# DirecTv - Class Action Law Suite



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

Hello,

I am looking to see how many people may have been duped by DirecTv.

Did you have a DirecTv Tivo and also paid for a Service/Repair contract through directv? Did you have to have Directv replace your tivo under the contract only to get a DirecTv DVR (crap) and the installer take away the old one?

Well you gave up your perpetual ownership of the Tivo and in turn got a leased DVR from DirecTv if they replace it under contract. This I am told by several employees and supervisor, etc at DirecTv.

I only found this out when I had to cancel my account with DirecTv because my company was moving me to Texas, my wife and I did not want DirecTv anymore because of the lack of Tivos in their equipment lineup. When we called to cancel they said that they would send boxes for my equipment which I owned (Or thought). Now they put a charge on my account for 200 for the DVR.


How did I end up with a DirecTv DVR? - one of my Tivos had finally given up the ghost, called DirecTv to service it under the contract, they sent an installer out and replaced my Tivo with the DVR.


Has anyone else had this experience or something similar?


----------



## litzdog911 (Oct 18, 2002)

Here we go again .....


----------



## rlj5242 (Dec 20, 2000)

I was part of the Dishnetwork Dishplayer class action *lawsuit*. The only winner in that one was the attorney that started it. I can get a new DVR if I go back to Dish. Nothing more. It's the same deal as a new subscriber.

-Robert


----------



## cowboys2002 (Jun 15, 2001)

DirecTv - Class Action Law _Suite _

What address is that again?


----------



## John T Smith (Jun 17, 2004)

cowboys2002 said:


> DirecTv - Class Action Law _Suite _
> 
> What address is that again?


Room 666 at the Bates Motel


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

I don't think you have a leg to stand on in court. 

1) You had a service contract.
2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.

Your complaint is what again? Sue because the replacement DVR had a slightly different interface? Sue because you didn't read your contract?

Sorry, I'll stop laughing any minute now.


----------



## sbourgeo (Nov 10, 2000)

If DirecTV is willing to put me up in a suite, then count me in! :up: A mint on my pillow is not optional though...


----------



## bacevedo (Oct 31, 2003)

Dkerr24 said:


> I don't think you have a leg to stand on in court.
> 
> 1) You had a service contract.
> 2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.
> ...


I think the OP's complaint is that his owned Tivo unit was converted to a lease without his knowledge when it was replaced under the protection plan by a DirecTV DVR.

I am in the process of canceling my DirecTV account. I just think their new pricing and bad customer policies (2 year contract) have made them worse than the cable companies. I am going completely to free OTA TV. Saves me quite a bit a month, and keeps a lot of crappy shows out of my house.

Bryan


----------



## markbox (May 3, 2004)

DirecTV does seem to have a number of deceptive practices and 
if it takes a lawsuit to get them to change so be it. From 
personal experience, DirecTV offered me a free receiver swap
from the old MPEG2 receiver to a new MPEG4 capable receiver
including a new 5 LNB dish installation. I confirmed with them
twice, weeks before the installation, that I would not end up
in a new contract of any length. Day of installation I'm reading
the paperwork the installer is requiring me to sign and it says
I will end up in a new contract (1 or 2 year I don't recall).
So I call DirecTV to confirm no new contract and the CSR puts
me on hold to go talk to someone about my situation. End result,
I had to sign up to a new contract or the new free receiver offer 
was off the table. I went ahead and signed as I had already 
planned to get an DirecTV HD DVR from Costco to hook to the 
new dish and that definitely required a 2 year contract.
DirecTV is a nice service and I've had no problems with the 
equipment but their tactics leave a lot to be desired.


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

Why is it that these threads are mostly started by newbees?


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

JimSpence said:


> Why is it that these threads are mostly started by newbees?


Most likely trolls.


----------



## Da Goon (Oct 22, 2006)

> (b) Formal Resolution. Except as provided in Section 9(d), if we cannot resolve a Claim informally, any Claim either of us asserts will be resolved only by binding arbitration. The arbitration will be conducted under the rules of JAMS that are in effect at the time the arbitration is initiated (referred to as the "JAMS Rules") and under the rules set forth in this Agreement. If there is a conflict between JAMS Rules and the rules set forth in this Agreement, the rules set forth in this Agreement will govern. *ARBITRATION MEANS THAT YOU WAIVE YOUR RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL.* You may, in arbitration, seek any and all remedies otherwise available to you pursuant to your state's law. If you decide to initiate arbitration, you agree to tell us in writing the amount that you would pay to file a lawsuit against us in the appropriate court of law in your state. Unless we agree to pay your fee for you, you only need to pay an arbitration initiation fee equal to such court filing fee, not to exceed $125; we agree to pay any additional fee or deposit required by JAMS to initiate your arbitration. We also agree to pay the costs of the arbitration proceeding. Other fees, such as attorney's fees and expenses of travel to the arbitration will be paid in accordance with JAMS Rules. The arbitration will be held at a location in your hometown area unless you and we both agree to another location or telephonic arbitration. To start an arbitration, you or we must do the following things:
> 
> (1) Write a Demand for Arbitration. The demand must include a description of the Claim and the amount of damages sought to be recovered. You can find a copy of a Demand for Arbitration at jamsadr.com.
> 
> ...


http://directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P400042
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caveat_emptor

Good luck.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Ok, pardon me if this has been said in other (and I'm guessing by some of the comments, numerous) threads. However, it does seem odd that you buy something, and when you need repairs on it, they replace it with something you no longer own. If my car needed repairs, the car dealer wouldn't make me sign a lease and take my old car. At worst, they would buy my old car and use it as a down payment.


----------



## Turtleboy (Mar 24, 2001)

First post? Drink
Class action? Drink
"Law suite?" finish the glass.

Damn, I'm gonna get drunk playing this game.


----------



## smak (Feb 11, 2000)

I was thinking of becoing a lawyer at a major Los Angeles law firm, so when I became partner, i'd have access to their classy law suite at Staples Center.

-smak-


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

Dkerr24 


Um read the contract nowhere does it state that they will take your (Owned device) and change the status to Leased when they replace it.

Maybe you should read my post again, I had a fully paid for device prior to DTV change in position on owned equipment vs. leased. They then gave me a new device in return for my old device; I would agree with you if it stopped there, but it did not they have demanded the replacement device back. Surely someone of your smarts can understand that there is a reasonable expectation that a swap is a swap, If you get your contract with Best Buy on your receiver or TV and it breaks you walk in hand them the old one they hand you the new one, they don&#8217;t get to come back to you in 6 mos or a year and say ok time to returned the replaced device.

I did read my service/repair contract before paying for the service and nowhere does it say they can do this, but since you know where it is how about you kindly quote it for me or provide a link to it.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

sbourgeo 


Nothing better to do then to pick on some spelling mistakes, I am sure you are perfect so I will be happy to send all my post to you for markup.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

JimSpence 


Instead of being one of the many jerks that seem to lurk around here about doing something constructive and refer me to the threads on this subject.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

DevilDogs said:


> Ok, pardon me if this has been said in other (and I'm guessing by some of the comments, numerous) threads. However, it does seem odd that you buy something, and when you need repairs on it, they replace it with something you no longer own. If my car needed repairs, the car dealer wouldn't make me sign a lease and take my old car. At worst, they would buy my old car and use it as a down payment.


Thanks DevilDogs there are a few people here who are trying to be constructive instead of destructive.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

smak said:


> I was thinking of becoing a lawyer at a major Los Angeles law firm, so when I became partner, i'd have access to their classy law suite at Staples Center.
> 
> -smak-


WOW Another Brain Trust at work.


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

Wayno1965 said:


> Dkerr24
> 
> Um read the contract nowhere does it state that they will take your (Owned device) and change the status to Leased when they replace it.
> 
> ...


Welcome back! Figured you were a troll that would post once, then disappear.

Never had much of a need for finding and reading my Directv service agreement since I can self-repair any/all problems that arise with my equipment. I just need Directv for the signal, nothing else.

The point here is what difference does it make that they want the old equipment back? You planning to use equipment that can't work without a Directv signal?


----------



## sbourgeo (Nov 10, 2000)

Wayno1965 said:


> sbourgeo
> 
> Nothing better to do then to pick on some spelling mistakes, I am sure you are perfect so I will be happy to send all my post to you for markup.


You had me at "perfect"...


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I think if I were the OP and felt this way about D* then I would just cancel the damn service. That sends a clear message to them when they ask you for the reason. It's not like they will do anything about it though.


----------



## MikeAndrews (Jan 17, 2002)

bacevedo said:


> I think the OP's complaint is that his owned Tivo unit was converted to a lease without his knowledge when it was replaced under the protection plan by a DirecTV DVR.
> 
> I am in the process of canceling my DirecTV account. I just think their new pricing and bad customer policies (2 year contract) have made them worse than the cable companies. I am going completely to free OTA TV. Saves me quite a bit a month, and keeps a lot of crappy shows out of my house.
> 
> Bryan





markbox said:


> DirecTV does seem to have a number of deceptive practices and
> if it takes a lawsuit to get them to change so be it. From
> personal experience, DirecTV offered me a free receiver swap
> from the old MPEG2 receiver to a new MPEG4 capable receiver
> ...


As I've posted they listed my owned HR10-250 as leased and told me not to worry about about it because the DVR/outlet fee is the same $5 extra a month. I called almost a year later to ask again that they fix my bill and make it clear my TiVo is not leased. So when I canceled they tell me I have another year of commitment and they're charging me an early cancellation fee for it. Commitment for WHAT? Straightening out my bill? Exactly what did I get for my commitment?

THAT'S what we need class action for. The CSRs can push the commitment button at any time and somehow that binds the customer.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Dkerr24 said:


> Welcome back! Figured you were a troll that would post once, then disappear.


Nice. Kick a man again while he's asking for help.


Dkerr24 said:


> Never had much of a need for finding and reading my Directv service agreement since I can self-repair any/all problems that arise with my equipment. I just need Directv for the signal, nothing else.


Well goody for you. That puts you in a very special group, doesn't it? However *most* people can't do that. I thought that's why they turned to this forum.


Dkerr24 said:


> The point here is what difference does it make that they want the old equipment back? You planning to use equipment that can't work without a Directv signal?


Clearly, you've never heard of eBay. Oh, what's that? You have? Well then you would know that people buy all sorts of junk, er, stuff, including broken Tivo units. But, that ability was taken from him when they took his broken Tivo. If he had the Tivo still, he'd at least be able to sell it if he wanted. Instead, when he cancels his service, he has to send the equipment back, including a unit they used to replace a *purchased* unit.

Calling people trolls is about as constructive as calling them stupid. What happened to this forum? It used to be very helpful, even to people asking questions that have been asked. I just responded in another post where someone is having the same problem with pixelation as I'm having. While I did get a little forceful with them (they must not have read the posts I gave them in a previous post), I was still helpful. I did *not* resort to calling them a troll or calling them stupid.


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

DevilDogs said:


> Calling people trolls is about as constructive as calling them stupid. What happened to this forum? It used to be very helpful, even to people asking questions that have been asked. I just responded in another post where someone is having the same problem with pixelation as I'm having. While I did get a little forceful with them (they must not have read the posts I gave them in a previous post), I was still helpful. I did *not* resort to calling them a troll or calling them stupid.


Definition of a 'troll' from wikipedia:

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

Don't see stupid anywhere in that, but hey make up whatever definition you like.

Oh and thanks for the pat on the back for me being able to fix my own equipment. It's not hard if you're willing to do a bit of research and reading. I'd rather do that than give the money to someone who took the time to figure it out and make a business out of it.

And what 'help' is the OP asking for? Just more folks whining about issues with their service or equipment is hardly helpful. Neither is sympathy.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Oh, now that the OP edited I see that they canceled service and were expecting to not return the box. Did they charge your CC? If so, then call your CC and tell them what the deal is. They can't really charge you for this if you were paying for the monthly replacement plan.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Dkerr24 said:


> Definition of a 'troll' from wikipedia:
> 
> An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial and usually irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the intention of baiting other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.


I know what a troll is. Quite frankly, what some people were doing to the OP could be classified as being a troll too. You *did* bait another user (me) into an emotional response. And this *is* disruptive to the original topic. I don't think his intent was to bait other users. It was informative, and he wanted to see if others experienced the same problem.



Dkerr24 said:


> Don't see stupid anywhere in that, but hey make up whatever definition you like.


No, it doesn't infer the person is stupid. However, calling someone a troll can evoke a response as if you called them stupid. That was my point.



Dkerr24 said:


> Oh and thanks for the pat on the back for me being able to fix my own equipment. It's not hard if you're willing to do a bit of research and reading. I'd rather do that than give the money to someone who took the time to figure it out and make a business out of it.


I agree, I repair my own stuff to. Of course, when I run into something new, I turn to forums such as this for help. My point is, most people who use a Tivo want the functionality without having to learn how to repair it.



Dkerr24 said:


> And what 'help' is the OP asking for? Just more folks whining about issues with their service or equipment is hardly helpful. Neither is sympathy.


He's asking if other people have had similar issues. I was not aware of that as a problem. Of course, I don't have a service plan. To me, it sounds like the service plan counts on the fact that most people don't read things like that. When is the last time you read a EULA for a piece of software? Does that mean that if the EULA said "By installing this software, you're giving up ownership of your computer", you wouldn't have a problem with it? He bought a service agreement. He bought a Tivo. They replaced the Tivo under the service agreement. How is that different than say a Best Buy service agreement? What would you say if they replaced your camcorder, but at the end of the service agreement, the camcorder became their property? It is basically the same thing.

My whole point in this is his message did not sound like he was intending to be a troll. He was asking what I felt was a legitimate question, and was bringing to light something I (and potentially others) was not aware of. For the most part, the response he got was uncalled for.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dkerr24 said:


> Just more folks whining about issues with their service or equipment is hardly helpful. Neither is sympathy.


No, I'm not going to let you get away with ducking this issue that easily by disparaging the OP. You can't tell me that if you bought a Ferrari from a dealer, purchased the dealer's warranty plan, later took the Ferrari in for warranty repairs, and had the dealer give you back a BMW with the title in the dealer's name you would be happy.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

Indeed it was not my intention to stir up trouble, I did want to know if other had this problem to see if it was worth my time and effort to start a Class Action. On another note I believe that if you have received poor server you tell others so that they may be aware of the pit falls that others have so that you may not fall into the same trap. It seems that at least one other person here has had a similar issue of converting them to leased instead of owned.

And thank you to all the others who have taken the time to help explain my point of view.


----------



## direfan (Jun 28, 2002)

lrhorer said:


> No, I'm not going to let you get away with ducking this issue that easily by disparaging the OP. You can't tell me that if you bought a Ferrari from a dealer, purchased the dealer's warranty plan, later took the Ferrari in for warranty repairs, and had the dealer give you back a BMW with the title in the dealer's name you would be happy.


Dkerr, I would sure like to hear your response to this. Thanks.


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

Wayno1965 said:


> Indeed it was not my intention to stir up trouble, I did want to know if other had this problem to see if it was worth my time and effort to start a Class Action. On another note I believe that if you have received poor server you tell others so that they may be aware of the pit falls that others have so that you may not fall into the same trap. It seems that at least one other person here has had a similar issue of converting them to leased instead of owned.
> 
> And thank you to all the others who have taken the time to help explain my point of view.


My suggestion to you is to call the headquarters office of DirecTV and ask to speak to the office of the president.

When I tried for 6 months to get a promised $200 rebate from DirecTV after purchasing my 2nd HR10-250, I finally decided to go to the top.

A very polite lady (whose name I can't remember, sorry) listened to my whole story and told me she would look into it and call me back. I thought, yup, another promise to call me back--I have heard that from DirecTV CSRs and tier II folks many times and never been called back.

Well, the next day she did call me back and suggested a remedy to make me whole on the $200. The rebate could not be salvaged so she asked if I would prefer a $200 check or a $200 credit to my account.

I was polite with her, but I did clearly express my frustration and disappointment with the situation.

I would never have even considered a class action lawsuit. I wanted all of my money, not pennies on the dollar after having the legal team collect the majority of my money.

That's my opinion, you do what you feel is best for you. BTW, the credit showed up on my account 10 minutes after we ended the last call.


----------



## PhilDana (Dec 6, 2007)

Dkerr24 said:


> I don't think you have a leg to stand on in court.
> 
> 1) You had a service contract.
> 2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.





Dkerr24 said:


> Never had much of a need for finding and reading my Directv service agreement since I can self-repair any/all problems that arise with my equipment. I just need Directv for the signal, nothing else.


Those who put themselves on a pedestal and pontificate without providing proof for their words, then admit that they haven't even read the relevant document have no credibility. Being a post whore does always lend credibility.
:down:


----------



## rbtravis (Aug 9, 2005)

All these comments on both sides have nothing to do with the purpose of this which is to try to help people fix problems. No one can help the OP, he gave his TiVo away. Help paying his legal bills only helps lawyers. I just got a settlement check from a class action lawsuit for $15.00 after 15 years of litigation. Lawyers are the only ones who benefit from lawsuits. Feel sorry for the OP for not reading the contract and understanding it. But only he is responsible for his actions. Don't make fun of his sorrow, just let him sulk quietly into the night and lets get back to the business of this forum which is helping people who kept their Directv TiVo's fix their TiVo's.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

I think there's a bit more to this forum than just that. 

Anyway, if D* put a charge on his D* account and not his credit card then who really cares. He won't be able to use that account and no one will be able to use that Tivo again.

If it was put on his credit card then he needs to dispute it. And if that credit card is still active and D* has not charged it.... then he can expect that they will. He will need to cancel the card and get a new one.

D* is very deceptive with this practice. Here's an old thread that I started when I had problems with them.

http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=357510


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

PhilDana said:


> Those who put themselves on a pedestal and pontificate without providing proof for their words, then admit that they haven't even read the relevant document have no credibility. Being a post whore does always lend credibility.
> :down:


Why would I bother reading a service contract on DTivo units? I never had a service contract, as I know most (if not all) service contracts are a rip-off. I fix my own gear, saving me the monthly expense.


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

direfan said:


> Dkerr, I would sure like to hear your response to this. Thanks.


I guess if you insist upon sticking with this silly analogy... I would never take my Ferrari to a dealership if I already had a mechanic who did excellent work for a lower price


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

That's valid in my case as well. My sister was paying $7 a month for that crap. I noticed it on her bill and told her to get rid of it. I can fix any problem that she would have and she's been wasting that money for several years now.

However, the OP was paying for it and so should be able to expect that the unit would be returned to him in working condition. However, D* does not even attempt to fix these boxes and simply just sends out one of their boxes. And on top of that they take ownership of the box?

Yes, I know, does it really matter? Well, when you leave D* apparently it does.



Dkerr24 said:


> I guess if you insist upon sticking with this silly analogy... I would never take my Ferrari to a dealership if I already had a mechanic who did excellent work for a lower price


----------



## JimSpence (Sep 19, 2001)

Maybe this suit can be added to this one. 
http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=134072


----------



## direfan (Jun 28, 2002)

Dkerr24 said:


> I guess if you insist upon sticking with this silly analogy... I would never take my Ferrari to a dealership if I already had a mechanic who did excellent work for a lower price


Weak! Answer the bigger question here. is it OK for DTV to switch an owned receiver with a leased receiver as part of the Protection Plan.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

direfan said:


> Weak! Answer the bigger question here. is it OK for DTV to switch an owned receiver with a leased receiver as part of the Protection Plan.


so what if you get some other poster in a forum to answer such a question. The answer is obviously no given just that little bit of info.

Did you look at your paperwork to see what it says?
Did you contact your credit card company about any charges?
Did you go higher up the foodchain at DirectTv?

those are the question with any real meaning for you and some of the first ones any competent lawyer would ask if starting any legal action.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

ZeoTiVo said:


> so what if you get some other poster in a forum to answer such a question. The answer is obviously no given just that little bit of info.


I believe the original question was if anyone else had issues like his. It's not like he expected us to fix his issue.



ZeoTiVo said:


> those are the question with any real meaning for you and some of the first ones any competent lawyer would ask if starting any legal action.


If others have had problems, he can tell this to a lawyer. That would probably get a lawyer to take notice. Suddenly, it becomes more than just one person having an issue. Besides, talking to a lawyer over $200 probably doesn't make sense. But, if say 5 or 10 (or more) people had a similar problem, it makes talking to a lawyer much more likely.


----------



## PhilDana (Dec 6, 2007)

Dkerr24 said:


> I don't think you have a leg to stand on in court.
> 
> 1) You had a service contract.
> 2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.
> ...





Dkerr24 said:


> Why would I bother reading a service contract on DTivo units? I never had a service contract, as I know most (if not all) service contracts are a rip-off. I fix my own gear, saving me the monthly expense.


I'm still LMAO.  You made statements directly relating to the wording of the Service Plan document without ever having read the document. You are either blowing hot air, trying to impress us noobs with your (lack of) knowledge, or are merely trying to boost your post count. Which is it?


----------



## jimb726 (Jan 4, 2007)

PhilDana said:


> I'm still LMAO.  You made statements directly relating to the wording of the Service Plan document without ever having read the document. You are either blowing hot air, trying to impress us noobs with your (lack of) knowledge, or are merely trying to boost your post count. Which is it?


Uh, no he didnt, he covered the intent of the document, namely to replace the defective unit, but I dont see anywhere in his post that he directly quotes the document. As far as the OP is concerned, he got jobbed over simply because he got his contract extended, what would be interesting would be whether or not the commitment termination date corresponds to his date of exchange?


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

PhilDana said:


> I'm still LMAO.  You made statements directly relating to the wording of the Service Plan document without ever having read the document. You are either blowing hot air, trying to impress us noobs with your (lack of) knowledge, or are merely trying to boost your post count. Which is it?


What statements did I make about the service contract other than just confirming the OP had one?

Once again, no need for me to read a contract I have no desire in ever obtaining for my own use. It would be a waste of money to me.

No need to inflate my post count. I've been around here since Oct 2004.


----------



## ZeoTiVo (Jan 2, 2004)

DevilDogs said:


> I believe the original question was if anyone else had issues like his. It's not like he expected us to fix his issue.
> 
> If others have had problems, he can tell this to a lawyer. That would probably get a lawyer to take notice. Suddenly, it becomes more than just one person having an issue. Besides, talking to a lawyer over $200 probably doesn't make sense. But, if say 5 or 10 (or more) people had a similar problem, it makes talking to a lawyer much more likely.


agreed, on the above -- but after the lawyer has seen that any remedies with the company or usual means like credit card intervention have been looked into/exhausted.
The lawyer has to find a pattern of illegal activiy for a class action, not just a slick contract or extended committment that was part of that contract terms.

NOTE - I do agree that the OP got stuck with a very bad deal from DirectTV and I would be as unhappy/looking for answers as he was. The thing is though, the answers have to be followed up on and he is more likely to get fair compensation fro dealing with DirectTv for his own specific situation versus a lawyer collecting fees over a class action stretching out over some number of years.


----------



## Wayno1965 (Jul 24, 2008)

ZeoTiVo said:


> agreed, on the above -- but after the lawyer has seen that any remedies with the company or usual means like credit card intervention have been looked into/exhausted.
> The lawyer has to find a pattern of illegal activiy for a class action, not just a slick contract or extended committment that was part of that contract terms.
> 
> NOTE - I do agree that the OP got stuck with a very bad deal from DirectTV and I would be as unhappy/looking for answers as he was. The thing is though, the answers have to be followed up on and he is more likely to get fair compensation fro dealing with DirectTv for his own specific situation versus a lawyer collecting fees over a class action stretching out over some number of years.


One of the reasons for exploring a CA is that I do not beleive that what was done was legal, a pattern of other customer having similar issues is something we should all be concerned about.

The more we the masses just fold up on issues like this stating "Oh there is nothing I can do I am just one person who does not have the money to fight a big company like DirectTV" the more compnaies will feel that they can do what ever they want even if it is illegal.

One way of holding companies accountable is to inform others of the pitfalls that have happened to them and maybe someday this will hit them where it counts in the wallet, other times it might take a class action to wake them up.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Dkerr24 said:


> What statements did I make about the service contract other than just confirming the OP had one?





Dkerr24 said:


> I don't think you have a leg to stand on in court.
> 
> 1) You had a service contract.
> 2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.
> ...


How do you know he didn't have a leg to stand on? Why would you say he didn't read his contract? You didn't either. By your statement that he didn't read his contract, you infer that you did, and know that his contract states that he is essentially SOL. 


Dkerr24 said:


> Once again, no need for me to read a contract I have no desire in ever obtaining for my own use. It would be a waste of money to me.
> 
> No need to inflate my post count. I've been around here since Oct 2004.


See, it is statements like these that make it sound like you're doing some chest puffing. I don't care that you can repair your own equipment. That has absolutely no bearing on his problem. (Troll, anyone?) As far as longevity, I've been on since Dec 2002. That fact and 4 bucks will get you a coffee somewhere.


----------



## PhilDana (Dec 6, 2007)

Dkerr24 said:


> Why would I bother reading a service contract on DTivo units? I never had a service contract, as I know most (if not all) service contracts are a rip-off. I fix my own gear, saving me the monthly expense.


You can fix your own gear?? Whoopdee do. There are thousands of folks who do their own work, and most of them do it without asking for help. Be sure to let folks know when they are to be suitably impressed. impressed. http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=292611.


----------



## Dkerr24 (Oct 29, 2004)

PhilDana said:


> You can fix your own gear?? Whoopdee do. There are thousands of folks who do their own work, and most of them do it without asking for help. Be sure to let folks know when they are to be suitably impressed. impressed. http://http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=292611.


No intention here to impress. Just making a point in our litigation-crazy society that we must start to take personal responsiblities. You sign a service contract, you better READ it.

My point about fixing my own equipment is an explanation of how I avoid being put into such a situation. I took the time to read and learn how to fix the unit so I wouldn't feel compelled to use a service contract.

You can talk to the crickets from now on in this thread. I'm done with this topic.

(By the way sport, you posted a dead link)


----------



## Marrelli (Jan 12, 2007)

Dkerr24 said:


> No intention here to impress. Just making a point in our litigation-crazy society that we must start to take personal responsiblities. You sign a service contract, you better READ it.


 And how do you know whether the OP did or did not read his contract?


----------



## rhuntington3 (May 1, 2001)

Nope, hasn't happened to me.


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Dkerr24 said:


> No intention here to impress. Just making a point in our litigation-crazy society that we must start to take personal responsiblities.


Wow, I actually agree with you on that. But there's a difference between hot coffee lawsuits and a company taking ownership of something you bought.



Dkerr24 said:


> You sign a service contract, you better READ it.


Instead of continually bringing up the fact that the person better read their contract, you should read the thread. The OP does say he read his contract. Here it is: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=400292&p=6519579



Dkerr24 said:


> My point about fixing my own equipment is an explanation of how I avoid being put into such a situation. I took the time to read and learn how to fix the unit so I wouldn't feel compelled to use a service contract.


Just because someone can't fix their own equipment, doesn't give a company the right to screw over the customer.


Dkerr24 said:


> You can talk to the crickets from now on in this thread. I'm done with this topic.


So instead of admitting your wrong, you're just going to leave?


Dkerr24 said:


> (By the way sport, you posted a dead link)


 Guess he fixed it. Must've been because of the nice way you asked him to fix it.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Where is the bored icon, when you need it??



DevilDogs said:


> Wow, I actually agree with you on that. But there's a difference between hot coffee lawsuits and a company taking ownership of something you bought.
> 
> Instead of continually bringing up the fact that the person better read their contract, you should read the thread. The OP does say he read his contract. Here it is: http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=400292&p=6519579
> 
> ...


----------



## DevilDogs (Dec 29, 2002)

Wayno1965 said:


> One of the reasons for exploring a CA is that I do not beleive that what was done was legal, a pattern of other customer having similar issues is something we should all be concerned about.
> 
> The more we the masses just fold up on issues like this stating "Oh there is nothing I can do I am just one person who does not have the money to fight a big company like DirectTV" the more compnaies will feel that they can do what ever they want even if it is illegal.
> 
> One way of holding companies accountable is to inform others of the pitfalls that have happened to them and maybe someday this will hit them where it counts in the wallet, other times it might take a class action to wake them up.


I did happen to think of something that might be helpful to you. I recently won a fight against Budget Truck Rental. They were trying to get us to pay $1200 to fix one of their trucks when 2 different customer service reps told us that we would not be responsible for the damage. Anyway, as the last attempt to get the situation solved, I contacted our state's Attorney General. They were very interested in the problem, and we did get the situation resolved. You might want to try to contact your Attorney General and see what they say.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

Dkerr24 said:


> What statements did I make about the service contract other than just confirming the OP had one?


The very first post you submitted in this thread:



Dkerr24 said:


> 2) Directv fulfilled their end of the contract by replacing your unit with a new unit with similiar DVR features.


Completely implicit in that statement is the fact you have either read the contract or somehow know what is in the contract concerning taking ownership of a unit replaced under the contract as well as the right for DTV to substitute a different brand of DVR when replacing the unit. Then you go on to berate the OP for not knowing something of which you yourself have no direct knowledge. Then you go on to denigrate the OP and other individuals in general because you allegedly know how to fix your DVR. Implicit in those statements is the fact others do not know how to fix their DVRs, which once again is a fact of which you have no direct knowledge.

It's entirely possible the contract in question specifically reserves the right for DTV to replace the customer owned DVR with a different brand of DVR. It's even possible that the contract allows DTV to take ownership of the DVR upon replacement, although I doubt it, because I find it unlikely the contract would stand up under litigation in most states. The pertinent fact is, however, you have no idea whether the actions of DTV in this case were spelled out in the contract or not, or whether the actions were legal in the larger panorama or not.

Oh, and just BTW, DTV did not replace his unit, your statement notwithstanding. They just loaned him another unit, without ever bothering to either return or replace his unit.



Dkerr24 said:


> Once again, no need for me to read a contract I have no desire in ever obtaining for my own use. It would be a waste of money to me.


I'm not suggesting you should, and neither am I, but then not having done so, don't pontificate upon how DTV is or is not working within the constraints of said contact when you haven't a clue one way or the other. Most especially, don't give the participants of this forum an attitude about their getting their just deserts when you have no idea whether they have or not.


----------



## lrhorer (Aug 31, 2003)

bacevedo said:


> I am going completely to free OTA TV.


*OTA TV is NOT free.* If you are an average consumer, then it costs you anything from 3 to 10 times as much as CATV or Satellite, whether you ever use it, or not, or indeed whether you can even receive OTA or not.


----------



## Budget_HT (Jan 2, 2001)

lrhorer said:


> *OTA TV is NOT free.* If you are an average consumer, then it costs you anything from 3 to 10 times as much as CATV or Satellite, whether you ever use it, or not, or indeed whether you can even receive OTA or not.


Would you mind explaining what you mean here?

If you mean taxes, everyone pays them, whether using cable or satellite or OTA only.

Maybe I am missing your point here.


----------



## magnus (Nov 12, 2004)

Ok, then you might as well just use it then.



lrhorer said:


> *OTA TV is NOT free.* If you are an average consumer, then it costs you anything from 3 to 10 times as much as CATV or Satellite, whether you ever use it, or not, or indeed whether you can even receive OTA or not.


----------



## dtremain (Jan 5, 2004)

lrhorer said:


> *OTA TV is NOT free.* If you are an average consumer, then it costs you anything from 3 to 10 times as much as CATV or Satellite, whether you ever use it, or not, or indeed whether you can even receive OTA or not.


ARe you talking about the cost of advertising being passed onto the consumer? How is that any different with most cable/satellite stations? That has nothing to do with the method of delivery.

Your point is pretty confusing.


----------



## vaughnnaber (Aug 9, 2008)

I have the same issue!
I had two Tivo's. One had a bad receiver and I had the tech come to look at it. DTV tech on the phone swore that they would replace it with a new Tivo until they showed up. Long story short, I also got stuck with one of thier DVR's and don't like it as much.
Now they are taking away my HD chanels on my other Tivo if I do not switch to thier DVR. I definatly feel like they are bullies trying to push Tivo out at all cost. I am ready to drop DirectTV all together. I just need to research what alternatives are in my area. (Neenah, WI - Just south of Green Bay. Go Jets ;-) )
I appreciate the original post. I knew that I could not be the only one and wondered if someone was trying to rally the troups. I am not trying to be a troll and just stir up trouble but I admit that the only reason I came to this forum today was to ask the same question and see what was out there.


----------

