Sprint Is Full Of Crap! - Page 4

kellybrf · #31 (**permalink**) 11-10-2008, 11:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NinjaMom

In all fairness... The OP did NOTHING wrong. He bought something that should unfortunately turned out to be a scam. The OP is the victim... Not Sprint.

no argument there, but i took issue with his immediate blame of sprint when they have nothing to do with it. when you buy on ebay you take this risk. it sucks, but if you want to guarantee this wont happen then buy directly from the carrier or live with what you got yourself into.

SprintTouch08 · #32 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 12:33 AM

yes but the typical rah rah Sprint expected answer is ridiculous becaise the OP did not do anything wrong here. Furthermore, its SPRINT'S policy/loophole that is the issue here which caused this problem. If this is happening then DONT ship Assurion phones unactivated! VERY simply solution, but Sprint puts too much faith in its customers. Obviously there are people out there pulling this scam this isnt a first time a bad ESN refurb was sold, it happens more than you think. Simple answer is if the phone was reported lost/stolen, theres no reason at all the new one cant be shipped activated as the old phone should in theory be dead or lost/stolen if the customer made an honest claim. Therefore shipping activated would solve problems across the board really and prevent this from happening to honest people.

kellybrf · #33 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 12:37 AM

saying the op didnt do anything wrong isnt quite accurate. he himself is not trying to scam sprint, but by purchasing from ebay he was taking an inherent risk. again, its a crappy situation and i have sympathy for him, just not his immediate accusal of sprint.

furthermore, not all asurion claims are for lost phones. especially with the new physical damage policy plenty of customers file a claim and still have working phones until the new one comes. the scammer obviously didnt file the claim as lost or stolen because they sent a return kit, which only gets sent out when the phone is damaged.

dicast · #34 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 04:15 AM

All my claim in the past with Asurion, they want the 50 up front. before the ship out the phone. If this policy still enforce sprint should not charge him for it.

Chow22 · #35 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 08:39 AM

It seems too me that sprint is 100% at fault....the op nevered ordered a phone from Asurion so how can sprint legally charge him. Was he ever informed that their would be a $50 charge? Did he agree to this in any contract?

Where the phone was purchased does not have any relevance. The ebay seller did not charge him $50 on his sprint bill. There is an inherient risk in purchasing a phone from anybody. A sprint store employee could pull the same scam if they so choosed.

ZELL22 · #36 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 09:11 AM

How about posting the ebay sellers name so everyone can spread the word. I just bought one for my Lady, and I'm hoping this is not the same dude that I bought from.

And just FYI, purchasing anything of of the internet can have some risk involved, but there are security measures in place to TRY and assure that the people we are dealing with are reputable. If the OP or anyone else gets screwed over they shouldn't have blame put on them just b/c they wanted to buy something at a cheaper price, and not extend their contract. Sprint needs to have a better system for verifying the phones that they ship out and who they were shipped out to. He shouldn't have extra charges placed on him, so yes it's Sprints fault.

**NinjaMom** · #37 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kellybrf

no argument there, but i took issue with his immediate blame of sprint when they have nothing to do with it. when you buy on ebay you take this risk. it sucks, but if you want to guarantee this wont happen then buy directly from the carrier or live with what you got yourself into.

Do you work for Sprint? Are you the rep he was complaining about??

If not, then the fact you took issue with his complaining is a mute point.

The OP explained to Sprint what happened... Sprint can investigate the phone and simply see that the OP is not who they sent the phone to in the first place. They (Sprint) should be charging the ebay seller...not the OP and there is nothing wrong with the OP having a problem with that.

**NinjaMom** · #38 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kellybrf

saying the op didnt do anything wrong isnt quite accurate. he himself is not trying to scam sprint, but by purchasing from ebay he was taking an inherent risk. again, its a crappy situation and i have sympathy for him, just not his immediate accusal of sprint.

There is NOTHING wrong with wanting to find a phone at a better price. Do you only buy things at the high end price because you feel that there is something wrong with finding a deal. The OP did nothing wrong by trying to find a deal on a phone. That is smart shopping. The OP was victimized by an ebay scammer and then again by Sprint. Since when does sprint charge you have they send the phone. My insurance replacement was charged up front....

Kelly... While I think no one needs to be calling you names or insulting you.... I do think that your stance on this is very tired. You have stated your issue with it more than enough. It is not necessary to keep adding salt to the OP's injury by trying to place blame on him for smart shopping that you apparently do not agree with.

If Sprint doesn't want people trying to buy there phones somewhere else... Maybe they should have a more reasonable offer for their loyal customers wanting to upgrade. The ebay scammers wouldn't have a market to sell to if Sprint was really into taking care of their customers. It would be a win for the consumer and for Sprint and a loss for the real person at fault in all of this.

freegood · #39 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 01:49 PM

^That is not smart shopping. You get what you pay. Risks, warts and all.

In this case, the risk is the added amount of time to sort things out and the potential problem of eating the 58 dollars.

**ScrapMaker** · #40 (**permalink**) 11-11-2008, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by freegood

^That is not smart shopping. You get what you pay. Risks, warts and all.

In this case, the risk is the added amount of time to sort things out and the potential problem of eating the 58 dollars.

There shouldn't BE a risk of buying a "used" phone, as long as you call Sprint and check the ESN. There should not be any charge to the buyer. The insurance should charge whoever made the claim, not the end-recipient of the phone. They should have taken their $50 up-front, like they did for all of my other claims. If it was a free insurance replacement, because of a manufacturing defect, then there should still not be a charge.

On that note, it IS smart shopping. I got my BNIB original Touch for $200 on Craigslist. I called to verify the ESN, and I couldn't be happier. Paying full-price at a Sprint store, or being locked into a 2-year agreement seems like NOT-smart shopping, to me.