Great, whatever. You're right. I didn't get out of my Sprint contract. I'm a liar.
I don't doubt you - I have no reason to do so, since this really is just a case of your word against ... well... nobody... It seems that you had a lucky encounter. It's not safe to assume that everyone will have an equivalent experience.
You're also right about verbal contracts. They're just so easy to enforce.
Apparently you haven't been following the whole thread. You're getting terms confused which have already been explained here. Verbal contracts are defined as contracts whose terms are set down in words. It doesn't matter if those words are in written form or spoken form - they are both forms of verbal contracts.
A contract written down and signed on a piece of paper is a "written contract". It is also a form of "verbal contract".
A contract agreed to by spoken words is an "oral contract". It is also a form of "verbal contract".
I just made a million bucks by claiming a bunch of local restaurants agreed to pay me for a soup recipe I don't really have.
That is a my-word-against-theirs situation, where it is likely that neither side can produce any evidence to back up their case.
Totally different from the documented paper trail that phone companies procedurally build up - they have a computer record of the date and time that they established contact with you via a phone call. They keep track of each instance where, during the course of the call, one operator transfers you to another one (eg the contract termination desk). In this case it is not just an instance of my-word-against-theirs... It is my-word-against-their-documented-evidence-to-the-contrary.
It is entirely possible that sometimes (maybe even more often than not) the cost of assembling a coherent summary of this evidence is greater than the money they'd bring in from the early termination fee - and in that case, they may decide to hedge their losses and let the agreement slide. That doesn't make the agreement any less binding, if they were determined to prove their point at any cost.
Oh, and if you want to put someone you don't like in prison, all you have to do is accuse them of rape! I hear they don't ven investigate after you do that.
The burden of proof in any criminal matter (such as rape) is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This stems from the basic tenant that is is better that 10 guilty men should be set free than that 1 innocent man should be falsely convicted.
The burden in civil matters is less stringent - typically the standard is the greater preponderance of evidence - whichever side has better than 50% of the evidence pointing in his favour wins.
