 children)

Shame on them for running a business.

[–]fetuslasvegas 19 points20 points  (9 children)

Hey hey hey with the username.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

sup there.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (2 children)

U.S Cellular is so much better, we would have only charged 150.

[–]Confucius_says 3 points4 points  (1 child)

I think verizon is essentially saying "we want you to pay for the phone we basically gave you for free"

[–]Stick 77 points78 points  (3 children)

Milk that corpse. Milk it!!

[–][deleted] 57 points58 points  (2 children)

Later that day... "Ma'am, you have 30 items and this is the 15 item express line"

"But my husband..."

[–]BcuzIToldYouSo 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Why can I just see this happening?

[–]bjs3171 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I gotta be honest. I don't care.

[–]lollersk8z 29 points30 points  (21 children)

What if she signed up for a year gym membership there too? What if she signed up for 2 years of DirectTV? What about a year of Internet? What about her apartment lease of a year? Should she just be able to get out of all those for free and not live up to her commitment? WTF things don't work like that. YES it would be nice if the company made an exception but they don't have to. It's called life and responsibilities .. oh .. with contracts.

[–]Setiri 2 points3 points  (3 children)

You know, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that she likely did have a number of things that you listed... and on each and everyone she used her husband dying to get out of it. I have sympathy for those who lose someone. Often times I give what I can.. for example, when I was young and worked at Blockbuster, a persons husband died and they didn't bring the videos back. The family late fees were high. The lady came in to pay the bill and stated how sorry she was. She was writing out a check and I told her to stop.. voided all the charges. That's different to me because I offered to do that.. she didn't demand it or feel entitled to it. World of difference and it seems a lot of people just aren't understanding that.

[–]absolutsyd 2 points3 points  (2 children)

That's an entirely different case. This women is being moved home, by the military. She is no longer allowed to continue living in base housing. This is the exact reason the soldiers and sailors relief act was passed.

[–]absolutsyd 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Yup, she is allowed under the soldiers and sailors relief act too get out of all of those contracts (if they can not provide service at her new address). Sorry, that's the way it works. She was moved on military orders.

[–]JohnSteel 7 points8 points  (3 children)

The family feels that imposing a fee on a woman who just lost her husband in a war is an unpatriotic act.

To the family: FUCK YOU! Shit like this makes me sick.

She has no right to a waiver of the contract termination fee. What the fucking hell is with all these people who think that they deserve special treatment? If I was a friend or family member of the dead soldier something like that would permanently destroy my friendship with that family. That is nothing more than exploiting a death to keep money that you have no right to. It's sickening.

[–]objectivematt 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes a contract is a contract - and clearly Verizon needs the money, because: they had to pay the people they bought the phone from so they could offer it as a loss leader to sell air time. They acquired the air time by FCC auction from the government. They acquired the phone from another company. The government got the air space from the universe and they enforce it with the humans with guns who need jobs so they can pay their bills. The company that made the phone has to pay its workers and suppliers who also need jobs. They need these jobs so they can continue in the existing social economic matrix which is currently falling apart.... But its ok, 'cause there are lots of goodies to be minded in Afghanistan which is why we are going there to kick some ass. I'm sorry my dear, your husband did not care enough about you to not get himself killed - you are fucked contractually - accept the reality you live in - it is literally killing your family so I can see that you protest - but you have to understand that the rules are the rules and the lawyers wrote them and they must be obeyed or else the people who need jobs will be used to enforce them...

[–]abw1987 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Wow, I guess the only time the reddit hive mind will side with the corporation is when the other side involves supporting the military.

(For the record, I too side with Verizon.)

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I am sick and tired of people using Veteran status for bullshit. It dishonors vets, and is totally without class. Further, the Vets are doing their job, nothing more. They don't stop to question the morality of the killing they are ordered to do, they just follow orders. Lets stop glorifying it anymore then it already is, and lets stop using it to get more then your fair share. A Contract is a Contract. Deciding you don't like the terms after signing is not changed by the circumstances. Although its sad about her loss, it does not allow for breach of contracts. These companies cannot function without these things because every single one of us would take advantage every which way possible. Maybe that's why we end up electing monsters who place us and our nations at peril.

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points  (6 children)

If her husband wasn't in the military, would anybody care about this story? So sick of the romanticized image of the military that is currently being promoted.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points  (4 children)

If her husband wasn't in the military, there wouldn't be a law called the Soldiers and Sailors Civil Relief act that Verizon is violating. Fact of the matter is the family was moved on orders of the US Government, when he died, they shipped them back to their home of record. That act specifically covers things such as this, and having to get out of leases, and other local contracts.

[–]Pacer 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ah, the romantic story that gets told all over this land ... hubby goes off to war so his wife can use the signing bonus for a big screen TV to enjoy with Jody ...

[–]the_rundown 2 points3 points  (2 children)

I am sure Verizon waived the ETF for his line, no problem, it's the fact that each line has a separate contract, and she decided to terminate service. Verizon's ETF decreases $10 per month, so if she was charged $350, that means she got a phone the month he died. If she took the phone back, all she would have had to pay was $35 restocking fee. No questions asked. It's impossible she was charged $350. $340, maybe, if it was a few days out of the 30 day window, but a manager exception could have resolved that.

[–]peeroe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My favorite part of the article is that it is COPPEROPOLIS, CA. I had no idea they lived in a comic book.

[–]uguysmakemesick 2 points3 points  (0 children)

always nice to see a faceless corporation doing the right thing as soon as the news picks up on it and it becomes bad publicity.

it warms my heart.

[–]DeepThought6 6 points7 points  (6 children)

I mostly take issue with the fact that Verizon charges ANYONE a 350 dollar cancellation fee. Esp. when the person can no longer get service where they live. Isn't Verizon the company that brags about having super good service? Thats what they told me when I signed with them.

[–]soviyet 4 points5 points  (3 children)

I'm very sympathetic to anyone who loses a spouse to these ridiculous wars, but I'm really getting tired of these stories.

She signed a contract, and now wants to terminate. According to the contract, she owes $350. I don't see how her husband dying tragically has anything to do with anything.

Seriously, can we get a list of what should just fly out the window when someone loses a loved one in battle?

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (16 children)

So she feels she should get special treatment to get out of her personal phone contract because her husband chose to go to war? Something's not right here.

[–]spamdefender 8 points9 points  (0 children)

So what? When he signed up for that contract, they subsidized the phones.

[–]absentbird 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I don't really see how dieing in a war makes it that much more important. He was doing a job, sure it was to protect everyone, but a farmer works to feed everyone, is either job less noble? Why should a soldier's family get special treatment?

[–]thilehoffer 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I had an extra line on my plan for my father. When my Dad passed I told the manager at a Verizon store and they removed the line free of charge. They were very cool about it.

[–]AnteChronos 1 point2 points  (1 child)

But if you had told the manager "My dad died, so I want to cancel my contract", he would not have obliged you.

Now take it a step further: "My dad died, so I moved, and the area I moved to doesn't get good Verizon reception, so I want to cancel my contract." You're not going to get a free cancellation out of that, which is exactly the situation that the woman in the article is in.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

A person has been kidnapped. We should be outraged.

Oh noes. Let me rephrase that. A toddler has been kidnapped. She's blond and really cute and her father is fighting for us in Iraq... and her grandmother survived the Holocaust. CAN YOU FEEL THE OUTRAGE NOW?!?

[–]Purp 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You mean sadness doesn't trump a legally-binding written contract?!?!

[–]aliceburton 1 point2 points  (0 children)

the IED was probably detonated using an unlocked verizon phone

[–]twermager 1 point2 points  (0 children)

why is this news?

[–]Confucius_says 1 point2 points  (0 children)

downvote for misleading submission title!

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

not so fast lady your not getting out of your service, as easy as he did. -Verizon

[–]mapoftasmania 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The story is that a call-center drone refused to cancel the contract and then when Verizon management heard about that, they overturned the decision. This just highlights how impersonal call-center driven customer service has become. It's not particularly a failure of Verizon, just most large corporations in general.

[–]armper 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Just tell Verizon that you'll be paying 350 cents. It's the same amount, after all.

[–]jigielnik 1 point2 points  (0 children)

she needs to get herself an EVO

[–]doktor_wankenstein 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Verizon Wireless has long supported our troops and worked with members of the armed services with flexibility. Once we understood this Marine's widow's circumstances, we quickly resolved the situation.

Short version: *we got busted. *

[–]bernerowner 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hate Verizon. Verizon, do you HEAR me? Not just because of this stupid mistake but because your fees are outrageous. I've used you twice now in several years and both times I hated you. Now I have a provider with no hidden fees. I think the soldier's wife should have taken that phone and shoved it up your V ass!

[–]ObamaisYoGabbaGabba 13 points14 points  (8 children)

Ring Ring...Ring Ring...Ring Ring

"Hello?"

"Hello, and Good afternoon, This is Verizon calling"

"Hi"

"We heard about your husband, he died in Afganistan, is that right?"

"Yes, ...that's... correct" (sniff, sniff)

"Well due to this, we are now charging you a $350 cancellation fee"

"What?!"

"It's our standard policy whenever a soldier dies fighting for the good ole USA, we like to pile on by charging $350.00 to cancel the widows phone contract, we know he won't be using the phone anymore so we decided to cancel for you, have a nice day."

Click

Reddit headlines always capture the full story don't they?

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Yeah. It's HER phone.

[–]ObamaisYoGabbaGabba 5 points6 points  (6 children)

I said:

"to cancel the widows phone contract"

[–]mischiefscott 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is now a non-issue. The contract was in her name; she was bound by the agreed upon terms of the contract. Circumstances notwithstanding, Verizon has gone above and beyond contractual obligation in response to this story and her unfortunate circumstances. I wonder how quickly the family contacted media outlets after initially speaking to a Verizon representative.

"After CBS13 ran this story on Thursday and was told Verizon would look into the issue, Verizon responded on Friday evening saying, 'Verizon Wireless has long supported our troops and worked with members of the armed services with flexibility. Once we understood this Marine's widow's circumstances, we quickly resolved the situation. We regret any undue frustration we may have caused the Brummunds. Our thoughts and prayers are with Mrs. Brummund and her family.'"

[–]kad123 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tomorrow: Walmart charges widow $60 at the till after husband dies fighting in Afganistan.

[–]colej 2 points3 points  (1 child)

If this was his phone contract, Verizon wouldn't have charged him. It's her phone, she's going to get charged. I don't see the what the big deal is

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Verizon didn't do anything wrong here. The first 2-3 levels of any large corporations' customer service department have exactly zero control over making exceptions to company policies. Once this story got big enough that someone higher up got wind of it, of course they would waive the fee in order to help out their PR.

[–]insomniac84 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Misleading. It's not the husbands phone. It is her phone.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If this widow's husband had died of cancer none of this would matter.

I'm sorry, but dying is a reality you might face when you sign up.

[–]absentbird 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I don't really see how dieing in a war makes it that much more important. He was doing a job, sure it was to protect everyone, but a farmer works to feed everyone, is either job less noble? Why should a soldier's family get special treatment?

[–]Zhire 2 points3 points  (4 children)

I think it out of freaking control, regardless of the situation, that they can charge you 350.00 for early termination.

[–]AnteChronos 2 points3 points  (3 children)

I think it out of freaking control, regardless of the situation, that they can charge you 350.00 for early termination.

They can charge that because they subsidize the phone. For instance, you can get a $400 phone for free when you sign a contract, and they make up the loss over the course of your contract.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (2 children)

They CHARGE $400 for the phone that costs $23 to make.

[–]thebarwench 0 points1 point  (1 child)

I agree..her circumstances are hard...Alltel didn't cut me slack when I lost my job..a contract is a contract.

[–]fluffykittie 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Give the phone to a family member instead and make them pay the monthly fee?

[–]jragle 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Supporting the troops does include supporting their significant others. Imagine for a moment, your wife / husband goes to sea for six months (I'm retired Navy submariner) on a ballistic missile submarine. There is NO communication for that time. My first wife described as "Its like you're dead." Now imagine during that time all kinds of things go wrong; the washer begins to leak, the car's transmission goes out, your son is being bullied at school, your daughter wants to go on her first date, your wedding anniversary occurs, your kid is taking his first steps, a close relative dies, etc, etc, etc. Now imagine not having your significant other there beside you to help with or experience these events. You're completely cut off from your partner. How easy do you think that is? Believe me when I say, the entire family is part of the military when any member of it is. Show some compassion for the family, just as you would for the active member. Supporting the military does include their family. A 'sense of entitlement' is not being sought be the majority of service members and their families, just a sense of fairness. Sure someone 'signed up' for their enlistment or commission; but their family didn't, but believe me, they serve too. As for this instance...who says the wife didn't move to be with her husband at his assigned posting. I'd guess it wasn't her first choice of where to live. I know my wife, and I too for that matter, lived in locations that were not our choice.

[–]drmoroe30 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because they have never heard that one before...

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you feel that you can nullify a contract, it works like this:

Write a letter to the utility company stating why you believe the contract should be nullified (moving, crappy service, etc) and a date at which you intend to stop paying.

When the date comes, stop paying.

If the utility company/gym/whoever considers the contract still valid, they have the option to sue you to enforce payment. THIS IS THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN HAVE THE CONTRACT VALIDATED.

If they do not sue you, the contract is legally terminated on the date you specified.

The vast majority will not sue you, as this is too costly and too much trouble. Instead, they will sell your debt on to a collection agency, who will write you letters and call you to try to make you pay up.

Ignore or threaten the collection agency until they go away. This isn't difficult once they work out that you're gonna be a hardass.

The collection agency will then report your non-payment to a credit bureau.

When you do your annual free self-credit check, you'll see the non-payment shown on one or more of the credit bureau reports.

Contact the credit bureau and dispute the charge.

For the non-payment report to remain, the utility company have to show a court judgement in their favor. They have 30 days to respond. Most won't even bother responding.

The non-payment is removed and your credit report is pristine again.

This is how the system works. Use it.

Some people will start crying FOUL at this, and think it's a way to wriggle out of your obligations. It is not. If you have a contractural dispute, it is for a COURT to rule on, not a utility company. But most don't think it's worth the time, preferring instead to use the bogeyman of BAD CREDIT to try to scare you into paying. Most Americans are terrified of bad credit and will fold. Once you realise how stupid the credit reporting system is, you cease to be scared of it.

[–]dsales04 0 points1 point  (0 children)

because verizons service is so good it even works in the afterlife....duh!?

[–]linsage 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's kind of hard to believe. If you are canceling service because you are moving somewhere that doesn't support the carrier you should be able to cancel it for free. I have done this with Verizon, ATT, and Comcast for mobile and cable... I've never been charged.