My wife would have gone over the counter and kicked the salespersons rear end. Then taken a phone.
Have your husband do it for ya little lady just wouldn’t cut it.
I’m guessing here, are there laws and regulations in Australia that make it extremely hard for a service provider to simply cut off cell phone service to deadbeat customers?
Try renting an apartment in a jurisdiction awash in “tenant’s rights” laws. You have to practically give a semen sample.
Try, just TRY to get a non-prepaid cellphone in THIS country if you have no job and crappy credit.
This is not misogyny folks.... just business.
From the business point of view, you are asking for ‘unlimited’ credit when you buy a cell phone (unless you specifically purchase pre-paid minutes). It would appear that the cell phone company has a vested interest in knowing how you intend to pay back the ‘loan’ he is about to give you.
Depending upon the persons, a cell phone plan for a family can run from under $100/month to several thousand per month. If a housewife or stay-at-home mother has no income, and has chosen not to declare herself married; such that her credit is tied to her spouse’s - I see no other choice for the Cell phone provider.
If he gives cell phones to mothers, who have no income, no credit score and no verifiable means of income (because they have chosen not to marry, or legally establish a claim to the family income) - then they have to be fair and give similar plans to anyone who should come and ask for a cell phone - without regard to establishing their ability to pay either.
This means that people who do pay for thier plans, will now be forced to pay more to make up for those people with phones who chose not to pay their bills. And, if you are free to get a phone and someone else gets the bill - what’s to stop wide-spread abuse of this system?
Just a thought ... Why limit this to phones?
I want a new car/boat/airplane. I’m alledgely a mother, and have no verifiable income and no credit score.
If you deny me getting this, you are a bigot. If I don’t pay for it, you either go bankrupt, or you must charge those who can afford this item more to make up for my fraud.
What do you have in Blue?
I smell BS!
Whats the hidden agenda they are trying to promote?
Guess Mom has no means of making the payments. If she is going to use the husband’s income to qualify, he’s got to okay it. Finally something makes sense.
My wife didn’t work for years yet had stellar credit and had her choice of credit cards. She had double my limits. Yep, I paid the monthly bill. Seemed weird to me.
It’s the company’s right to decide who they want to do business with.
Yea - we don’t have the whole story. Perhaps her credit was SHOT.
People need to learn that just because they can get $500,000 to buy a house without any verification of ability to pay does NOT mean that they’re entitled to a cell phone.
The difference. They guy who writes the loan sells it off to some sucker, who bundles it up with others and sells it to another sucker, who then sells it to a pension fund, which gets bailed out by ME. Whereas the cell phone company is stuck if they get a deadbeat.
Yes, how do they know she is not able to purchase a phone?
Very simple.
Would you extend credit to an unemployed person?
Something sounds fishy here.
She could have bought a pre-paid package phone off the rack.
If she’s a single mother with no paying job that’s one thing.
If she’s a mother with a husband that has a paying job it should be the family income that matters, not whether she has a “job” or not.
I’d do business somewhere else if it is the latter.
Who in the hell are these pinheads to tell anyone that has the price of the phone that he or she or it can't have one? In the next place, I learned long ago not to send anyone away who wanted to leave money with me.
What the hell is vodaphone that they are so precious? And how long does it take for them to "try" to fix it??? Drop the stupid damned policy. Yesterday.
I was not able to be on the mortgage because I did not have an outside job.
I would use the term homemaker.
There is a large difference between a mom and a welfare mom. which are we talking about here?
In any of the United States (doesn’t matter if we’re talking community property or common law) one member of a marital relationship has the right to contract on behalf of the couple under most circumstances. I presume the laws are different down under?