**alert**automatic Verizon Contract Change In 60 Days

[Intrepidun]

I just received this e-mail from Verizon. Does ANYONE have a clue as to what this is about? We are told in effect that our contract will AUTOMATICALLY be modified by this new-fangled contract unless we advise Verizon within 60 days. It is related to the Campbell suit, but it is unclear how. This is the first few paragraphs of the message. Anyone who wishes to see the whole thing please e-mail me:

NOTICE

VERIZON WIRELESS IS SENDING YOU THIS NEW CUSTOMER AGREEMENT AS PART OF THE SETTLEMENT OF A LAWSUIT.

THE COURT HAS NOT TAKEN ANY POSITION ON, OR APPROVED, ANY PART OF THIS NEW CUSTOMER AGREEMENT.



UNLESS YOU TELL US THAT YOU PREFER YOUR EXISTING CONTRACT LANGUAGE, HOWEVER, THIS NEW CUSTOMER AGREEMENT WILL REPLACE YOUR EXISTING CONTRACT LANGUAGE. IT WILL NOT CHANGE YOUR PRICE PLAN OR THE LENGTH OF ANY REMAINING TERM OF YOUR SERVICE.



IF YOU DO NOT WANT THE LANGUAGE IN THIS NEW CUSTOMER AGREEMENT TO APPLY TO YOU, SIMPLY SEND AN E-MAIL TO CSAOptOut@CampbellVZWSettlement.com WITH YOUR NAME AND WIRELESS TELEPHONE NUMBER, OR CALL, TOLL FREE, 1-800-572-7857 AND LEAVE THE SAME INFORMATION ANY TIME WITHIN 60 DAYS OF RECEIVING THIS NOTICE.

david.posner@comcast.net

[Jay2TheRescue]

What are the terms of your current agreement, and what has changed in the new agreement?

-Jay

[Intrepidun]

That's the question. If you read through the 20 some-odd pages, you still don't know the actual implications of this. And I certainly don't have my original contract handy. Even if I did, I wouldn't automatically appreciate the implication of the alternatives.

[Critic]

Intrepidun - I haven't received the e-mail you referred to. Is it possible that this is only affecting customers in California? Also, have you tried calling customer service to establish 1) that the e-mail is genuine, and 2) what the changes to the contract terms are, in layman's terms? It seems to me that if this is genuine, and so overreaching that they're sending you 20 pages to review, the CSRs should be able to bullet-point the changes for you.

Also, I don't know about California, but I know that in NJ, while a SIGNATURE isn't required to put a new contract into effect, VZW is required to get some kind of implicit consent (ie: your recorded voice saying that you agree to the changes).

[Intrepidun]

I just don't know. I'm going to ask Verizon here in Fresno.

[Quint101]

I received the same notice in my bill... VZ sent me the revised contract. They sent this as a result of a settlement of a lawsuit a few years back; I am not sure what the old contract is saying; Despite the fact I dont want to be ignorant about my actions, I'll probably won't opt out since I am going to stay w/ VZ for a while and I am not part of this settlement.

[ZaphodB]

I live in California, and I didn't get this e-mail.

[WiggyFife]

I'm not aware of & haven't received any such alleged monkey-business...

[Jay2TheRescue]

Originally Posted by Quint101

I received the same notice in my bill... VZ sent me the revised contract. They sent this as a result of a settlement of a lawsuit a few years back; I am not sure what the old contract is saying; Despite the fact I dont want to be ignorant about my actions, I'll probably won't opt out since I am going to stay w/ VZ for a while and I am not part of this settlement.

I can almost guarantee they aren't changing the contract to give you more rights. I think I would oppose it if I had a choice.

-Jay

[wgray8231]

Originally Posted by Jay2TheRescue

I can almost guarantee they aren't changing the contract to give you more rights. I think I would oppose it if I had a choice.

Normally, I would agree, but if VZW is being forced by the ruling in a lawsuit it would make sense that the new contract is "better" for the customer.

[Critic]

Originally Posted by wgray8231

Normally, I would agree, but if VZW is being forced by the ruling in a lawsuit it would make sense that the new contract is "better" for the customer.

Not necessarilly. The new contract may simply be reworded to close whatever legal loophole allowed the suit in question.

[SmArTeStChIlD421]

just so everyone knows......this can be a good time to get out of your contract.....i dont know if verizon does this but check your terms.....sprint terms state that if a change is made to your terms and you don't agree with it....cal within 30 days of the change and they'll let you out of your contract with no ETF!!!

[Critic]

Originally Posted by SmArTeStChIlD421

just so everyone knows......this can be a good time to get out of your contract.....i dont know if verizon does this but check your terms.....sprint terms state that if a change is made to your terms and you don't agree with it....cal within 30 days of the change and they'll let you out of your contract with no ETF!!!

Nope. Go back and reread the original post. There's an opt-out of the new contract language. The get-out-of-jail-free card only applies when VZW tries to make a mandatory change to your account (new fee, different terms, etc.) that you CAN'T opt-out of.

[SmArTeStChIlD421]

i stand corrected

I sure wish someone could find out more on this.

It's like one of those 'itches' that gets worse because you cannot 'reach it', in this case a 60 day reach problem.

[alcue]

I live in NY, so I can't guarantee this will hold elsewhere.

I've done a quick comparison between this agreement and my original one. here are the differences I've spotted so far:

under OUR RIGHTS TO MAKE CHANGES:
original agreement: last paragraph: "within 30 days after the first bill when your changes go into effect"
new agreement: last paragraph: "within 60 days after we send you notice of the change."

under YOUR WIRELESS PHONE NUMBER AND CALLER ID:
original agreement: "The same is true of your wireless phone number, except for any right you may have to port it."
new agreement: "The same is true of your wireless phone number, except for any rights federal law grants you."

under CHARGES AND FEES WE SET:
original agreement: "You agree to pay all access, usage, and other charges and surcharges we bill you, even if you weren't the user of your wireless phone and didn't authorize its use. You may have to pay a fee..."
new agreement: "You agree to pay all access, usage, and other charges and surcharges we bill you, even if you weren't the user of your wireless phone and didn't authorize its use. These include Federal Universal Service, Regulatory and Administrative Charges, and may also include other charges related to our governmental costs. We set these charges. They aren't taxes, aren't required by law, are kept by us in whole or in part, and the amounts and what's included are subject to change. You may have to pay a fee..."

under HOW WE CALCULATE YOUR BILL:
original agreement: "We bill for calls that connect, including calls answered by machines. In some areas we also bill for uncompleted calls that ring for a minute or more."
new agreement: omits billing for uncompleted calls that ring for a minute or more

under YOUR RIGHTS FOR DROPPED CALLS OR INTERRUPTED SERVICE:
original agreement: "If service is interrupted in your home airtime rate area for more than 24 hours in a row due to our fault, call us within 90 days..."
new agreement: "If service is interrupted in your home rate and coverage area for more than 24 hours in a row due to our fault, call us within 180 days..."

under PAYMENTS, DEPOSITS, CREDIT CARDS, AND CHECKS:
new agreement: "(IF YOU CHOOSE ANOTHER COMPANY TO BILL YOU FOR OUR SERVICE [SUCH AS VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS], LATE FEES WILL BE SET BY THAT PARTY OR BY ITS TARIFFS, WHICH MAY BE HIGHER THAN OUR LATE-FEE RATE.)"
original agreement: sentence is not included

original agreement: "WE MAY ALSO CHARGE FOR ANY COLLECTION AGENCY FEES BILLED TO US FOR TRYING TO COLLECT FROM YOU."
new agreement: "WE MAY ALSO CHARGE YOU FOR ANY COLLECTION AGENCY FEES THAT WE ARE CHARGED BY A COLLECTION AGENCY WE USE TO COLLECT FROM YOU IF IT IS PERMITTED BY THE LAW OF THE STATE WHERE YOU HAVE YOUR BILLING ADDRESS WHEN WE FIRST SEND YOUR ACCOUNT TO A COLLECTION AGENCY."

under IF SOMEONE STEALS YOUR WIRELESS PHONE:
original agreement: "If someone steals your wireless phone, notify us, provide us with any documentation (such as a police report) we request, and we'll suspend your service for up to 30 days, or until you replace or recover your wireless phone, whichever comes first. Until you notify us, you're still responsible for all fees and charges."
new agreement: "If someone steals your wireless phone, notify us. If we haven't given you a courtesy suspension of service and monthly fees within the prior year, we'll give you one for 30 days, or until you replace or recover your wireless phone, whichever comes first. Until we grant any suspension, you're still responsible to us for all fees and charges. You'll need to provide us with a sworn statement about the theft if we ask for one.", provide us with any documentation (such as a police report) we request, and we'll suspend your service for up to 30 days, or until you replace or recover your wireless phone, whichever comes first."

under OUR RIGHTS TO LIMIT OR END SERVICE OR THIS AGREEMENT:
original agreement: "You agree not to use (or permit your wireless phone to be used) for any purpose that's illegal or not allowed by this agreement."
new agreement: "You agree not to resell our service to someone else without our prior written permission. You also agree your wireless phone won't be used for any other purpose that isn't allowed by this agreement or that's illegal. You agree that you won't install, deploy, or use any regeneration equipment or similar mechanism (for example, a repeater) to originate, amplify, enhance, retransmit or regenerate a transmitted RF signal."

under DIRECTORIES AND YOUR PRIVACY:
original agreement (paraphrased): Your name, address and wireless number may be printed in a directory.
new agreement: "We don't publish directories of our customers' phone numbers. We don't provide them to third parties for listing in directories, either."

under WAIVERS AND LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY:
new agreement: "You also agree we aren't liable for missed voice mails, or deletions of voice mails from your voice mailbox (if you have one), even if you've saved them."
original agreement: statement missing

there also appear to be some differences in the DISPUTE RESOLUTION boilerplate, specifically about who pays for mediation. On the surface it appears Verizon pays for most or all of the mediation in the new agreement, while in the old agreement the customer was liable for more fees. However, there's a confusing "75%" limit/repay loophole in section (4) that it would probably take a lawyer to properly explain.

under ABOUT THIS AGREEMENT:
original agreement: "This agreement...[is] governed by the laws of the state encompassing the area code assigned to your wireless phone number, without regard to the conflicts of laws rules of that state."
new agreement: "Except to the extent we've agreed otherwise in the provisions of late fees, collection costs and arbitration, this agreement and disputes covered by it are governed by the laws of the state encompassing the area code assigned to your wireless phone number when you accepted this agreement, without regard to the conflicts of laws and rules of that state."

After all this, I'm still not sure if I want to stick with the original agreement or let them enact the new one. The new agreement seems to give customers longer windows in which to file for things, plus a break on mediation costs, and number privacy. However, the old agreement has better provisions for stolen phones, and makes Verizon comply with all state and Federal laws without the exceptions stated in the new version. And the new agreement says you can't start screaming when Verizon arbitrarily gooses all their hidden profit centers that are worded to look like taxes but really aren't.

Think I'll opt out of the new one after all.

Al

[VZW-LOVER]

If I understand it correctly. The main issue of the new contract is a VZW subscriber can not join a class action lawsuit. Arbitration is the only solution to solve any legal problems.

[dmarkson]

Thanks for that detailed comparison. That is what Verizon should have sent out!

[mrrd]

One more issue is the agreement not to use a "repeater, amplifier or any device to increase signal". There are many devices sold that boost signal in areas that are weak including cars and structures like office buildings which are mostly steel construction. If a signal was strong enough in these locations to begin with, these devices would not be necessary.

[VZW-LOVER]

I just opted out!.......when did everyone decide

[Fire14]

Originally Posted by mrrd

One more issue is the agreement not to use a "repeater, amplifier or any device to increase signal". There are many devices sold that boost signal in areas that are weak including cars and structures like office buildings which are mostly steel construction. If a signal was strong enough in these locations to begin with, these devices would not be necessary.

I wonder how they will enforce this, and if I remember correctly there is 1 manufacture of these devices, that is approved to be used by the carriers. I can't remember which companies it is though.

[Road Lizard]

wilson electronics has a smart system repeater that is supposedly approved. I have not read all the information on the PCS vers as it was released last week. It is supposed to be an automatic gain control feature of some sort that will not cause problems with system. The main problem with these repeaters in the past was that they had no gain control and someone could drive up to a site and have their repeater on full power and that causes the problems.

[scottb]

Originally Posted by alcue

I live in NY, so I can't guarantee this will hold elsewhere.

I've done a quick comparison between this agreement and my original one. here are the differences I've spotted so far:

under OUR RIGHTS TO MAKE CHANGES:
original agreement: last paragraph: "within 30 days after the first bill when your changes go into effect"
new agreement: last paragraph: "within 60 days after we send you notice of the change."
[snip...]

Wow, that's impressive. Nice job!

[SmArTeStChIlD421]

Originally Posted by alcue

I live in NY, so I can't guarantee this will hold elsewhere.

I've done a quick comparison between this agreement and my original one. here are the differences I've spotted so far.....

you have way too much time on your hands

[wirewatcher88]

After 5 years of service I was very very dissapointed in what I deem to be a "Deceptive" direct mailing marketing scheme that was recently sent out in the northern Calif region and possibly others. What it is : MY wife & I activated 2 lines on the same day under both our names with the same exact calling plans about 1/ 1/2 years ago. Recently we received a "Love me letter" from Verizon stating we had achieved "Merits Status" for being exceptional customers and as a result could upgrade our phones early and have camera phones etc . with a host of new ammenities. We get to the Verizon store after planning to get our new phones only to find that VERIZON will only allow one of us to activate a new phone with the $100 discount but the other would have to pay!!! We only became aware of this after we called an 800 number and were told by the store manager. NOWHERE on the mailer does it state that only one phone is eligible and in fact at the bottom in small print it says no more than 5 phones eligible. This is tantamount to false advertising and I know they figure most people will just pay the extra $100 once they are their . Not us . We are now going to discontinue Verizon as soon as the plan expires. very mad since verizon used to be an honorable company. WW88

[wirewatcher88]

Does anyone know if these plan changes extend to the west coast--would like to discontinue service asap and change carriers!

[jrip]

Originally Posted by Fire14

I wonder how they will enforce this, and if I remember correctly there is 1 manufacture of these devices, that is approved to be used by the carriers. I can't remember which companies it is though.

Digital Antenna offers the only device approved for use on any carrier, except Nextel. There is a separate amp/repeater for Nextel. But your answer is....http://digitalantenna.com/cellamprep_DA4000MR.html

[VZW-LOVER]

Originally Posted by wirewatcher88

Does anyone know if these plan changes extend to the west coast--would like to discontinue service asap and change carriers!

I'm on the West Coast and it does!