This is old and has been brought up before.
This is criminal on the part of the phone companies.
This is old and has been brought up before.
This is criminal on the part of the phone companies.
Seems you are lacking some too. The woman liked that phone better. She's been paying the same amount for it for years. Old people get set in their ways and dont like changes. She was perfectly happy with her bill and her phone service.
And my point was, years from now, people will still lease their modems. Most people dont even know they lease their modem, its just part of the monthly fee and they dont know any different.
spacejamz
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 10,865
- 1,510
- 126
please let us know exactly what law is being broken here...
and for the other @sshat posters in this thread, let's see where you will be when you are 60+ and you have been doing something the same way for 20+ years...give the lady a break...I am sure everyone's grandparents here keep up to date on all of the latest technology trends...
it so much easier to criticize someone else when you do not even put yourself in their position....
Have people actually read the article?
$14000 is the estimated total she's paid over the 42 years, the amount she's actually paid to rent the phone after the disbanding is only about $2000, $10 a month.
$14000 is the estimated total she's paid over the 42 years, the amount she's actually paid to rent the phone after the disbanding is only about $2000, $10 a month.
I'm probably going regret asking for a logical thought from you...what, exactly, is criminal about providing a service like phone leasing?
Most of the people in this forum are too young to remember that you HAD to lease the telephone from the telephone company. No unauthorized phones were allowed and that was the way things were done.
For what reason? The phone company offered a service, printed on the bill how much that service was, and those 750,000 people pay for it. Anyone can walk into Wal Mart and see all the phones for sale and decide to stop paying the phone company. Thats their decision. Just because a company overcharges something doesn't mean its illegal. Its up to the consumer to not pay for it if its out of line.
the bad math in this article and thread makes my head hurt..
ok, we will ignore the first 20 years, because maybe it was a more common practice back then, so by 1985 it might have been expected that most people would have been buying their phones..not everybody is an early adopter you know
Strogen said she paid $29.10 every 3 months, = $9.70/month
$9.70/month*12 months/year*21 years =$2444
ok, so thats more than the under $2,000 that Lucent claims that she spent..probably rates were lower on a per monthly rate
her grandkids should be happy--I bet she didnt have a DSL connection on that line, like my grandfather does..think of the thousands of savings!!
and the $14K figure is purely absurd, since we already know that the rate was at some point less than $10/month, even adjusted for inflation..its not like someone who is paying to rent a phone is going to be having a superstar financial portfolio
ok, we will ignore the first 20 years, because maybe it was a more common practice back then, so by 1985 it might have been expected that most people would have been buying their phones..not everybody is an early adopter you know
Strogen said she paid $29.10 every 3 months, = $9.70/month
$9.70/month*12 months/year*21 years =$2444
ok, so thats more than the under $2,000 that Lucent claims that she spent..probably rates were lower on a per monthly rate
her grandkids should be happy--I bet she didnt have a DSL connection on that line, like my grandfather does..think of the thousands of savings!!
and the $14K figure is purely absurd, since we already know that the rate was at some point less than $10/month, even adjusted for inflation..its not like someone who is paying to rent a phone is going to be having a superstar financial portfolio
Would you pay $1.4 million dollars in interest for your $140,000 house just because the lender made an open ended lease???
Are we going to be saying this about ourselves 30 years from now about "leasing" our cable boxes and remotes?
It's because the TelCo is a corporation and in dmcowen674's book that already makes them guilty.
From your own link:
Colloquially, the term has been expanded to refer to the practice of convincing borrowers to agree to unfair and abusive loan terms. ...
Clearly the lease is fraudalent.
It would be my choice to do so or not. I wouldn't be saying the lender should have criminal charges brought up against them.
Let's follow the thought out. What are "unfair and abusive loan terms"?
Care to point out exactly where in the lease agreement the terms become unfair and abusive?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 20K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 12K
-
Discussion Speculation: Zen 4 (EPYC 4 "Genoa", Ryzen 7000, etc.)- Started by Vattila
- Replies: 13K
-
Facebook
Twitter