Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by SledgeHammer, Oct 2, 2019.
I could be wrong, but I don't think D* is considered a utility (like water, sewer and electric).
So if I pass away my $55,000 credit card bill goes to 0. I don't thing so! My hats off to to AT&T for doing the right thing!
In the same circumstances, with a surviving person as the account holder, DISH would charge the ETF. And they would write it off as DIRECTV did in the same circumstances.
I would not expect the ETF to be waived if the deceased lived with family that remained in the home after the death. Especially if the bill was not in the deceased's name.
Sorry to break it to ya... but utilities like water and electric are considered part of the local government and they can put a utility lien on your property. TV, internet, etc. aren't utilities and they don't have that ability.
That being said... yeah, it kind of SOUNDS sleazy to make them pay the ETF, but they signed a contract, right? Sucks, but heirs are responsible for putting the affairs in order.
But only from proceeds of the estate. No personal liability is involved for the heirs
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
If the deceased lived with the family, this whole fiasco could have been averted by just adding a "simple" receiver to the daughter's account without extending the contract.
I'm guessing the daughter didn't want the contract extended, hence, new account.
It's practices like this that will lose future accounts for direct.
It was adding a receiver for a caregiver that triggered the unwanted contract extension. The article did not say how old the mother's account in the daughter's name was, other than the assumption that it would have been out of contract if the receiver had not been added for the caregiver. (I assume you are referring to the account the deceased was using as the "daughter's account". If the daughter has an account at her own residence she was following the Terms of Service by having a separate account for her mother.)
Daughter uses Mother's death to get out of contract she signed.
They should have kept it in her moms name and then payed the bill. No reason they couldn’t have.
They would do the same thing in the same position if the person was in a contract. So would everyone else.
After having service with DTV for about 7 years one of two of the HR24s stopped functioning and I asked for a replacement and got one HR24 about a week later and they did not want the old one back. About a year later the other HR24 also shot craps (not the replacement) so I quit even though retention threatened me with an ETF which did not make sense. Now they want $300 ETF. Talking to them is useless and keep in mind I never upgraded, changed
programming, or models of receivers. I fired a complaint to the Illinois AG and will wait to see what happens. I understand that others have had similar problems. The original contract agreement I had with DTV before AT&T bought DTV did not have this stipulation. When you think about it, if your receiver craps out after one year and you only want the 2 years, then you have a choice of getting it replaced and a new 2 year commitment or you can continue to pay for 1 year and not be able to watch anything.
replacement of failed STB does not extend your contract - call retention dept now !