Lol! Relax a little, ya know? Did you happen to watch the video?
And don't take your personal portfolio problems out on me, I just linked the video and story.
Besides, it looks like your stock is doing quite okay.
Posted on 10/26/2007 1:09:26 AM PDT by bd476
You Tube
About This Video:
AT&T makes San Diego Fire victims pay for destroyed $300 SAT receiver
AT&T makes Azola couple a victim again
This is a news report showing AT&T being totally insensitive to the victims of the devastating San Diego County fires.
The Azola family lost their home and AT&T was only concerned about letting them know about the $300 they would owe for the fire damaged SAT receiver.
This is a shameful display by a large company to victims of one of the worst fire in this Counties (sic) history.
Added: October 24, 2007
Apparently the newlywed couple had just returned from their honeymoon, arrived home and realized the fire was fast approaching. They gathered up their belongings and then fled the advancing fire.
According to the newlywed bride, the AT&T Representative asked her if they had been able to save the AT&T equipment satellite receiver from the fire.
When the bride answered that the AT&T equipment had been destroyed in the fire which had burned their home to the ground, the AT&T Representative informed the couple that their bill would be payable upon receipt as usual.
The bride said that she asked the AT&T Representative if AT&T would be willing to wait until she and her husband were reimbursed by their insurance company. Again, AT&T answered that the bill had to be paid as soon as they received it.
AT&T California's Customer Service is not entirely based in California. From what I understand, they have also offices in Mumbai, India and Manila, Philippines.
Perhaps the couple could try calling customer service again.
Ping.
and your point is??? life is life and things are sometimes bad...maybe a bad decision to choose and big your multi millions dollar hause there...but why should i as a stockholder of ATT foot the bill for that? too many “it’s not my fault someone else should pay or it is their fault” of a mindset has set in in the USA today...
Lol! Relax a little, ya know? Did you happen to watch the video?
And don't take your personal portfolio problems out on me, I just linked the video and story.
Besides, it looks like your stock is doing quite okay.
Assume that this had be a normal house fire, what would have happened? The couple would have had to pay for the equipment, usually via their home insurance policy.
There is nothing sinister about what is being done here.
I just re-read the posted story about the video, and also what I wrote and I have no idea what you are referring to as "sinister."
Did you hear "sinister" in the video?
From dictionary.com:
sin·is·ter
–adjective
1. threatening or portending evil, harm, or trouble; ominous: a sinister remark.
2. bad, evil, base, or wicked; fell: his sinister purposes.
3. unfortunate; disastrous; unfavorable: a sinister accident.
My use was as in ....
There is nothing sinister (bad, evil, or wicked) with what AT&T is doing to this couple in expecting compensation for the SAT receiver.
You just read the title and didn't watch the short video, right?
It's true, though that life is busy. It makes it very easy to miss out on everything when you don't take the time to read.
Here it is again:
Apparently the newlywed couple had just returned from their honeymoon, arrived home and realized the fire was fast approaching. They gathered up their belongings and then fled the advancing fire.
According to the newlywed bride, the AT&T Representative asked her if they had been able to save the AT&T equipment satellite receiver from the fire.
When the bride answered that the AT&T equipment had been destroyed in the fire which had burned their home to the ground, the AT&T Representative informed the couple that their bill would be payable upon receipt as usual.
The bride said that she asked the AT&T Representative if AT&T would be willing to wait until she and her husband were reimbursed by their insurance company. Again, AT&T answered that the bill had to be paid as soon as they received it.
AT&T California's Customer Service is not entirely based in California. From what I understand, they have also offices in Mumbai, India and Manila, Philippines.
Perhaps the couple could try calling customer service again.
And what’s going to happen if they don’t pay their bill right on time? What is AT&T going to do? Burn their house down?
LOL! There you are again, and you still haven't read beyond the title and you haven't watched the video yet, have you?
Computer screens can be hard on the eyesight, making it difficult to read text, much more so than printed paper.
However, the video is very short and you can listen to it without watching if your eyes are bothering you.
Here it is again.
I’ve read your comments to other posters, but still can not discern your own opinion regarding this event. What say you?
Late payment on an AT&T satellite receiver/service account would probably affect their credit rating.
It is a little surprising that AT&T has refused the couple extra time to pay their bill while waiting for their homeowner's insurance to reimburse the loss of the AT&T equipmment.
In this case, however, it may be a matter of AT&T being the only company in town, or at least for that service area. If the couple rebuilds their house on that same land, they may have no choice but to choose AT&T again, or do without.
AT&T should be paid but they also should pro-rate the bill and provide a grace period to pay.
Unfortunately AT&T has no obligation to be nice. When rebuffed by the rep, the woman should have asked for a supervisor, and gone up the line until reaching someone who either extended the payment due date or understood the PR implications of not doing so.
Thank you for asking, NautiNurse.
Since you're Free Republic's resident expert on hurricane disasters and recovery, it would be interesting to hear your opinion about the catastrophic firestorms in Southern California, and about the upcoming recovery efforts.
Here's what I wrote about the newscast.
Exactly what I was thinking. Did they also contact Best Buy to replace the television, albeit they don't have an electrical outlet to plug it into? I would chalk this story up to a ditsy bride.
This is an example of the “new” A.T. & T. which is really the same as the old A.T. & T. The best thing about the do not call list was that I no longer had to receive the daily call from A.T. & T. trying to get me to convert to their long distance plan. What bastards.
Example: In Florida, if a hurricane should destroy a leased vehicle,or home or SAT receiver the leasee would pay for repairs or replacement with his insurance. I would hope the newlyweds would have “Homeowners Insurance”.....
That's true. Do you believe that AT&T should wait for insurance companies to reimburse losses from the fire or should AT&T continue to demand on-time payments as contractually scheduled?
There are thousands of people whose homes and material possessions were destroyed in these fires, some folks with very limited resources and available cash.
How much buffer would a company like AT&T have to have to withstand thousands of late and possible non-payments?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
