Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by frankygamer, May 10, 2012.
By choosing to not agree the person is choosing to cancel service. It's the same thing as not paying your bill. If you don't pay your bill then DIRECTV cancels the account as they determine you no longer want the service because you have stopped paying for it. That's the bottom line and DIRECTV's lawyers know it. Just like every other company out there. By you informing them that you no longer agree to their terms of service you're requesting that the service be stopped.
Repeating over and over what you want it to be will not change the legality of what would happen.
I hate using analogy's because then people just want to argue about how the analogy is flawed but to keep it simple I'll use one.
If you told everyone you would pick them up food, and you never specified a payment type before, but then said they had to give you cash from now on and someone said "I don't agree with that you can use my card" they're choosing to not have you pick them up lunch if you're not willing to change your requirements.
No it isn't.
Do you have legal training, or are you in the office of Counsel at DIRECTV®?
I'm sorry, but this is just plain wrong. By the wording of DirecTV's Customer Agreement, service can be cancelled by the customer ("Your Cancellation" section 5.(b)) or by DirecTV ("Our Cancellation" section 5.(c)). The Agreement specifically says that not paying amounts owed or electing not to accept changed terms may result in DirecTV cancelling service.
You can't read into a customer's refusal to accept new terms and conditions anything other than a refusal to accept new terms and conditions. The customer may be perfectly happy with the service and want to continue under the old terms. It's up to DirecTV to decide how to proceed (cancel the customer or let service continue under the old terms).
As is made clear in another section, DIRECTV "cannot" maintain different sets of T&C's for different customers.
The "may" part is just more of that apparent legal squishyness that has infected the legalese of late.
But it's fun.
So what you are saying is that if you do not pay your bill DirecTV can cancel your account and you will not owe an ETF?
No, my argument throughout the thread has been that if you refuse to accept new terms and conditions and DirecTV then cancels, you will not owe an ETF (if one applies). Not paying your bill is a breach of the contract. Refusing new terms and conditions is not a breach of the contract, and is an option that DirecTV provides. They are clearly not the same thing, and I would expect that any applicable ETF would be applied in the first case but not the second.
DirecTV words it two different ways in the same document. In one place they say that they "will" cancel service if new terms and conditions are not accepted; in another place they say that they "may" cancel service if new terms and conditions are not accepted.
My opinion, I think it is a too good to be true that you can escape your etf fees for this kind of change in the agreement. Directv is judge and jury on this and going to arbitration probably doesn't make sense financially wise.
It does state that continuing service constitutes acceptance of the new agreement so it can easily be argued that not accepting the terms constitutes cancelation. Additionally, I can't find anything that says they'll waive any fees if they cancel.
It isn’t clear either way but there is certainly nothing to prevent them charging the ETF. If they wanted to, what’s to stop them? :shrug:
What's important is who's doing the cancellation. The Customer Agreement explicity states that if the customer does not accept new terms and conditions, DirecTV will/may initiate cancellation. As mentioned previously, there is cancellation by the subscriber, and there is cancellation by DirecTV. These two different types of cancellation are described separately in the Customer Agreement. For both types of cancellation, the Customer Agreement says that the customer "will still be responsible for payment of all outstanding balances accrued through that effective date," as well as a deactivation fee. However, language about owing an ETF is only included in the section describing what happens if the customer initiates cancellation. DirecTV could very easily have included the ETF language in the section that describes what happens when DirecTV initiates cancellation, but they didn't.
You're right; there isn't anything that explicity says that DirecTV will waive any applicable ETF if they initiate cancellation, but the omission of language stating that an ETF will apply is telling when such language is included in the section that talks about customer initiated cancellation.
It's ALWAYS the customer. They aren't holding a gun to your head making you cancel. Actually even if they were YOU would still be making the choice to cancel or be shot.
And that is a choice being made by the customer. I really don't get how this is so hard for you to understand. It's a customer's choice to either accept the T's&C's or reject them. If they CHOOSE to reject then then their account may be cancelled. It's a customer choice, it's ALWAYS a customer choice.
And I really don't get how this is so hard a concept for you to understand. (Kind of like your insistence that there is no requirement to have a valid credit or debit card on file.) If it was "always the customer," then DirecTV wouldn't have a section in their Customer Agreement that is titled "Our Cancellation" that has different language then the section that is titled "Your Cancellation," now would they?
I guess that we'll both have to agree to disagree.
That section is for when DIRECTV has determined that they no longer want to have a customer as a customer anymore. If they choose to cancel your service for you with no intiation by you, such as fraud, credit abuse, harassment, or various other reasons, then that section would pertain to that account. All companies reserve the right to no longer do business with customers as they see fit.
I guess that you missed the part of the section that says this:
In addition, we may cancel your Service if you elect not to accept any changed terms described to you, as provided in Section 4.
Credit abuse, fraud, not paying a bill, etc. are all breaches of the contract. Choosing not to accept new terms and conditions is not a breach of the contract, as it is specifically contemplated and allowed by the Customer Agreement.
As has been said that section is for if they want to get rid of you for some reason like you abusing the system, screaming at a CSR, etc.
Whether or not you accept the Terms and Conditions it is YOUR choice, not DirecTV's.
And it's still YOUR choice!
But that's not even the issue anyone's disputing! The point is ---- oh, never mind, it's been made several times already.
Nobody's holding a gun to D*'s head to make them change the agreement. If they don't want this kind of trouble, all they have to do is leave the existing agreement alone for existing customers.
Plus, nobody's forcing them to cancel your service if the you refuse the new TOS. D* can always offer service under the old TOS.
Finally, just because something is in the TOS doesn't mean it's legal or will always hold up in court. Section 4 of D*'s agreement comes to mind. The fees are kept just low enough so that people won't bother to fight it. And the fees are low enough such that lawyers aren't interested in individual cases.
Since I've done this with Sprint, even before the FCC "smackdown", it is possible.