Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Customer takes Bell to court and wins

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 82 posts

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#41

Post by dawnerd »

koolba wrote: post #11
TallGuyShort wrote: post #4

>> In a move that was pivotal to his legal case, he requested a transcript of the call I take advantage of the fact that the companies who seem to be the most frustrating to deal with, are courteous enough to begin each phone call stating that "calls may be recorded." I have a call recording app on my phone and on at least 3 occasions I have had a company immediately escalate a phone call to a person who immediately…

I've had the same experience though I don't use a special app, just regular audio recorder, as the phone I'm using for the call isn't my mobile. On every occasion that I've mentioned having a recording of terms distinct from what is actually being provided/charged I've received immediate escalation and resolution. The funniest was with an ISP (who shall remain nameless) who claimed that they didn't have access to the…

Probably why they say "your call may be monitored or recorded"

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#42

Post by rarec »

btilly wrote: post #37
thaumasiotes wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They'll stop at nothing! Would they have gone as high as $1,010? $1,050?!?! The judgment against them was $1,110; how high do you think they should have gone with the settlement offer?

Given that they are now going to face a class action lawsuit and hundreds more of these, $30,000 would have been cheap for his silence. The question isn't what he has to gain, it is what they stood to lose.

In most cases, they have very little. I may hate Comcast, but if I have the misfortune of moving into a place and they're the only game in town, it's basically tough luck. Could rant and rave all day about how terrible everything is, but I have to have internet for work either way.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#43

Post by alexbeloi »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #26
rdiddly wrote: post #25

"Before they got to court, Bell offered Ramsay money to drop the case — $300, roughly the amount Ramsay estimated the telecom would be over-billing him for two years. He declined." HA! "Three weeks before the court date, Bell contacted Ramsay again. He was offered $1,000 to settle, but was required to sign a confidentiality agreement. Again, Ramsay declined." Wow, big spenders! They'll spare no expense! They'll stop…

> They'll stop at nothing! Would they have gone as high as $1,010? $1,050?!?! The judgment against them was $1,110; how high do you think they should have gone with the settlement offer?

Not counting damages to reputation

(1 - P) * 1110 + (cost of additional legal fees)

Where P is Bell's probability of winning.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#44

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

mcherm wrote: post #29
ryanlol wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is utterly ridiculous that iOS is still lacking support for this super basic feature.

But there's a good reason for that -- as long as legislatures keep making it ILLEGAL to use such a feature, can you really blame Apple for not wanting to offer it?

It wasn't legal to rip CDs in many places of the world but they promoted it heavily.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#45

Post by jgh »

giarc wrote: post #22
ryanlol wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is utterly ridiculous that iOS is still lacking support for this super basic feature.

It's not really a basic feature. The sandboxing of iOS apps is smart in many ways. Allowing 3rd party access to an native Apple app could open up problems.

They already allow recording the audio from other apps, other than through audio plugins which apps have to purposefully implement, via ReplayKit.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#47

Post by 21 »

rdiddly wrote: post #25

"Before they got to court, Bell offered Ramsay money to drop the case — $300, roughly the amount Ramsay estimated the telecom would be over-billing him for two years. He declined." HA! "Three weeks before the court date, Bell contacted Ramsay again. He was offered $1,000 to settle, but was required to sign a confidentiality agreement. Again, Ramsay declined." Wow, big spenders! They'll spare no expense! They'll stop…

Maybe in the other 9 instances that this happened before 1000 worked. Lawyers are not hiqh-quality PR people who understand that today the smallest thing can blow up in a multi-million dollar problem.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#49

Post by throwaway613834 »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #4

>> In a move that was pivotal to his legal case, he requested a transcript of the call I take advantage of the fact that the companies who seem to be the most frustrating to deal with, are courteous enough to begin each phone call stating that "calls may be recorded." I have a call recording app on my phone and on at least 3 occasions I have had a company immediately escalate a phone call to a person who immediately…

> That's why I like it when companies tell me they're recording - then I have a green light.

I'm not sure them having permission to record implies you also having permission to record in all-party-consent states. I would appreciate a source stating otherwise.

Re: Customer takes Bell to court and wins

#50

Post by ballenf »

Spoom wrote: post #28
TallGuyShort wrote: post #4

>> In a move that was pivotal to his legal case, he requested a transcript of the call I take advantage of the fact that the companies who seem to be the most frustrating to deal with, are courteous enough to begin each phone call stating that "calls may be recorded." I have a call recording app on my phone and on at least 3 occasions I have had a company immediately escalate a phone call to a person who immediately…

I'm guessing companies will eventually change the message to say that they're recording, and place their call center in a two party state, so you have to request their permission to record on your end (which they will decline).

Would they have to wait for the customer to likewise consent -- would their recording not be an implicit consent?

Even in the two-party states, I would be surprised to find a judge or prosecutor who would allow a claim against a customer recording a call that was also recorded by the company. Even if technically violating the letter of the law. But cases like these have surprised me before.

Post reply on HN