Regarding the original complaint, concerning the 5'9'' female who was uncomfortable in the "baby seats on American Eagle..." well, I doubt that AA will take you seriously. I've flown on American Eagle myself, and I know they are small planes... I'm not sure how you were not aware of that (since your letter does not give any identifying factors, such as departure and arrival locations), but a woman who is 5'9" and 420 pounds, I believe falls into the category of morbidly obese. I'm not exactly thin myself, at 5'7" and upwards of 165 pounds, which places me at slightly overweight. I did find the seating slightly uncomfortable, but as a larger than average (whatever that is) passenger myself... I have to say, it's kind of your own fault if you are overweight and do not fit in the space allotted to you. It's agony, sure, I give you that, but you cannot blame the airline if you do not fit comfortably in a seat because you are 200 pounds overweight. That is not their problem.
We've had Time Warner for about a year and I agree with most statements here. The first few months were hell. They kept charging us for things and we did not know why. We had to have someone breakdown each item on the bill and explain, in plain English, what each item was. A lot of it turned out to be useless, so we trimmed off a few options (most of which we were told were included as bonuses for joining - a lie) and knocked our stuff down to digital cable, phone, internet, and DVR.
Well, for the first month or so, we had problems with our phone and internet. The internet or phone would go out for no reason and we would call Time Warner, only to go through hold hell, useless operators, and promises of service technicians who showed up 2 hours late (or not at all - which we were charged for once and later had to have removed from our bill). We exchanged the modem twice, finally buying our own router rather than renting theirs.
The phone did not work properly at first. We got static and popping on the "crystal-clear" digital phone. Plus, it would go out at night and stay off for hours. What if the house caught fire or we needed 911? Guess we're screwed.
The DVR would go off at midnight and reset itself, sometimes taking hours to do so (meaning we could not watch TV at all - even though we're paying for 24 hours of TV). This also ceased after a while. Now we get occasional glitches, especially with some of the on-demand stations.
Frankly, I have no idea why most of these events stopped happening after about six or seven months of service. We haven't had to call anyone in months. Were they just trying to shake us off?
The only problem we have now is with the DVR, but we've got stuff saved on it and we can't replace it right now. I just wish I knew why most of the problems seemingly disappeared about six months ago.
I received this spam today and was also alarmed. But you can't really blame yahoo. I checked the message again, and it usually says "this message has been verified by yahoo as coming from paypal" (or something to that effect) and this message didn't say that. I guess yahoo probably should have blocked it, but this message did not say "verified," so it didn't pass as legit by yahoo. Yahoo is not to blame. It's the people who perpetrated this scam who are to blame.
It's called "N'Rage" and marketed by aiibeauty.
I have to agree with PassingBy. I mean, you got a gift for free... sorry you didn't like it. That's not wal-mart's fault. Just because it had a note stuck to it saying it came from from wal-mart does not mean that wal-mart has to give you $600. The problem wasn't because it was an electronics item - it was because you didn't have a receipt, because it was a gift. Sell it on e-bay if you really want the money that bad, or give it to someone who really wants it. Either way, you're not out any money since it was a gift. Jeez. Some Christian you are!
Someone gave you the camera to use on a church mission, not to buy your kids gifts. I'm sorry they didn't get Christmas, but that's not wal-mart's fault. If whoever gave you the camera hadn't given it to you, they still wouldn't be having Christmas. So, lady, what's your problem?
They don't have to tell you their policy. If you really were concerned about it, you should have noted the policy before buying the item. Go to customer service, and they have a huge poster on the wall that shows their return policies. If you cared, you would have asked an employee or even a manager, just to be sure, before buying such an expensive item. The only valid point is that they should not have told you Compaq would take it back. That was a lie, I'll give you that.
This is a pretty rare but not unheard of scam. http://www.snopes.com/fraud/sales/giftcard.asp will explain some about it. It's not necessarily the cashier's fault, but could be. The store should have given you the money back just to hush it up, at least. Since they didn't, keep screaming! But, as a I said, it may have been a professional thief who stole the number off the card and waited until it was sold, then drained the account dry.
Go to snopes and read the info. Check the card again and see if there was anything wrong with it. Convince, if you can, some manager to get in touch with Walmart's website and see if that's how the card was used (and your money stolen).
I have to agree with this. My mother always had to put stuff on layaway when I was growing up. Now, what are parents supposed to do? Save up and just hope that maybe the stores will still have the "it" toy of the season the week before Christmas/birthday/etc.? Most wal-mart shoppers go to walmart because they can't afford other places (myself included).
I'm of the opposite opinion. Places that DON'T ask for ID scare me. Most places ask for your ID now. If they don't, they should, because - think about it - if someone snatches your purse...
They rifle through your wallet, then go on a spending spree which you pay for, because all they have to do is fake your signature on one of your checks. All the machine does at the register is verify that the account exists. As long as it is a valid account, the check is accepted and the thieves walk out the door with hundreds of dollars of items you paid for.
Now, if the cashier asks to see your ID... she or he can match up your photo to you in person. It's not necessarily foolproof, but it certainly makes me feel a little more secure to know that some short, blond, overweight woman will not rip me off because that description would obviously not match my ID photo.
If they ask for my ID, I pony up my ID because I know that the original intent of requiring me to show my ID was set in place in order to protect me, the consumer. Whether the cashier does his or her job is another question altogether. If they ask for the ID and the blond, blue-eyed, short, overweight thief shows them my ID, and the cashier accepts it, then I'm screwed anyway.
It's a security measure, not a hassle. I know it might seem like it, but there is a valid point to it.
That said, none of this matters now because Wal-mart has switched to the telecheck program, in which you do not have to show any ID or sign anything, or even fill out the check. You just give it to them and they run it through the machine. Valid account - money removed from account - whether you did it or if it was someone who picked up or stole one of your checks who did it.
Putting them on hold does seem like a fun idea... but I haven't been called by an actual human being in so long! It's all machines - stupid recorded messages that go on and on, until I hang up or my answering machine cuts it off after 45 seconds!
Yeah, I also believe that it's not that difficult to just show them ID when they ask for it. It's what, an extra three seconds?
Whenever we call Time Warner, now Comcast, we always get disconnected somehow, which results in yet another 45 minute (at least) hold session.
I've also had problems with Cingular. For some reason, even though my parents and I had the same phone models and we shared a plan, my phone would always have poor reception when my parents had good reception. The last time we took our phones in to Cingular to trade them in, they told me that I had poor reception because I was using an old SIM card (the one from my last cell phone). This made sense to me, because she told me that the SIM affects the reception.
Well, when we updated our phones and renewed our contract with Cingular, we all received the Samsung SGH-C417, and I got a new SIM card.
Since then, even though Cingular bills itself as the plan with the fewest dropped calls, I've had more dropped calls in the last month than I ever had in the last two years with my last phone, with the old SIM card (a Siemens phone - with the old card from a four year old Nokia).
Now, I don't know if it's the phone or Cingular, but my reception really sucks with my "new" card.
