Alvin Finklestein's Know Your Rights Quiz: Cable Company Edition

Situation: "Greg" is a customer of the local cable company.

They are currently holding a promotion for all existing customers where they can get free HBO for this month only. The fine print states that to be eligible, you simply need to have had an active account with them for at least 30 days, which Greg does.

Greg has not yet taken advantage of the free HBO, but he scans his cable bill, and notices a $50 error. He calls the billing department, they admit the error, and give him $50 credit.

While on the phone, Greg asks them to turn on the free HBO.

The rep tells him, "Sorry, that promotion issues a credit on your bill against the HBO charge, and we can't do that this month because you've already received your maximum amount of allowed credit."

Greg protests, "But that credit wasn't a gift! It was fixing a billing error!"

The rep is not impressed with that argument. "I understand that, sir," she says, "But the system cannot allow that much credit in one month. There's nothing we can do."

When Greg protests further, the rep tells him that the HBO thing is a promotion, and customers do not have a legal right to promotions. She tells him that the company has the legal right to refuse promotions to specific customers at their own discretion, and in this case they are refusing it because their system cannot issue the dual credits properly.

There is no doubt that Greg is receiving horrible customer service, but does he have a legal right to this free HBO?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alvin Finklestein

Situation: "Greg" is a customer of the local cable company.

They are currently holding a promotion for all existing customers where they can get free HBO for this month only. The fine print states that to be eligible, you simply need to have had an active account with them for at least 30 days, which Greg does.

Greg has not yet taken advantage of the free HBO, but he scans his cable bill, and notices a $50 error. He calls the billing department, they admit the error, and give him $50 credit.

While on the phone, Greg asks them to turn on the free HBO.

The rep tells him, "Sorry, that promotion issues a credit on your bill against the HBO charge, and we can't do that this month because you've already received your maximum amount of allowed credit."

Greg protests, "But that credit wasn't a gift! It was fixing a billing error!"

The rep is not impressed with that argument. "I understand that, sir," she says, "But the system cannot allow that much credit in one month. There's nothing we can do."

When Greg protests further, the rep tells him that the HBO thing is a promotion, and customers do not have a legal right to promotions. She tells him that the company has the legal right to refuse promotions to specific customers at their own discretion, and in this case they are refusing it because their system cannot issue the dual credits properly.

There is no doubt that Greg is receiving horrible customer service, but does he have a legal right to this free HBO?

---

YES, and they're only trying to hook you on HBO anyways so take this one to the top.

Fuck them, they're filthy rich gluttons with a pseudo monopoly, coming to an end soon.

complete BS, but low level customer service reps can't override anything and are discouraged from escalating anything. you could sue them and win but would be a hassle and they know that.

did you ask if they could defer issuing the billing correction until NEXT month? that gets around the limit of $50 per month...

don't know about legality...and for a mere $50 would going to court really get anyone anything? 50 wouldn't cover the cost of the court paperwork

thus, it comes to threatening to leave....is Direct/Dish available in you area? could mention that you want to stay with local company rather than learn new set of channel settings that a competitor would have BUT you think their handling of this matter is so unreasonable you are going to change if not resolved to your satisfaction...

I'll bet she was telling the truth. $50 likely the max credit that could be entered in the application or she may not have known to get around the issue. Sounded like BS to customer so he turns into ass hole and she just wants to get rid of him.

I've been on the other end of calls like that before and if you get rude with me you can go fuck yourself.

If you are in this situation be as nice as you can, try to get someone on the phone that knows what is going on, and for gods sake do not offer solutions, it makes CS think you think you know their job better than they do.

Or politely hang up and call back a few minutes later and maybe you get someone else who understands things better than the first CS you talked with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by limitles

Fuck them, they're filthy rich gluttons with a pseudo monopoly, coming to an end soon.

---

This ^^^^

HBO is like a $10 extra? I mean does anyone purchase this separately?

Does anyone really pay for movie channels at all?

Do you think there is a college student in Boston who doesn't have access to all cable television content through a remote viewing app?

Comcast TV Go, for instance. Ask anyone with a pulse for an account & password.

This is like worrying about not getting a Bed Bath & Beyond coupon.

Question for Alvin: What is the amount of money where you feel that even though you are getting screwed over that you don't worry about it because it's not worth your time to fight the matter? Is it $2, $5, $10, etc..?

While this story sounds like something that would happen to Dan Druff, it's not about him.

Believe it or not, failing to offer Greg this HBO promotion is a false advertising violation, and Greg would have success pursuing a civil remedy if he should choose to do so. Of course, it is unlikely that Greg or anyone else would sue over $10, but we are talking about legality here, rather than practical enforcement.

I am bringing this matter up because companies often hide behind "that's a promotion and we can remove it at any time" excuses when they screw customers in this fashion.

In some cases, the companies are legally correct to say that. If a company announces that you get 2 burgers for the price of one through November 30th, but then chooses to end the promotion early on November 10th, you will have no recourse, even if you showed up on November 10th specifically for that promotion. However, if there is a printed coupon with a future expiration date, the company is required to honor it. A company is allowed to stop honoring coupons at any time if they lack an expiration date, though.

But back to this situation.

Since the promotion has not been canceled, but simply cannot be honored for Greg only due to a technical error on the cable company's side, they have a requirement to make him whole. This is because the legal terms for the promotion include Greg as a qualifying party, and thus it moves into the false advertising realm if they fail to honor it.

As already suggested, one solution here would be to give Greg the $10 credit in a subsequent month. However, it would be against civil law for the cable company to deny Greg the promotion entirely.

I received a related question, which I will also answer here.

This one actually does involve Dan Druff.

Mr. Druff posted about an incident where he was regularly going to a fairly expensive pizza place but using a coupon that is always available. When they erroneously charged his credit card too much and couldn't fix it, they suggested that they would just give him the equivalent credit on the next visit, as he was a regular there.

Legally, Mr. Druff did not have to accept that solution, as he should not be required to make a future purchase in order to receive a billing correction, but understandably he didn't argue as he knew he would be back anyway, and didn't want to make a scene.

The problem arose when the ownership told Mr. Druff that he would not be allowed to use the coupon next time combined with that credit he is being given. When Mr. Druff pointed out that the coupon and the credit were approximately the same amount, and thus he wouldn't actually be getting any money off next time, the pizza parlor owner dug her heels in and told him that her offer was firm.

So was this pizza parlor owner in violation of the law?

Yes and no.

She was in violation in that she was required to return the overcharge in cash, rather than future purchases.

However, she was NOT in violation by stating that the coupon cannot be used next time in combination with the money off from the prior mistake. This is because the coupon does not necessarily have to be combined with any other "offer", and techincally her agreement to fix the prior mistake on the next order can be construed as an offer.

This is why it is often wise to simply ask for cash refunds for overcharges, and to clarify coupon policies on the spot when a place offers to "make it up next time" after screwing up today. That is, if you got overcharged $7, but usually use a $10 off coupon at this place, make sure you can get BOTH the $7 back and still use the coupon next time. If you can't, they aren't fixing the problem.