Has any one else had this kind of problem with SBC?

[andor25]

Ok heres the deal. My girlfriend before moving to kansas lived in Indiana and had phone service through SBC when she left she allowed the phone to stay on for her mother to use as she said she would pay the bill.

Now we are not disputing the fact that the bill is the sole responsibility of my girlfriend and the fact that mom didnt pay as agreeed has any bearing on sbc.

But after months of non payment the bill was able to reach over 600.00 before she called and shut it off when we asked sbc why they did not disconnect it sooner they told us it was my girlfreinds responsibility to have the service shut off

After recieving a bill marked final bill that first only showed a 251.75 balance and starting to pay on that did they inform us of a second bill because they split charges in order to not disconnect the phone. NO ONE AUTHORIZED THIS when asked they say they dont need any authorization from any one to split bills like this

Well I got to reading the bill and it says clearly on each billing statement TO AVOID DISCONNECTION by such and such date pay this amount $ ???

If this amount was never paid why was the service allowed to continue?

According to the fair debt collection act: it is a violation to threaten any action they do not intend to do so thier own bill is a fraud if I read that right also under the slamming and cramming laws it states :

Proper authorization

A company providing telephone service must be able to prove it has proper authorization from the consumer before ordering a change in a consumer's service. Proper authorization can be provided as:

A written signature on a form that meets specific requirements.
Taped voice authorization during a call made from the phone line to be changed.
Taped voice authorization by an independent, third-party verification service.
Written information that meets specific requirements and is mailed to the consumer within three business days of the consumer's request.

So am I dead wrong to think something is not amiss with this whole mess

As it stands now she has continued to pay on the debt and requested a complete statement of all charges from the time the account was opened and knows better in trusting her mother to do the right thing as she has cleary showed she cant

But I am still amazed they allowed the bill to reach this amount. I mean why in the world would you allow a service to continue till july when you havent recieved a payment since february

Oh by the way it only stopped in july cause she called in to have it shut off after finding out the bill wasnt being paid

[jerrick]

Ok-- I see a couple things at work here...

1. You don't know if the bill splitting was legal.
2. You don't know how the bill was so high without a disconnect.


First, bill splitting is not a change in service, so SBC is correct in saying that they don't need authorization to do so. Second, their actions with the disconnect are inconsistent with experiences I have heard in the past. However, this could be because your girlfriend's mother called and talked with them. It would be because your girlfriend had such a good rating with them they were trying to work with her because they hadn't had problems in the past.

You don't mention why your gf didn't call the first month the bill was not paid or why she didn't talk to her mom or SBC about it--- or maybe she did-- this is a big variable in the whole mix as well.

As crappy as the situation might be, ultimately, your gf is responsible for the bill, as you acknowledge. SBC dropped the ball, if you want to term it that way, with the disconnect. But it is their decision who receives service once a bill has not been paid.

[adusa37]

Contact the better business bureau and turn them in. Also contact a lawyer and ask them if this is legal. It doesnt sound like it is. I know a friend who had a $250 phone bill with sbc and they cut her off even though she paid $200 of it. That was last month and they refused to turn it back on until she paid the last $50!