A moment please

[Zero327]

Let us have a moment of silence for our fallen beloved gene pool:

James
Irmo, South Carolina


I am filing this complaint against AllSat, Inc. and Dish Network in response to a false claim of $325.00 in unpaid penalties submitted to the credit reporting agencies. This fraudulent claim has lowered my credit score by over 100 points and comes just as I am relocating to a different city.

AllSat, Inc. sent me a letter dated 04/24/2007, regarding 'a violation to the Terms & Conditions.' AllSat alleges that I agreed to a document entitled, 'AllSat, Inc. Offer Terms and Conditions' enclosed in the correspondence in which they state that I owe $325 for the violation.

As instructed by the letter, I replied to their billing department via email (cancellation@allsat.com) and to the president of the company Ben Soldberg (soldberg@allsat.com) on May 22. In a follow up telephone call today (May 24), the customer service representative claimed not to have received my emails and informed me that I have been turned over to their collection agency.

Seven months prior to this I placed a phone order with AllSat, Inc. (a sub-contractor of Dish Network) for installation and service of Dish satellite television. Within one month of my order the high definition service for local channels ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox were discontinued as a result of a law suit. This rendered my top-of-the-line high definition television package worthless. After unsuccessfully trying to rectify the situation with Dish Network I cancelled my service.

I am an independent high-tech consultant and relocate frequently. With this in mind I amended the Dish Network agreement both on the front and back before I signed it and refused to sign my initials agreeing to the 18-month service contract. The amendments made to the agreement explicitly released me from any service obligation to either AllSat, Inc. or Dish Network.

In addition to striking all pertainent clauses of fine print, I stated in writing above the signature line that I did not agree to be bound by any service contract and did not agree to a termination penalty of any kind. Both AllSat, Inc. and Dish accepted this agreement when they activated my service.

I ordered from AllSat because I found an marketing offer on the Internet through a recommendation website. I linked to AllSat's website briefly and called the number provided on the top of the website to inquire about the offer. As I placed my order with AllSat, Inc., I was offered a discount If I agreed to an 18-month commitment, which I DECLINED. I was then assured by AllSat's customer service representative that there was NO service obligation or termination penalty for the plan that I ordered. Their customer service representative made no mention of any additional terms and conditions whatsoever.

Under general contract law the purchaser must actually agree to be bound by terms and conditions. If there is no agreement then terms and conditions are unenforceable. AllSat alleges that I consented to its terms and conditions electronically by merely visiting its website. However, a decade of legal rulings on this subject clearly demonstrates that purchasers are bound by electronic terms and conditions only if they affirm so by clicking on an agreement mechanism (e.g. 'I Agree' box). AllSat, Inc has no such electronic mechanism on either their website or any email communication.

Furthermore, most states hold (including the one I am in) that a purchaser cannot be charged or penalized for a violation to terms and conditions 'unless such representation or assurance be made in writing, signed by the party to be charged therewith or by some person thereunto by him legally authorized.'

AllSat, Inc, is in willful violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) under section § 602 of the Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681) for accuracy and fairness in credit reporting.

AllSat, Inc. and Dish Network have no legal standing as to the claims they have made against me. I hope that I have helped expose AllSat, Inc. and Dish Network as predatory companies that use illegal tactics to extort money and exact costly credit penalties on unsuspecting consumers. AllSat, Inc. and Dish Network are not above the law and should not be allowed to continue to operate as though they are without severe consequences.

James
Irmo, South Carolina
U.S.A.
---------------------


This guy watches too many Law & Order reruns... Amusing read though. So remember boys and girls, the next time you take on a service or the court issues an order to you, just cross out the parts you don't like, sign it and send it back. That'll teach em!

 

[Hall]

So remember boys and girls, the next time you take on a service or the court issues an order to you, just cross out the parts you don't like, sign it and send it back.

You're most certainly "allowed" to do that but the other party doesn't have to agree to them. The problem Dish and/or AllSat has is he apparently had service for what, 7 months ? That doesn't help their case in that they did NOT agree to the change in terms and conditions that he made. What should have happened is his service should have been turned off as soon as the installer turned in his paperwork and arrangements made to remove the equipment they provided.

 

[webbydude]

Seven months prior to this I placed a phone order with AllSat, Inc. (a sub-contractor of Dish Network) for installation and service of Dish satellite television. Within one month of my order the high definition service for local channels ABC, CBS, NBC and Fox were discontinued as a result of a law suit. This rendered my top-of-the-line high definition television package worthless. After unsuccessfully trying to rectify the situation with Dish Network I cancelled my service.

How is it possible to discontinue local HD channels "as a result of" the law suit, but yet maintain regular service? Am I missing something?

 

[Greg Bimson]

This actually, if the plaintiff is truthful, would be exactly correct.

If anyone wanted to know what "contract negotiations" are, that is exactly what this man did. He read the contract, crossed out the parts he didn't like, and signed it. The other party appears to have accepted the contract, and therefore is bound by the changes which were made.

The paragraph quoted by WebbyDude is the "distant network" issue, only based upon the timeline given by the plaintiff. The plaintiff is claiming that because he lost the HD feeds of the networks as Dish Network was forced to turn off all distant network feeds which included the HD ones he was receiving, and Dish Network could not rectify by giving him HD feeds of the networks, he cancelled his service. It is that action that set this whole can of worms into motion.

 

[webbydude]

I was thinking that was the case, but the term "local channels" kind of took me off track.

To sum up the original post, it sounds like a case of losing HD locals and deciding to exit the 18 month contract early because of said fact?

 

[steve4810]

I was thinking that was the case, but the term "local channels" kind of took me off track.

To sum up the original post, it sounds like a case of losing HD locals and deciding to exit the 18 month contract early because of said fact?

I think that is accurate but what difference does that make? It sure helps in getting public sympathy on his side but isn't a fact that carrys weight in his case.

It is simply that he refused their conditions and they, by continuing service after they were notified in writing (when his paperwork got to HQ) have no legal right to do any of what they appear to have done.

This is yet another goose-gander deal. Us poor sucks are 100% screwed when we sign the contract even if we didn't read it. This time they are 100% screwed even if no one beyond the mailroom knew he changed the agreement.

Hey, Allsat: It's too f-ing bad you didn't attend to business. Now, if this fellow presses his case in court, you are toast.

And Zero: It's a shame you don't know the difference between a court of law and a bunch of dick-wads who call themselves "a company".

One has the power to issue decisions that carry the full weight of the law. The others are just bullies pissing in the wind.

Allsat might get away with this crap but only because they make the most noise and have the time and money to steam-roll any customer they choose.

 

[Hall]

I'm wondering now, knowing how one-sided these agreements are normally written, if it in fact has a clause that says you must accept ALL of these terms. There is no "negotiating" involved.

 

[harshness]

When you use the term "service contract", do you mean "18-month agreement"?

 

[harshness]

I'm wondering now, knowing how one-sided these agreements are normally written, if it in fact has a clause that says you must accept ALL of these terms. There is no "negotiating" involved.

Actually, the part about not accepting the 18-month agreement is explicitly covered in the current Residential Agreement.

 

[riffjim4069]

This actually, if the plaintiff is truthful, would be exactly correct.

If anyone wanted to know what "contract negotiations" are, that is exactly what this man did. He read the contract, crossed out the parts he didn't like, and signed it. The other party appears to have accepted the contract, and therefore is bound by the changes which were made.

I agree. I have modified the terms & conditions on pre-printed contract forms and, in almost all cases, I was not challenged. I have never done this with Dish Network, but there is nothing forcing a customer to blindly accept the contract from AllSat/Dish Network simply because they place the document in front of their face and hand 'em a pen. This is a contract so people (both parties) need to actually read before signing. As Greg mentioned, a customer is certainly permitted to change the terms of the contract...and it is up to the other party to accept or reject these revisions.

It can be argued that Mr. James is "cheesedicking" his way out of a contract. However, if the information provided is factual then AllSat is clearly wrong by referring the matter to a credit reporting agency. The FCRA will permit Mr. James to correct this erroneous entry in his credit file.

 

[ptech]

I'm wondering now, knowing how one-sided these agreements are normally written, if it in fact has a clause that says you must accept ALL of these terms. There is no "negotiating" involved.

You are absolutely correct.

AllSat, Inc. sent me a letter dated 04/24/2007, regarding 'a violation to the Terms & Conditions.' AllSat alleges that I agreed to a document entitled, 'AllSat, Inc. Offer Terms and Conditions' enclosed in the correspondence in which they state that I owe $325 for the violation./QUOTE]

James, I feel for you but when you called. Do you remember giving certain identification information and remember being told your being recorded. this is a legal contract.

 

[Zero327]

And Zero: It's a shame you don't know the difference between a court of law and a bunch of dick-wads who call themselves "a company".

I understand the difference better than you know. But I also don't enter into a contractual agreement without reading what I sign and the terms laid before me, and I certainly don't walk into a service contract thinking I can renegotiate written terms standard across the full customer base. You can negotiate your level of service and the perks/costs that go with that, but even the town drunk knows that you can't scratch out the parts you don't like and proceed with it. I find it amusing anyone would think otherwise.

I'm fully versed on the theory of "meeting of the minds" which seems to be a more prevelant plaintiff/defendant excuse in the courtroom when they violate contractual terms because they didn't sign here, signed under duress there, or wanted the service, but didn't "really" want a contract. This is a societal failing, not one to be blamed on corporate America. Noone is arguing the contracts are written to be one-sided, least of all myself, but this customer knew what he was doing and he thought by altering a legal document if he ever ran into a situation where he wanted to back out he could invalidate it.

This is the difference between a stupid customer and intent to defraud, he planned ahead to invalidate the contract in the event the full terms were exercised on him. How does a company with 30,000 employees keep pace with 13.6M people who would do the same?

Oh, and next time keep the personal insults to yourself. All I posted was an article of a consumer who thinks he can dictate terms for a service he wants to a Fortune 500 company; service for cell phone, satellite, whatever is a resource just as much as gas for your car. His actions are like driving up to the pump, resetting the price, pumping gas and suing when you're charged the correct amount. Oh wait, what if he takes the receipt, scratches out the price then signs it? Then again, don't they arrest you for "renegotiating" at the pump.

 

[Smith P.]

<...>
All I posted was an article of a consumer who thinks he can dictate terms for a service he wants to a Fortune 500 company; service for cell phone, satellite, whatever is a resource just as much as gas for your car. His actions are like driving up to the pump, resetting the price, pumping gas and suing when you're charged the correct amount. Oh wait, what if he takes the receipt, scratches out the price then signs it? Then again, don't they arrest you for "renegotiating" at the pump.

You're sick man or too much involved in the corporate's PR.

 

[JeremyL]

Actually something similar to this just came up on one of of those TV court shows - not sure which one, my wife had it on while I was home for lunch one day.

Anyway, it was a dispute between landlord and tenant. The tenant made a change to the lease which said there would be no early termination penalty if they gave the landlord 60 days notice before breaking said lease. The judge ruled that since the landlord signed after the tenant, he agreed to the tenant's modification of the lease.

Now, the question in this case is, did the installer sign the work order after the customer made the modifications? If so, the installer was signing on behalf of AllSat and Dish Network, and, therefore, accepted the customers terms.

I believe there is also a clause in the contract stating Dish Network can modify the agreement with written notice. If Dish Network received the paperwork and did not modify the agreement their representative signed, then I'd say they're out of luck. It's really a case of Dish and AllSat not performing due diligence by reviewing each contract for completeness/modifications.

Truthfully, the installer should have called the office before signing the work order/contract. AllSat should have to eat this money and chalk it up to a lesson learned.

 

[Zero327]

You're sick man or too much involved in the corporate's PR.

I wish! The VP of Marketing makes more than I do...for now.

 

[Hall]

I will presume that the paper agreement reads almost exactly like the online agreement, so this is the relevant part:

CUSTOMER: Thank you for choosing DISH Network. This agreement (the “Agreement”) sets forth the terms and conditions of the Digital Home Advantage promotion. Additional terms and conditions of service are contained in the Residential Customer Agreement provided to you in your receiver User’s Guide and made available at DISH Network -- Home. BY CLICKING ON THE “I AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS” CHECKBOX TO WHICH THIS AGREEMENT IS LINKED AND THE CORRESPONDING “SUBMIT ORDER” BUTTON YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED, READ, UNDERSTAND, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND THE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER AGREEMENT...

Replace the part about "clicking" with *signing*, obviously.

Anyway, he didn't agree to ALL of the terms, so it should have ended there. Repeating what I said earlier, AllSat should have cancelled him as soon as they got the paperwork back, but they didn't. I'm not sure that this means they agreed to his changes though... He simply doesn't have the option of making, or proposing, any changes to this agreement. In turn, AllSat (or Dish) doesn't need to 1) check every agreement for changes and 2) have differing agreements with customers.

 

[Hall]

I will presume that the paper agreement reads almost exactly like the online agreement, so this is the relevant part:

CUSTOMER: Thank you for choosing DISH Network. This agreement (the “Agreement”) sets forth the terms and conditions of the Digital Home Advantage promotion. Additional terms and conditions of service are contained in the Residential Customer Agreement provided to you in your receiver User’s Guide and made available at DISH Network -- Home. BY CLICKING ON THE “I AGREE TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS” CHECKBOX TO WHICH THIS AGREEMENT IS LINKED AND THE CORRESPONDING “SUBMIT ORDER” BUTTON YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED, READ, UNDERSTAND, AND AGREE TO BE BOUND BY ALL OF THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THIS AGREEMENT AND THE RESIDENTIAL CUSTOMER AGREEMENT...

Replace the part about "clicking" with *signing*, obviously.

Anyway, he didn't agree to ALL of the terms, so it should have ended there. Repeating what I said earlier, AllSat should have cancelled him as soon as they got the paperwork back, but they didn't. I'm not sure that this means they agreed to his changes though... He simply doesn't have the option of making, or proposing, any changes to this agreement. In turn, AllSat (or Dish) doesn't need to 1) check every agreement for changes and 2) have differing agreements with customers.

 

[Greg Bimson]

Noone is arguing the contracts are written to be one-sided, least of all myself, but this customer knew what he was doing and he thought by altering a legal document if he ever ran into a situation where he wanted to back out he could invalidate it.

So, the question I pose, is until the parties sign a document, it is yet a legal document? And if the changes were accepted, does this not make the changes to the standard contract a legal document? I am still trying to find out where you think he did anything wrong...

This is the difference between a stupid customer and intent to defraud, he planned ahead to invalidate the contract in the event the full terms were exercised on him. How does a company with 30,000 employees keep pace with 13.6M people who would do the same?

But that is the entire point. Full terms cannot be exercised on him, because he didn't agree to the full terms, yet service was given to him anyway.

And it isn't like all 13.6M subscribers are doing this, just a handful. The remainder of the subs can probably placed in their own groups dependent on the contracts they've signed, so remember that Dish Network already is tracking different terms and conditions they've offered, most likely in their billing/accounting software. After all, the billing department can tell you how much of a committment is remaining, as well as those that may be on DishHD promotion or the DVR Advantage programs, as well as those subs that are no longer locked into a commitment.

I am playing a bit of devil's advocate here, but even state AG's say that many of these one-sided agreements aren't entirely bound by law and 100% legal. I know larger companies need to be able to have predictable ways to show their income, and keep standard contracts. However, Echostar also would need to "close the loop" when it comes to having work orders signed. Any change to standard boilerplates need to be reviewed before the customer has service turned on.

 

[steve4810]

Oh, and next time keep the personal insults to yourself. All I posted was an article of a consumer who thinks he can dictate terms for a service he wants to a Fortune 500 company; service for cell phone, satellite, whatever is a resource just as much as gas for your car. His actions are like driving up to the pump, resetting the price, pumping gas and suing when you're charged the correct amount. Oh wait, what if he takes the receipt, scratches out the price then signs it? Then again, don't they arrest you for "renegotiating" at the pump.

I'm sorry I offended you. I was "hot under the collar" and pointed my ire at the situation at you because I felt you posted to make fun of the man.

But I must point out that giving someone a printed agreement doesn't constitute agreement by that party. And it doesn't make any difference whether it was written in crayon by the town drunk or engraved on rag bond by Exxon, Honda Motor Company, or Echostar Corporation or any of it's agents or subsidiaries.

The moment they were notified he did not agree to their terms and conditions they had the right to terminate service and demand return of all equipment and be paid for the service from the date it commenced to the date they were notified.

OK, he's accused of breach of contract, right? So exhibit A would be... Oh, I don't know, maybe the contract he signed?

If you believe a signed contract isn't necessary why does Dish seem to demand it be signed and returned. What happens if a customers just throws it away? Does Dish just let it pass or request it be returned with a threat to terminate service.

One note: since you and I posted, it's been pointed out that the installer signs for Dish so if the changes were made after that they are moot. If on the other hand the installer signed after the changes were made he accepted the changed agreement.

Back to court. If the installers copy is the same as the one the customer mailed to Dish it binds. If on the other hand Joe changed HIS copy and mailed a copy of it to Dish, Allsat is 100% doing the proper thing.

 

[wmi]

I'm sorry I offended you. I was "hot under the collar" and pointed my ire at the situation at you because I felt you posted to make fun of the man.

But I must point out that giving someone a printed agreement doesn't constitute agreement by that party. And it doesn't make any difference whether it was written in crayon by the town drunk or engraved on rag bond by Exxon, Honda Motor Company, or Echostar Corporation or any of it's agents or subsidiaries.

The moment they were notified he did not agree to their terms and conditions they had the right to terminate service and demand return of all equipment and be paid for the service from the date it commenced to the date they were notified.

OK, he's accused of breach of contract, right? So exhibit A would be... Oh, I don't know, maybe the contract he signed?

If you believe a signed contract isn't necessary why does Dish seem to demand it be signed and returned. What happens if a customers just throws it away? Does Dish just let it pass or request it be returned with a threat to terminate service.

One note: since you and I posted, it's been pointed out that the installer signs for Dish so if the changes were made after that they are moot. If on the other hand the installer signed after the changes were made he accepted the changed agreement.

Back to court. If the installers copy is the same as the one the customer mailed to Dish it binds. If on the other hand Joe changed HIS copy and mailed a copy of it to Dish, Allsat is 100% doing the proper thing.

Actually we (installers) don't sign any of the 18-months or 1 year contracts. We only sign the "service agreement" which just basically covers what we did on the install and the "inventoried" equipment that we used.