Shopping Discussion

VIRGIN: Activation refused

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 23rd, 2009 9:57 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Expert
Jun 14, 2001
15556 posts
1026 upvotes
luthair wrote: I'm aware of these rules, but to be honest I don't see what the companies gain by them.

Both cellphones and receivers are typically subsidized by the company, so when a user purchase hardware used it costs the corporation nothing. Essentially the company is either turning down a new subscriber who has been gained at no cost, or they're making an existing customer in good standing angry at them; at no time are they having any impact on the delinquent user. Does this seem a particularly bright plan to anyone?
How else are they going to protect themselves against someone running up a huge bill and then passing it off to a friend so they can do the same?

Aside from making all plans pre-paid I can't think of any (but that actually might be a better solution than what's happening now).
Should we have open retail markets to bring more UK and US retailers to Canada?wegmans-tops-trader-joes-americas-favou ... #p27788812
Deal Addict
Oct 17, 2004
1573 posts
168 upvotes
NG wrote: How else are they going to protect themselves against someone running up a huge bill and then passing it off to a friend so they can do the same?

Aside from making all plans pre-paid I can't think of any (but that actually might be a better solution than what's happening now).
Most services you're paying in advance. And really, as there are only a handful of cellular companies, how many times are people going to be able to do that type of behaviour? In the end these companies are cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Member
User avatar
Mar 14, 2005
453 posts
Edmonton, AB
NG wrote: How else are they going to protect themselves against someone running up a huge bill and then passing it off to a friend so they can do the same?

Aside from making all plans pre-paid I can't think of any (but that actually might be a better solution than what's happening now).
If the friend wants to run up a huge bill, he can get a free phone from Virgin and do it on his own. Why would he need a used phone to be 'passed off' to him?
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 17, 2004
1284 posts
795 upvotes
Markham
TakumiDC5 wrote: If the friend wants to run up a huge bill, he can get a free phone from Virgin and do it on his own. Why would he need a used phone to be 'passed off' to him?
We can all speculate as to Virgin's motivation for the policy, but the prevent-futher-delinquent-accounts-with-the-same phone isn't a particularly compelling one. You're right -- the same scam can be perpetrated with a brand new subsidized phone just as easily as an old one.

The more obvious motivation is to punish the person with the delinquent account. The person has already rung up a bunch of charges on their account that Virgin will likely have trouble collecting. Although Virgin will not recover any money by refusing to activate the phone on that account, they have just prevented that person from making more money.

The unintended consequence is that an uninformed innocent third party might still get ripped off buying that phone (which Virgin refuses to activate). Which kind of sucks ... but it's always buyer beware when buying used electronics. And the more that this happens, the less likely people will let themselves be ripped off buying a used cdma phone.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 13, 2008
6132 posts
1005 upvotes
Fort Saskatchewan
TakumiDC5 wrote: If the friend wants to run up a huge bill, he can get a free phone from Virgin and do it on his own. Why would he need a used phone to be 'passed off' to him?
I know! I just dont get how these people arent understanding. Are they saying the phone is cursed somehow? Like is this 'The Hardy boys and the case of the Cursed Virgin?'

You people do realize that once the phone is activated under the next persons name they get a different phone number, and a different account number, and a different credit check run on the new owner?

As I said in the previous post.. it makes NO sense for the company to do this.
Deal Addict
Dec 4, 2004
1982 posts
10 upvotes
Kingston
[QUOTE]
The more obvious motivation is to punish the person with the delinquent account. The person has already rung up a bunch of charges on their account that Virgin will likely have trouble collecting. Although Virgin will not recover any money by refusing to activate the phone on that account, they have just prevented that person from making more money.[/QUOTE]
How about that one then? ^

You two can spend the next 7 pages telling us how that doesn't make any sense now too please.
Better yet, just call virgin. You have SUCH a valid argument, they'll likely completely see the sense in it, and change their policy once they see how correct you two actually are.



And.....GO!

/popcorn

[sarcasmometer----> high]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 13, 2008
6132 posts
1005 upvotes
Fort Saskatchewan
dolphie wrote: How about that one then? ^

You two can spend the next 7 pages telling us how that doesn't make any sense now too please.
Better yet, just call virgin. You have SUCH a valid argument, they'll likely completely see the sense in it, and change their policy once they see how correct you two actually are.



And.....GO!

/popcorn

[sarcasmometer----> high]
Talking to us as if what we are stupid doesnt make what we are saying wrong. Closing the account and taking the person to collections, THAT is the incentive to keeping your account paid and up to date. Once the account is closed, what does the person care if the phone will work or not? Its not like he/she can activate it again in their own name.

As far as preventing the person from selling the phone to make more money I will grant you that. Oh wait.. how did this thread start again?
Member
User avatar
Mar 14, 2005
453 posts
Edmonton, AB
dolphie wrote: How about that one then? ^

You two can spend the next 7 pages telling us how that doesn't make any sense now too please.
Better yet, just call virgin. You have SUCH a valid argument, they'll likely completely see the sense in it, and change their policy once they see how correct you two actually are.



And.....GO!

/popcorn

[sarcasmometer----> high]
It was NG that brought up the same point that was already discussed for 7 pages, but you know, since he has SUCH a valid argument, we should just see how completely correct he is, and stop posting any contrasting arguments right? I mean, what do you think this is, a forum for discussion or something? The nerve...
Deal Addict
Dec 4, 2004
1982 posts
10 upvotes
Kingston
[QUOTE]Talking to us as if what we are stupid[/QUOTE]


you were saying?

edited to add:
You can only make yourself look stupid here. I can't make you look stupid, nor can anyone else who disagrees with you.

Only you.
Little touchy too, I see :)
[QUOTE]
I mean, what do you think this is, a forum for discussion or something? [/QUOTE]
awesome. I thought so too.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Nov 13, 2008
6132 posts
1005 upvotes
Fort Saskatchewan
dolphie wrote: you were saying?

edited to add:
You can only make yourself look stupid here. I can't make you look stupid, nor can anyone else who disagrees with you.

Only you.
Little touchy too, I see :)
I didnt say you were making us look stupid, I said you were talking to us as if we were stupid. You are correct though, as you just proved only you can make yourself look stupid.
Member
User avatar
Mar 14, 2005
453 posts
Edmonton, AB
dolphie wrote: awesome. I thought so too.
Really? You sure about that? 'Cause your sarcasmometer is telling me otherwise...
Deal Addict
Dec 4, 2004
1982 posts
10 upvotes
Kingston
absolutely positive.
Nothing but PURE awesome on this last page :D

Top

Thread Information

There is currently 1 user viewing this thread. (0 members and 1 guest)