How to get out of att-fee free!!

[ct2k7]

I've managed to get a copy of the AT&T contract. From what I've read, the exploit is excluded, and is not a way out of your contract - it is not considered a breech of contract.

 

[Lindsayej1983]

.

 

[ct2k7]

It's not MY contract that I repeatedly cancel. I've done so for my account ONCE, but have done it many times on behalf of friends/family. I am with Verizon and happy as can be.

You cancelled their contracts on their behalf? I assume, with their consent, and knowing you could get them blacklisted.

 

[dukebound85]

Do you mean like if you already have the iphone, have had it for the 2 years, but the contract is up would they make you get another 2 year to keep using the iphone? If so, no, it's not mandatory. Me and my roommate's contracts were up slightly (like a month or so) before the iphone 4 was out and had no issues being on month to month til it was out.

If you mean if you get a new iphone? I'm not sure if AT&T allows you to go month to month on a new iphone (say you bought used or bought full price from Apple) and you are not on contract already. I've never tried or worried about it (I always just get a subsidized phone from them when my contract runs out. I have had no issues so have no problems taking advantage of a cheaper phone by agreeing to be with them for 2 more years).

Not quite. I realize you can go month to month subsequently after you had fulfilled your contract.

My question is if one goes to a different network and decides at a later point to rejoin ATT, are they forced to have a new 2 year contract with the old iphone that had already completed its initial contract

I know in the past, you had to which was quite illogical to me as if you say gave your old iphone to a family member and they wanted to use it as a phone, they would be required to have a 2yr contract even though they already have a handset that is not being subsidized.

 

[Lindsayej1983]

.

 

[Xian Zhu Xuande]

Not really

There is nothing wrong with breaking a contract if it allows for it. Far from being "illicit/illegal" as ATT would have to honor it if indeed the contract was terminated (ie both parties acted so it can never ever be illegal...)

Haha. Would you shrug it off if AT&T used some weasel words in the contract to charge you unanticipated fees or increase your rates? No, you'd be pissed. There is nothing legally wrong with doing it, but there's something ethically wrong with doing it. Why do people who want to be weasels feel it is so important for others to validate their decisions?

However, I do not care for companies as they always try to take advantage of the consumer in most cases and look out for their bottom line. For instance, ATT charges the same plan rates for unsubsidized phones as subsidized (which the plans are supposed to be making up the cost). Why should a customer not be entitled to act in their best interest as long as the contract allows for it?

Only a valid argument if the company (AT&T in this case) has not honored your side of the agreement. If AT&T has honored their contract (they pretty much always do) and the other person is the one being the disingenuous weasel, that lies with them. As for the terms of the contract, the consumer entered into it willingly with their eyes wide open.

And your unsubsidized vs. subsidized argument isn't valid. You're only in contract to make up for subsidized pricing. Outside that period of time, you're free to cancel whenever you wish. Additionally, measures a wireless provider has in place in an attempt to ensure they don't lose money on a customer (and to prevent people from buying just to hawk on eBay) do not under any circumstance mean they are not entitled to charge their regular fee to customers who are not in a contract.

In summary, I have no idea why jav6454 thinks it's illicit nor cares what other people are legally able to do.

Depends on the definition of illicit, really. Forbidden by law? It certainly is not. But it is also not an honest or sincere way of doing business. And that's the only focus of my reply—I don't care if people do this. It is just a personal pet peeve when people do something which is unethical, dishonest, or disingenous, then have the nerve to turn to the community for justification or validation. If someone's going to steal, they should acknowledge they're a thief. If someone's going to lie, they should acknowledge they're a liar. If someone's going to be a weasel, by golly, dawn the furry mantle.

 

[Lindsayej1983]

.

 

[dukebound85]

Haha. Would you shrug it off if AT&T used some weasel words in the contract to charge you unanticipated fees or increase your rates? No, you'd be pissed. There is nothing legally wrong with doing it, but there's something ethically wrong with doing it. Why do people who want to be weasels feel it is so important for others to validate their decisions?

And ATT would suffer a massive blow to their company as they would attract no customers. While they could do as you hypothisized, it is not in their interest long term

Only a valid argument if the company (AT&T in this case) has not honored your side of the agreement. If AT&T has honored their contract (they pretty much always do) and the other person is the one being the disingenuous weasel, that lies with them. As for the terms of the contract, the consumer entered into it willingly with their eyes wide open.

If the contract, that ATT had written mind you, allows for it, it is fine. Why do you think we have contracts?

And your unsubsidized vs. subsidized argument isn't valid. You're only in contract to make up for subsidized pricing. Outside that period of time, you're free to cancel whenever you wish. Additionally, measures a wireless provider has in place in an attempt to ensure they don't lose money on a customer (and to prevent people from buying just to hawk on eBay) do not under any circumstance mean they are not entitled to charge their regular fee to customers who are not in a contract.

Fair point

Depends on the definition of illicit, really. Forbidden by law? It certainly is not. But it is also not an honest or sincere way of doing business. And that's the only focus of my reply—I don't care if people do this. It is just a personal pet peeve when people do something which is unethical, dishonest, or disingenous, then have the nerve to turn to the community for justification or validation. If someone's going to steal, they should acknowledge they're a thief. If someone's going to lie, they should acknowledge they're a liar. If someone's going to be a weasel, by golly, dawn the furry mantle.

You would be amazed at how strict people/companies follow contracts to a T and if something is violated, it is a really big deal. Of course I speak from my experience working with government contracts where the stakes were a bit more important than cell phones but my point is the same. If terms are changed, you are no longer tied to it unless you agree to the changes

Personally, seeing as how the contract specifically excludes this loophole, I would never attempt to pull the wool over ATT eyes by hoping to deal with csr's who are slightly oblivious

 

[tigress666]

I know in the past, you had to which was quite illogical to me as if you say gave your old iphone to a family member and they wanted to use it as a phone, they would be required to have a 2yr contract even though they already have a handset that is not being subsidized.

Well that's kind of ridiculous.

Why would I agree to be forced to stay with them for 2 years if they aren't offering me anything in return?

I guess though the idea is that if you want service from us, you have to agree to stay with us for a certain amount of time (verizon did that with fios and they didn't offer anything free with it, just the ability to get FIOS. Which we like but sadly the company that bought FIOS now wants out of the tv business so they are raising cable rates and trying to encourage people to leave the tv side of it at least as they only want the internet business ).

In that case since they do offer a subsidized phone for going in a 2 year contract, I'd at least make them give me one of the free ones they offer as a backup and at least get something for the 2 year contract.

 

[Xian Zhu Xuande]

And ATT would suffer a massive blow to their company as they would attract no customers. While they could do as you hypothisized, it is not in their interest long term

It looks like you missed the point.

If the contract, that ATT had written mind you, allows for it, it is fine. Why do you think we have contracts?

Actually, it is a legal issue. If AT&T were left to its own devices do you think they would allow a customer to ditch a multi-hundred-dollar contract because they're pissy about some dollars and cents? More likely, they would offer a courtesy credit and an apology instead—a perfectly appropriate response.

You would be amazed at how strict people/companies follow contracts to a T and if something is violated, it is a really big deal. Of course I speak from my experience working with government contracts where the stakes were a bit more important than cell phones but my point is the same. If terms are changed, you are no longer tied to it unless you agree to the changes

Yeah, but if you read the contract you'll see that this amounts to shenanigans.

Personally, seeing as how the contract specifically excludes this loophole, I would never attempt to pull the wool over ATT eyes by hoping to deal with csr's who are slightly oblivious

I think it boils down simply to this: a customer who sincerely cared about this would probably have already caught it, and even if not, their goal in calling would not be to eliminate the contract, but rather to get the amount charged out of contract refunded with a possible courtesy credit to compensate them for the fuss of the phone call. Nobody calling about this technicality is doing so with this goal in mind, I wager. They're looking for an easy way out of the contract they agreed to.