| Author |
Message |
shatheid
Posts: 1 |
 
Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:16 pm |
i am on a shared family plan, and the person whose name the account is in has received the following letter from cingular yesterday. this is the same address that we signed up for the account on, have always had bills sent to...and never had any problems yet. on the map on their website, we are both clearly in their coverage territory. im smack dab in the middle, she is near the edge a bit...but still in their 'estimated coverage'
"we have determined you live and use your phone in an area not directly served by Cingular's network"
"as part of our regular review of customer accounts, we have determined you live and use your phone in an area not directly served by Cingular's network.
"This situation occurs with less than one percent of the customers on Cingular's plans, but when it happens, the costs to Cingular greatly increases. That's why this type of usage is contrary to the terms of your rate plan."
"As a result, your Cingular service will be cancelled by April 14, 2006. Of course, Cingular will waive teh early termination fee. To maintain wireless service we recommend you select a wireless service provider who directly serves teh area where you do most of your calling. If you choose this option you may be able to keep your current phone number, and you will not have to pay an early termination fee to Cingular."
"We regret this situation has occurred and, though no one is at fault, it is important that you find an alternate carrier before April 14, 2006. If you don't, your service will be terminated with no further warning."
"Please contact us at 866-704-0181 during business hours Monday-Friday, 7 am-7pm EST; Saturday, 9am-6pm CST and reference keyword: "Off-Network."
|
 |
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
|
steva11
Posts: 1687
Phone Model:
w810i/pearl
Service Provider:
Rogers |
Tue Mar 14, 2006 12:55 am |
Cingular has always had a policy that they can terminate service if you roam more than 50% on another carrier's network...they started enforcing that earlier this month. many people have recieved the same letter.
it's too costly for cingular.
|
|
elmo01
Posts: 2186
Phone Model:
Samsung SPH-M510
Service Provider:
Bell Canada |
Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:37 am |
|
I'll almost bet that the OP is in the Carolinas...its happening a lot down there
|
|
Jadall
Posts: 389
Phone Model:
Nokia 3300,Nokia n-gage, SEt290a
Service Provider:
Cingular |
Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:47 pm |
|
Wow very interesting!!
|
|
Cingularity
Posts: 22
Phone Model:
SonyEricsson S710a
Service Provider:
The Largest One |
Sun Mar 26, 2006 4:30 am |
|
The logic is that even though a customer has a $59.99 rate plan that allows them nationwide coverage without roaming charges, if they live/work in an area where the towers are owned by a partner carrier and greater than 50% of their usage is not on Cingular-owned towers, when the partner carrier sends the bill to Cingular for that customer's use on their towers, the bill is $300... then Cingular is losing $240 a month by having that customer.
|
|
Susi
Posts: 5 |
Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:39 pm |
I got the same letter. I had to sign up with Verizon. Isn't it funny how they're just starting to enforce this c**p now when I've had my service for 9 months and have upgraded my plan twice. I was told it's 31% of the calls placed were "off network". If this is the case, why did they issue me a number and let me have service if I'm not in their coverage area? Now I'm stuck on sucky Verizon, which I hate.
I don't suppose there can be a class action suit on this?
|
|
steva11
Posts: 1687
Phone Model:
w810i/pearl
Service Provider:
Rogers |
Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:07 pm |
|
no, there can be no suit. you wouldn't win. 31%? I thought it was only 50% and over that got the letter.
|
|
elmo01
Posts: 2186
Phone Model:
Samsung SPH-M510
Service Provider:
Bell Canada |
Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:43 am |
| Susi wrote: | I got the same letter. I had to sign up with Verizon. Isn't it funny how they're just starting to enforce this c**p now when I've had my service for 9 months and have upgraded my plan twice. I was told it's 31% of the calls placed were "off network". If this is the case, why did they issue me a number and let me have service if I'm not in their coverage area? Now I'm stuck on sucky Verizon, which I hate.
I don't suppose there can be a class action suit on this? |
its not the number... its where the phone is being used and what network the phone is registering on
|
|
BigRUSS
Posts: 2105
Phone Model:
two cans ( del monte) and some string,
Service Provider:
RussCo |
Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:47 pm |
|
for all of you people that are geting this letter, where did you sign up your service???? did you use your actualy pysical address or did you have to give somone elses address???? did you notice alot of FMR in your call detail????
|
|
Susi
Posts: 5 |
Mon Mar 27, 2006 3:14 pm |
I gave my home address, and my PO box for them to send the bills to. The only difference between my home address and the PO box is 2 blocks.
I just wish someone would have told me about this before I signed up because then I wouldn't have bothered.
As for the other question, I have no idea what that is, so I can't answer it.
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
