i need some legal advice...

[WRXface]

ok im not a law student or anything, i remember my teacher telling me that in any contract, i have the right to remain silent, which means the contract can not start or end with my silence, i have to sign something, i have do something.

i dont want to pay this early termination fee im about to pay for AT&T, cuz they suck much better than a hooker around the corner, im about to pay $175 to cancel my contract with them, isn't illegal to pay anything to end a contract?

i had their horrible service for a crappy month. and now i want to switch to T-Mobile. can someone tell me about this, or what i can do, i really want to fight this. or where it is in the constitution.

 

[MBHockey]

Wow...

Well, for starters, you signed the two year contract in the beginning where you agreed to pay an early termination fee if you wanted out before the two years.

 

[-aggie-]

You have 30 days to cancel and not pay an ETF.

If you waited past 30 days, you owe the ETF.

What's unfair about that?

 

[ss957916]

There's normally a cooling-off period (14 days in the UK). If you're outside that, you're within the terms of the contract you signed and therefore need to pay to be released.

 

[instaxgirl]

You have 30 days to cancel and not pay an ETF.

If you waited past 30 days, you owe the ETF.

What's unfair about that?

Yeah the problem is you've already signed the contract which included the ETF.

 

[LeeTom]

this used to work...

look on Verizon or T-Mobile's coverage map and and find a place that they have coverage that AT&T doesn't. then, figure out what county that is in and use that county's records (usually the assessor's office) website to find an address in that area. then draw up a rental agreement at that address, using the owner's name as the landlord and yours as the tenant.

take this to AT&T, say you're moving to an area outside their coverage area and want to end your contract without early termination fees. don't be dumb and pull out the "rental agreement" unless they ask for proof.

i am not a lawyer either, and for all i know this is illegal, but you asked...

footnote: from a purely legal standpoint, you should have listened to your teacher. you signed the contract, and you are liable for the $175. you have an iPhone, which cost more than the price that you paid, and they want the money they fronted so you could have a $400 device for $199.

 

[QCassidy352]

You signed a contract that contains language saying if you want to end the contract early, you pay $175. That's perfectly legal. If you're now past the point where you can end your contract for free (30 days?), you have to pay the EFT. There's nothing illegal going on here, and nothing in the constitution is going to help you.

 

[GoCubsGo]

LeeTom people just like you make me sick. You're telling this guy to commit fraud. Or are you unable to comprehend that?

OP, you signed a contract ... your signature is your "voice". Don't take the advice of uneducated people who direct you to be dishonest and fraudulent.

 

[Consultant]

FYI verizon recently raided their ETF to $350 for their advanced devices.

If Verizon is so good, and no one leaves Verizon, then their ETF should be $0, not $350.

 

[BOSS10L]

Holy OP didn't read the fine print, Batman!

Pay the ETF or deal with AT&T.

 

[LeeTom]

LeeTom people just like you make me sick. You're telling this guy to commit fraud. Or are you unable to comprehend that?

OP, you signed a contract ... your signature is your "voice". Don't take the advice of uneducated people who direct you to be dishonest and fraudulent.

I didn't tell him to commit fraud, I told him HOW to. Big difference. Also, the amount of fraud that these large telcos commit on a daily basis is astounding. Remember when they "finessed" the SMS plans so that in order to get a decent amount of text messages you have to pay $15 instead of $10?

Also, what other services in this country have you preset the amount you're going to use, and if you go over that amount, you pay up the nose? "I'm sorry, but you used 10 gallons of gas since your previous fill-up instead of 8 - that'll cost you $120."

On top of that there are all the fees and and anti-competitive practices going on that are actually under investigation in congress right now. So when these fees become illegal next year, how will my "fraud" be seen then?

By definition, the people on the opposite side of a war are psychotic to your side, but when the lines are redrawn...

 

[milani]

I didn't tell him to commit fraud, I told him HOW to. Big difference. Also, the amount of fraud that these large telcos commit on a daily basis is astounding. Remember when they "finessed" the SMS plans so that in order to get a decent amount of text messages you have to pay $15 instead of $10?

Also, what other services in this country have you preset the amount you're going to use, and if you go over that amount, you pay up the nose? "I'm sorry, but you used 10 gallons of gas since your previous fill-up instead of 8 - that'll cost you $120."

On top of that there are all the fees and and anti-competitive practices going on that are actually under investigation in congress right now. So when these fees become illegal next year, how will my "fraud" be seen then?

By definition, the people on the opposite side of a war are psychotic to your side, but when the lines are redrawn...

Failed reasoning. Banks charge unfair interest rates on loans. They do this to millions of people. Banking activity is under investigation in the United States. Therefore robbing a bank is acceptable.

 

[anjinha]

FYI verizon recently raided their ETF to $350 for their advanced devices.

If Verizon is so good, and no one leaves Verizon, then their ETF should be $0, not $350.

That's not why they raised the ETF. They raised it because a lot of people were signing up for contracts so they could buy subsidized phones and then they would just pay the ETF and sell them on ebay for a profit.

 

[Applejuiced]

I doubt that, they got sick of losing customers because of their boring phones and also the huge iphone success. What better way to lock current customers down than double the ETF? That would make anyone think harder about leaving them.
If Tmobile, AT&T and Sprint and many others can sell "advanced" phones and still afford to keep a $175 so can Verizon but they chose a different approach.
Some of the phones they consider for a $350 ETF are a joke.

That's not why they raised the ETF. They raised it because a lot of people were signing up for contracts so they could buy subsidized phones and then they would just pay the ETF and sell them on ebay for a profit.

ok im not a law student or anything, i remember my teacher telling me that in any contract, i have the right to remain silent, which means the contract can not start or end with my silence, i have to sign something, i have do something.

i dont want to pay this early termination fee im about to pay for AT&T, cuz they suck much better than a hooker around the corner, im about to pay $175 to cancel my contract with them, isn't illegal to pay anything to end a contract?

i had their horrible service for a crappy month. and now i want to switch to T-Mobile. can someone tell me about this, or what i can do, i really want to fight this. or where it is in the constitution.

You can fight it but I dont think it will get you far. Its not illegal to pay the ETF, its on the contract you agreed to and if you dont pay they can legally go after you.
If you're under the 30 day mark you can get out without ETF, if not you'd have to find some clever way to get out of it.

 

[anjinha]

I doubt that, they got sick of losing customers because of their boring phones and also the huge iphone success. What better way to lock current customers down than double the ETF? That would make anyone think harder about leaving them.
If Tmobile, AT&T and Sprint and many others can sell "advanced" phones and still afford to keep a $175 so can Verizon but they chose a different approach.
Some of the phones they consider for a $350 ETF are a joke.

I'm betting the other carriers will increase the ETF as well. Verizon did this because people were abusing the current system, it's very likely that the other carriers will follow suit.

And Verizon is not locking in anyone by increasing the ETF because their old customers still have the old $175 ETF, only people who signed contracts with Verizon after November 15th will have the $350 one and they knew what they were getting into because this was announced well before. If anything this will just make people think twice before they sign into a two year contract, which people should do anyway.

 

[Applejuiced]

I'm betting the other carriers will increase the ETF as well. Verizon did this because people were abusing the current system, it's very likely that the other carriers will follow suit.

And Verizon is not locking in anyone by increasing the ETF because their old customers still have the old $175 ETF, only people who signed contracts with Verizon after November 15th will have the $350 one and they knew what they were getting into because this was announced well before. If anything this will just make people think twice before they sign into a two year contract, which people should do anyway.

I doubt that others will follow towards an ETF increase but we'll have to wait and see how it plays.
I dont know about the "abusing the system" arguiment, even if you do cancell and pay the ETF, a months service and many other fee's the carriers still make up the subsidy. They dont pay anywhere near $350 towards you phone, as these advanced devices get more popular the cheaper they cost to produce.
And even towards the end of your contract with Verizon the last month still has a $120 ETF.
If that made any sense then the FCC wouldnt be questioning it either......
In other words cell phone companies hide behind the "we need to make back your subsidy" excuse.
Memo to Verizon: if you and your phones don't suck, people won't leave early. Quit sucking.

 

[sushi]

I didn't tell him to commit fraud, I told him HOW to. Big difference.

I would venture to say many would disagree with your line of reasoning.

So I am on a bank heist. I am telling the burglars how to do their job, what person to tie up what person to kill, what money to take, etc. However, by your line of reasoning, I am not guilty because all I did was tell them what to do.

Nope, you're just as guilty as the person who commits the fraud.

 

[MikePA]

I love threads like this where the OP realizes they asked a stupid question after the first reply so they revert to lurk mode. 'where is it in the constitution' was a real hoot. I just hope he's not old enough to vote.

To the OP - if it's past 30 days, you owe the ETF. Man up and pay it.

 

[ericvmazzone]

ok im not a law student or anything, i remember my teacher telling me that in any contract, i have the right to remain silent, which means the contract can not start or end with my silence, i have to sign something, i have do something.

i dont want to pay this early termination fee im about to pay for AT&T, cuz they suck much better than a hooker around the corner, im about to pay $175 to cancel my contract with them, isn't illegal to pay anything to end a contract?

i had their horrible service for a crappy month. and now i want to switch to T-Mobile. can someone tell me about this, or what i can do, i really want to fight this. or where it is in the constitution.

Your logic fails. You were NOT silent when you entered the contract and you cannot be silent when you tell AT&T you want out. Meaning you must break your silence thus invalidating your argument. Two, the contract is that you'll stay with AT&T for at least two years at a locked price, whereby if you leave before two years you pay the ETF.

If you think it's in The Constitution, I suggest you read the whole thing and find out for yourself. Hint, there's nothing in there that says that.

 

[sparkyms]

I would venture to say many would disagree with your line of reasoning.

So I am on a bank heist. I am telling the burglars how to do their job, what person to tie up what person to kill, what money to take, etc. However, by your line of reasoning, I am not guilty because all I did was tell them what to do.

Nope, you're just as guilty as the person who commits the fraud.

Nope, what LeeTom said wasn't who to kill or what person to tie up... but How to kill and how to tie people up. Information like how to kill someone or how to tie someone up is pretty much widely available but it doesn't make the person who feeds that information guilty of any crime committed if people CHOOSE to act upon such information.

 

[alexph]

If you are passed 30 days then you are somewhat st****d unless you can prove that they have broken the contract.

I'm in the UK and despite what O2 showed on their web site, network reception was non-existant in my area.

After an exchange of emails lasting four months, resulting my my telling them I was about to issue a claim in the Small Claims Court, they not only cancelled my contract, refunded 50% of my monthly network charges and paid me £150 by way of compensation. I also got to keep the 3G iP{hone, which is now happily on vf.

 

[thelatinist]

Wow. The specious reasoning displayed in many posts in this thread is astounding.

OP: You started the contract with your signature, and it will end at your request. If AT&T decided to cancel the contract, you wouldn't owe anything; if you decide to cancel the contract, you do. It has nothing to do with the Constitution (which I advise you to read; it's a very important document), and everything to do with the terms of your contract (which in the future I would also advise you to read before signing; for it, too, is a very important document).

 

[farmermac]

The op should walk into a AT&T store and calmly explain to the manager that the US constitution bans cell phone contract ETF. And film it and post it here.

 

[LeeTom]

I would venture to say many would disagree with your line of reasoning.

So I am on a bank heist. I am telling the burglars how to do their job, what person to tie up what person to kill, what money to take, etc. However, by your line of reasoning, I am not guilty because all I did was tell them what to do.

Nope, you're just as guilty as the person who commits the fraud.

Your scenario fails because I am not "on a bank heist". I am chatting at a cafe with the future bank robbers giving my opinions on how it works. It's the same reason why you can legally find bomb-making plans on The Internet. By your logic, freedom of speech and expression should be removed from the constitution. This is a public forum, and I have espoused information. It's the people who claim to be offended by that information that ultimately tie our collective hands.

 

[rdowns]

FYI verizon recently raided their ETF to $350 for their advanced devices.

If Verizon is so good, and no one leaves Verizon, then their ETF should be $0, not $350.

An ETF has nothing to do with how good a company is. It's to guard against all the idiots trying to scam them for free phones, generally very expensive ones. There must be a 100 threads on MacRumors asking/detailing how to do it.