<Well, if you've spent the last 3 weeks in Australia, it's unlikely that you've 
been calling Sprint customer service from there, so theywouldn't be dropping 
you.>>

This is not true, because the letter arrived the day I left for Perth. I called 
them everyday for a month _before_ I went away because I wanted to get my bill 
cleared up before I left.

< one of the more frequently heard questions associated with this story is "if 
I complain, will they let me out, too?">

Yes, but so is "Time to boycott Sprint over its customer treatment". (ZDNet)
http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=5604

And, no doubt, some insurance companies act unethically, but I'm reffering to 
the many companies that establish a prior understanding with policy holders 
that if they become "high maintenance"(in this case too many accidents) they 
may need to find a different provider. In Sprint's case no prior understanding 
existed (other than, perhaps, the boiler-plate "Sprint reserves the right to 
cancel this contract at its discretion" fine print which is not really a 
customer/company understanding that Sprint can only handle so many  calls). 



--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

From: "Craig Froehle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Treo] Sprint canning users who complain too much
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 20:43:12 -0400

On 10 Jul 2007 18:33:00 -0400, Bill Motzing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if I just got back from 3 weeks in Australia to find I've no phone and
> no-one has my number anymore because its been given away? Welcome home.

Well, if you've spent the last 3 weeks in Australia, it's unlikely
that you've been calling Sprint customer service from there, so they
wouldn't be dropping you.  So, the intersection of the "calling every
day to complain" crowd and the "vacationing in Perth" crowd is zero.

> If my contract is coming up and I've been mistreated, I'll likely already be
> considering other companies. Most people are aware of the length of their
> contracts. Additionally, by Sprint waiting for the contract to expire, an
> oportunity is created for the customer to make a choice.

OTOH, this could be viewed as giving these highly unsatisfied
customers a choice (of alternate carriers) well before their contract
is up.  In that light, Sprint is actually doing well by these
customers by letting them out of the contracts in advance.  I think
that's actually _preferable_ (and so do many others, since one of the
more frequently heard questions associated with this story is "if I
complain, will they let me out, too?").

> Just as car  insurance co.s don't renew drivers with bad  records' policies,

Um, car insurance companies regularly *drop* policy holders (i.e.,
cancel policies, just as Sprint is doing) on a massive scale for no
reason beyond a single accident, ticket, etc.  If you think what
Sprint's doing is bad, the folks running the insurance companies must
be on the express ferry to Hades.


Reply via email to