The non conformer's Canadian Weblog

May 1, 2008

To Bell Sympatico

Filed under: News and politics — thenonconformer @ 11:08 pm
Tags: , , , , , , ,
   You can get out of the Sympatcio Internet contract by cancelling your land line phone service? Or by telling the truth about Bell on the net.
 
Intro – I have been disscussing, detailing on the net Bell’s indequate pretentious, poor services, internet and customer services, specifics included now for many many months.. even in October 2007 http://thenonconformer.blogspot.com/2007/10/choosing-cable-or-dsl-internet-service.html
 and do also see my letter below Friday, October 19, 2007 To my MP Paul Martin MP- Using our rights to communicate with our elected representatives, news media. http://thenonconformer.blogspot.com/2007/10/to-my-mp-paul-martin-mp.html 
 
I have a civil engineering degree, Concordia University , Montreal 1968, and I had worked as a ReMax Realtor in Calgary too but in my decades of real life experiences in Canada the existing laws, regulating societies, governments clearly did not stop many Realtors,  lawyers or even now Bell Sympatico from telling lies to the customers, others.  http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/07/13/misapplications-of-the-laws-in-canada/
   
Imagine that Bell has been in Business for many years and is still guilty now clearly of misleading advertisements, fraudulent and unacceptable business practices, not living up to their contractual obligations, as I now have PERSONALLY WITNESSED, EXPERIENCED  and undeniably detailed to even Bell and many others many times too now . I Paid for a high speed unlimited download service but that is not what I got next. I got low internet speed at a high price. With Bell you have to check your actual delivered speeds , “internet download and upload speed test” cause Bell seems to change it to suit themselves..  (Presently I am with Acanac Inc. http://www.acanac.ca 1-866-281-3538, and do  see their speed test too).
 
 
From: paul kambulow
Sent: Thursday, May 01, 2008 6:55 PM
Cc: pm@pm.gc.ca ; Nicholson.R@parl.gc.ca ; Day.S@parl.gc.ca ; Dion.S@parl.gc.ca ; Abbott.J@parl.gc.ca ; allenm@parl.gc.ca ; Ambrose.R@parl.gc.ca ; Anders.R@parl.gc.ca ; Baird.J@parl.gc.ca ; Bell.D@parl.gc.ca ; Bernier.M@parl.gc.ca ; Blackburn.J@parl.gc.ca ; Cannon.L@parl.gc.ca ; casson@rickcasson.com ; Chong.M@parl.gc.ca ; Clement.T@parl.gc.ca ; davebatters@shaw.ca ; Davidp@parl.gc.ca ; delmad@parl.gc.ca ; DevolB@parl.gc.ca ; Emerson.D@parl.gc.ca ; Faille.M@parl.gc.ca ; Finley.D@parl.gc.ca ; Flaherty.J@parl.gc.ca ; Fletcher.S@parl.gc.ca ; Goodale.R@parl.gc.ca ; hawnL@parl.gc.ca ; Hearn.L@parl.gc.ca ; Holland.M@parl.gc.ca ; info@dickharrismp.ca ; jaffer@parl.gc.ca ; Keeper.T@parl.gc.ca ; Kenney.J@parl.gc.ca ; Layton.J@parl.gc.ca ; Lukiwski.T@parl.gc.ca ; Lunn.G@parl.gc.ca ; Mackay.P@parl.gc.ca ; MacKenzie.D@parl.gc.ca ; martin.paul@parl.gc.ca ; mathyi@parl.gc.ca ; Mayes.C@parl.gc.ca ; Moore.J@parl.gc.ca ; Obhrai.D@parl.gc.ca ; OConnor.G@parl.gc.ca ; Oda.B@parl.gc.ca ; ottawa@larrymiller.ca ; Pallister.B@parl.gc.ca ; pepinl@sen.parl.gc.ca ; Prentice.J@parl.gc.ca ; rajotte.j@parl.gc.ca ; sgroj@parl.gc.ca ; silva.m@parl.gc.ca ; simmssc@parl.gc.ca ; Skelton.C@parl.gc.ca ; Solberg.M@parl.gc.ca ; sorenson.k@parl.gc.ca ; Toews.V@parl.gc.ca ; Verner.J@parl.gc.ca ; volpej1@parl.gc.ca ; warkentin.c@parl.gc.ca ; Yelich.L@parl.gc.ca ; zedp@parl.gc.ca ; letters@cbc.ca ; news@ctv.ca ; newsroom@herald.ca ; newsdesk@lfpress.com ; submit@theherald.canwest.com ; letters@thegazette.canwest.com ; globalnational@canada.com ; localnews@tc.canwest.com ; sunnewstips@png.canwest.com ; city@thejournal.canwest.com ; globalnews.reg@globaltv.ca ; mmarshall@leaderpost.canwest.com ; oped@ott.sunpub.com ; editor@tor.sunpub.com ; tabtips@png.canwest.com ; sanderson@thecitizen.canwest.com ; newsroom@canadianchristianity.com ; ministre@finances.gouv.qc.ca ; ministre@justice.gouv.qc.ca
Subject: .. KMM16616921V25471L0KM (KMM16681313V70004L0KM)
Attention: Bell Executive Care Attention Sasha Rollin / Bell Billing accounting department
 
The ISP wrongfully sees itself as the sole judge of disputes in their contract obligations too. This sort of contract, where the subscriber is considered to agree by signing up for service rather than by active negotiation, is given extra scrutiny by the courts. Any wiggle room or ambiguity is usually resolved in favor of the consumer rather than the company.
 
Even in the US the Bells are losing heavily to the Cable guys, who are bleeding them to death next too,  and in desperations  the Bells are  looking for any other possible sources of revenues..   But had they not abused, screwed their customers so often, the customers would not have so readily transferred to the cable ISPs. When the past Bells customers do  transfer to cable  they take not just their internet services es but their phone lines and next they rarely come back to the Bells too.. and the Bells revenues go down seriously. “ Posted on by marksy Well here again I sit and write about a multi-billion dollar corporation screwing its’ customers any way and every way it can.  This time it is the god of phones, Bell Canada….  led me to what probably amounted to my 15th – 20th phone call in the last 2-3 months.”
  
Courts Turn Against Abusive Contracts “In the past month, however, two new US court rulings suggest that judges are developing a more sophisticated sense of how corporations conduct online and technology transactions with their customers that Bell Sympatico especially now needs to note. “The EULAs or terms-of-service agreements are long and legalistic, the deals are offered on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and the terms are often oppressive and one-sided. As a result, the legal hegemony of the EULA is cracking. This is a good development for consumers, who would otherwise be saddled by oppressive terms they have neither the legal sophistication to understand nor the bargaining power to avoid, and for the public interest, which suffers when customers are forced to waive rights that capitalist democracies rely on for innovation and accountability.In Gatton v. T-Mobile (.pdf), the California Court of Appeal struck down a provision in the mobile phone company’s EULA requiring consumers to go through arbitration to challenge termination fees or the practice of selling locked handsets that can’t switch carriers with the customer. The court held that both the way customers entered into the EULA contract, and the arbitration terms of that contract, were unconscionable, and therefore the provision would not be enforced.The reasons the court gave for holding the EULA procedurally unconscionable apply to most EULAs. Even though the arbitration term was fully disclosed to consumers, the contract was one of “adhesion”: an agreement imposed and drafted by the party with superior bargaining strength, which gave the consumer only the opportunity to accept or reject the contract, not to freely negotiate it. As a result, the customer’s unequal bargaining power results in an absence of meaningful choice. The fact that the customers could choose a different carrier may mitigate, but not cure, the procedural unconscionability.Gatton is an important case because it recognizes that every clickwrap, shrink-wrap, browsewrap and box-wrap contract has an element of procedural unconscionability that requires the court to consider whether the challenged term of the contract is overly harsh or one-sided. This opens up the content of contracts to legal supervision, which is great in a situation where the customer hasn’t really been able to bargain, negotiate or otherwise exercise market power.  But in  unacceptable direct contrast the now  recived, mailed  statements for the subsequent months for the monthly high speed unlimited  internet billing statements  are not at all similar, not even as simple, but unacceptably they are unacceptably distorted still, confusing , full of unacceptable irregularities, unacceptable extra charges  now next.. that I unacceptably have many time now asked you by phone, in writing to rightfully deal with and correct. Amongst my many other rightul demands to you too now. IT IS SHEER UNACCEPTABLE  STUPIDITY, DISSERVICE ON YOUR PART THAT I HAVE EVEN TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS FOR MONTHS TOO. My monthly high speed unlimited  internet billing statement  for  February 2008  firstly  do not show any services and equipment charges, etc, at all , note none  at all,  but unacceptable in March  2008 Bell  shows me  some new, unacceptable different services and unacceptable  equipment  charges of $103.90 and next  the other charges  of 286.97 .

Please note I today by mail  have received your unofficial  my monthly high speed unlimited  internet billing statements from you for the last 6 months unsigned and incomplete firstly, so how can you EVEN expect rightfully now for me to pay you when you cannot delievr what I have asked the last 6 weeks to me in this? On top of that while the statements for November 2007, December 2007 and January 2008 monthly high speed unlimited  internet billing statement showing a total service charge of  54.13 for January 2008 were paid for and they are all very clear, satisfactory. 

AND I HAVE ALREADY DETAILED MY OBJECTIONS TO THESE UNACCEPTABLE AND UNSPECIFIED CHARGES, AND WHAT TO KNOW AS TO WHAT ACCOUNT THESE CHARGES WERE APPLIED TOO NOW TOO?
 
Now since undeniably too I was not aware OF THEM EVEN, GOT NO NOTICE OF THEM OFFICIALLY TOO,  I did not authorize, or pre approve nor have not authorized YOU TO CONTINUE ANY BANK ACCOUNTS WITHDRAWALS to the changes, OR FIRSTLY STILL  TO MAKE ANY CHANGES TO MY ACCOUNT AS WELL these changes are all inapplicable and unbillable to me still too and rightfully so.
 
You have once again unacceptably violated my contract agreement, obligations, for which I have asked you rightfully now for further dames too undeniably as well.
 
 
Paul Kambulow 7781a thibert Street,  LaSalle- Montreal, Quebec h8n2c5,
Home  Tel 514-363-7316  KMM16616921V25471L0KM (KMM16681313V70004L0KM)
 
PS p2pnet traffic shaping digest The folks who run Bell Canada figured they could get away with “managing” clients’ bandwidth without their permission, and without them noticing. They were dead wrong on both counts. Here’s a set of p2pnet stories on the Bell Canada traffic throttling scandal. It’s a work in progress with regular updates.
 
 Canadian opposition leader Stéphane Dion should support the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) campaign for government action to protect Net neutrality in Canada, says the union. “On behalf of the 340,000 members of the National Union, I am asking the Liberal Party of Canada to take a clear stand in support of seeing the principle of net neutrality enshrined in Canadian law,”
Bad persons, and Politicians, bad corporations  tend to be the same world wide, and the solution the same, full Public exposure and full prosecution of the guilty serves every one’s best interest next too still. For if the evil bad person is not exposed, punished they still  have no reasons to stop doing bad things and doing good things instead. They by the public exposure of their own bad acts they next also do find out that a good name was worth more than all the silver and gold they had hoped to acquire. And many next have as a result too.
I also do rightfully think it’s really reprehensible that Bell, etc., had now  advertised unlimited download service and then next complain when you actually take them up on their offer. If a user wants to take full advantage of the service they pay for, they should be entitled to it by law now too.  Still  if they’re unwilling to provide the bandwidth I pay for, during the full duration that I pay for it, then they shouldn’t have been be telling me they can. This is why cable TV & broadband need to be regulated  like  electricity and phone. http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/
  
No large corporation, with almost infinite legal resources and billions of dollars behind them, should be able to use their wealth to put real people at a disadvantage, because it would be presumed that only the corporations   had any legal rights.   Bell included now.
     
What started as a simple phone call by me in January 2007 to Bell tech help line to determine why my internet services were so slow and sluggish next had  become a major farce, cover-up on the part of Bell Sympatico. I was next lied to for months as to the real reasons Bell they rather had offered me their poor internet services to me and  to many others in my city for years now too.. and then Bell had even  lied to me some more, had also breached their contractual obligations to me many times too, had allowed me even to be slandered, abused on the Bell customer forums now too.. and why? so  that clearly greedy Bell can continue stay in business to make more money.. and so who really cares now about the customer’s good welfare in reality? now? What not Bell itself, not the CRTC, not the federal government, not our Prime Minister Stephen Harper, not  the the federal Minister of Consumer Affairs, Jim Prentice..  not  any provincial consumer affairs Minister, but only the citizens, the news media, and the NDP party care about the citizens  good welfare really it seems. Not acceptable for sure too! https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/basic-contract-law/
 
RSVP ASAP too. Thank you
  do see also
 https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/to-bell-sympatico/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/12/18/unfair/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/04/20/bell-internet/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/why-many-businesses-fail/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/06/14/buyer-beware-beware/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/07/07/crtc-farcical-hearings-on-internet-speed-control/
http://anyonecare.wordpress.com/2008/05/23/bell-bce-sympatico/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/05/01/is-your-isp-still-even-watching-you/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/16/the-war-against-bell/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/05/21/bell-throttles-internet-speeds/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/26/and/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/15/consumers-affairs/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/19/bell-lied/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/i-cannot-trust-you-for-you-lie-to-me-all-the-time/
 https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/deceptive-unacceptable-unfair-business-trade-practices-unreliable-internet-access/
https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/27/basic-contract-law/
http://witnessed.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/this-next-was-so-predictable-even-by-me-too/
 https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/action-not-mere-words-needed/

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: