Anti-ripoff megapost from The Consumerist
The Consumerist has posted a giant round-up of their advocacy articles called "The Ultimate Consumerist Guide To Fighting Back." It breaks down into three sections:
Section 1: "I've been wronged! What do I do next?"
Section 2: The Consumerist Corporate Executive Directory
Section 3: Success Stories
and each section contains links to excellent articles on everything from timestamping your communications with customer-service lines to "launching an executive email carpet-bomb" to the delightfully named "Underlying Principle For Forcing An Uncaring And Adversarial Company Fix Your Problem." The next time I'm ripped off, I'm starting here. Link
the latest
latest episodes
Just checked out the Consumerist site...bookmarked it and put it in its own special folder. It is just what I needed. An arsenal of facts and guidelines for doing battle with the ripoff artists is always a good thing to have. And I found good advice on dealing with Hackers on the web, also.
I long ago gave up on most gawkermedia sites, and the original version of consumerist smeared a friend of mine and caused her a great deal of psychological and legal distress, but I gotta say the current consumerist site is great.
Good info.
I'm currently pursuing a Lemon Law claim and am gratified that I've handled everything well thus far.
I bookmarked this too.
So I'm all for giving consumers tips to fight back against scammy businesses and indifferent corporate leviathans, but the couple of sections I read sounded pretty sketchy to me.
The tips on how to record customer service calls without getting in trouble is the most egregious. Basically it tells you to trick the customer service rep into thinking you were joking when saying 'This call may be recorded for training purposes.'
As several comments there effectively demonstrate, that is horrible advice.
Another story involves someone threatening to picket in front of a car dealership that ripped them off. The person's fliers accused the dealership of lying, even though (by the person's own account) no one at the dealership had lied to him (they just failed to tell him about an advertised deal). Following through with his threat would appear to have made him open to charges of libel and/or slander (presumably there would have been written and oral versions of the false charge made during such a protest).
Email carpet bombing can get surprisingly fast results for relatively simple disputes. I once took a survey from Bayer for a $10 amazon gift certificate. After several weeks passed I contacted Bayer, but they said they had no record of me taking the survey. After a couple of exchanges I decided to email everyone at Bayer hq to try to get it resolved. I got my gift certificate the next day.
sirdook,
There's also the bit about threatening to charge the company with mail fraud over what is almost certainly a mistake. This is on very shaky ground morally and legally.
Ugh, I just have to add this one to the bad list:
http://consumerist.com/consumer/hardballs/get-your-complaint-resolved-by-posting-it-to-the-companys-stock-forums-297566.php
Post your phone number on internet stock forums? Yikes!
@ #7 Sirdook:
It says to post your CONTACT number or EMAIL - not your home number, doofus! How else can they contact you concerning your complaint?
It looks like we've found another person who was booted from Consumerist for being a whiney twit who failed to read the articles before firing off half-cocked responses.
So which number is my 'contact' number? My home phone, my cell phone, or my work phone? On which of those do I want telemarketers calling me with stock scams? None. Maybe this is good advice for somebody who has an unimportant phone number they can use and then discard, but for most people it's horribly bad advice.
E-mail is a better idea, as long as you use a throwaway email address (or have a great spam filter). But then why suggest the phone number option to begin with?
Other than an occasional BoingBoing linked item, this was my first visit to the Consumerist. Based on the articles I've sampled, I'm not very impressed. Dismiss me with whatever ad hominem theory you like; it won't make this bad advice any better.
this is a great article... I know a couple of people who could use this, thanks for the post
Santa's Knee,
It is an ironclad law of the internet that any comment that scolds another comment for being mistaken has a high probability of being mistaken itself. Yours is the latest example. (For another, see the comment thread on the previous bb entry on Best Buy where the mod scolded me for not seeing something in the story that was not, in fact, there)
Sirdook never said "home number," and posting any contact number on the internet is a very bad idea. Furthermore, the post says that the reason for posting your contact number is "so they know you're for real," not so that they can contact you.
@NE2D - according to this 'law of innernet wrongness' you cite, your own post 'has a high probability of being mistaken itself.".
or does that only apply to scolding 'not done by NE2D'.
according to this 'law of innernet wrongness' you cite, your own post 'has a high probability of being mistaken itself.".
Of course: how do you think I learned this law? That is why I now read carefully before criticizing. And I've found that refraining from using words like "doofus," "whiney twit," and "half-cocked" tends to improve one's odds.
@#12:
"HaHaHa! Nice!"
@11 & 13:
What is an innernet?
I believe the "Underlying Principle For Forcing An Uncaring And Adversarial Company Fix Your Problem" is better considered as an elaboration on a more general principle.
If you want the attention of any organism, be it an elephant or a corporation, all you need to know is "How Does It Feel Pain"... and be absolutely certain you are willing to risk its full and undivided attention.
...Of course, the biggest whining has been about posting the corporate phone # list for Fry's, with the bogus argument against being that it's an "invasion of privacy". That only applies *if* they were giving out the respective execs' home phone numbers. A direct line for a business generally doesn't fall under any sort of unlisted phone # protections - of which few actually exist on the books - and most protections usually are restricted to "Do Not Call" lists.
...But, as a recent issue with Fry's demonstrated, there's justification for publishing their exec phone list. Fry's employees and managers have been given specific orders that, under *NO* circumstances are they to give out contact information for anyone higher than a store manager. CIP: last month, I had problems with two Fry's employees here in CenTex, both of whom refused to check the back stock to see if they had any more DVD-R blanks in stock that were on special. I'd called about 20 minutes earlier to make sure they had them, and the person I spoke to over the phone looked them up on the computer and verified that they had two cases in stock. The two punks - both barely out of high school and more intent on trying to sell some sorotity bimbo a new laptop - didn't even bother to look up the blanks to verify when I found an empty spot on the shelves where they were supposed to be, and then refused to do any investigating. Claiming they were both busy with this customer - flirting was more like it - they also refused to call a store manager as I asked. I ended up having to go in search of one myself. And since at that time I was still on my cane and mobility-impaired from my recent surgery, you can bet I wasn't in the mood for any bullshit.
...After about five minutes of being unable to find the store manager, much less any Fry's geek who'd try to track him down, I chanced across an assistant store manager who, after a rather heated exchange over whether or not Fry's employees had any real training on customer service, did march his ass back to the stock room and locate the blanks. He then gave me *one* stack, and then tried to tell me there was a "limit one" in effect. Nowhere in the ad did it say anything about any limits, nor were there any on the shelf tag. I needed four to do a large backup project, and seeing as how I'd been treated like shit by these punks already, I stood my ground and made this ass-istant uphold the shelf tag's lack of purchase limits. Having worked for the Texas AG's office in consumer affairs in the past, I still know who to call and report this sort of refusal, which is covered under "Bait and Switch" prohibitions, which Texas prosecutes even more judiciously than they do deadbeat dads on child support!
...The problem didn't end there, tho. When I got to the check-out, the cashier refused to honor that, claiming there *was* a limit in effect, and he couldn't override the cash register. After waiting 10 minutes for the same manager to show up and type in an override code, I made the purchase and attempted to leave the store. But before I did, I demanded the store manager's name, and the phone # for the corporate office *and* the name of the district manager who was above the store manager. I was denied -all- -three-, with the explanation given that if any Fry's employee gave that info out, they'd be fired regardless of reason. I made it clear that, when I *DID* get the info, I'd make sure they -would- be fired, because this sort of policy isn't in good customer service standards, not by a long shot.
And no, I did *NOT* let the punk at the exit check my purchase.
...Cut to two weeks later. A friend of mine's younger brother had just quit Fry's, and filled me in on the motiviation behind Fry's keeping a moat around the corporate suits in their castle: they simply do *NOT* want to deal with the average Joe Punchclock who a) bought a piece of electronics that b) he wasn't intelligent enough to know how to use, much less turn it on properly, and c) will bitch, babble and threaten incoherently until he gets a refund he "doesn't deserve". That's the reason they fire managers and employees who give out contact info for anyone higher than a store manager. The store manager's primary job isn't to maximize profits, it's to keep the suits from being bothered by irate customers.
...Sadly, said brother-of-friend wasn't able to get the info I wanted, because even *he* was denied it - his former store manager apparently thinks he's going to file a complaint on him! Which is why this list has not only been saved, I've already placed four phone calls. Granted, all I've gotten were voice mails, but the day is still young!
Bottom Line: The customer is always right, especially when they *are* right. And Hell hath no fury like a customer scammed, abused or otherwise ripped-off!
Santa's Knee,
Now I'm starting to think you're doing this on purpose. "Innernet" was Krex's typo, not mine.
NE2D, you have a hard life.
NE2D, you have a hard life.
Why do you say that?
"So which number is my 'contact' number? My home phone, my cell phone, or my work phone? On which of those do I want telemarketers calling me with stock scams?"
Dude, how much is a SIM card? FFS, I can get a whole phone for £8.99 and give it away once I am done with it.
Apropos the article, the only way I have ever had any issues, and there have been issues, believe me, resolved with British Telecom (other Mud Island dwellers all know where I'm coming from here, I'm sure)is with a letter direct to the CEO. Once other avenues have been exhausted, EECB is the way to go folks.