
DirecTV charges family $400 for equipment destroyed in Colorado fire - jalanco
http://gazette.com/article/1502291
======
driverdan
Why is this on HN?

I don't understand the problem. Why wouldn't they charge for the lost
equipment? That's why you have insurance.

~~~
Turing_Machine
"Why wouldn't they charge for the lost equipment?"

Because they care more about happy customers and good PR than a measly $400?

Seriously, the PR hit they're going to take for this far exceeds the value of
the equipment.

------
DanBC
Why doesn't DirecTV insure the equipment against fire? Thus covering the cost
of people who've genuinely had a tragic fire, and still able to go after
people who should pay?

From the headline I thought it was going to be an automated system still
sending letters.

> _Commenting on a complaint from a Mr.Arthur Purdey about a large gas bill, a
> spokesman for North West gas said "We agree it was rather high for the time
> of year. It's possible Mr.Purdey has been charged for the gas used up during
> the explosion that blew his house to pieces." (Bangkok Post)_

------
notahacker
It doesn't seem like a particularly smart thing to do, since for the sake of
$400 they've ensured at least one customer will _never_ use their $10-$50 /
month service again...

~~~
mikeash
On the other hand, it's a dumb thing to get upset about. Their equipment got
destroyed while you were responsible for it, that means you're on the hook for
it. If you had insurance, it'll cover it. If you didn't, then you're deeply
screwed far beyond the cost of some TV equipment.

Neither side comes off looking at all good here, although DirecTV is
definitely in the right, even if not necessarily smart.

~~~
Turing_Machine
Being technically/legally in the right and doing the right thing for a
customer (particularly one that's suffered a tragedy) aren't always the same
thing, not morally (which I doubt DirectTV cares about) and not from the
standpoint of customer relations.

~~~
mikeash
I agree as far as customer relations, even if it just pissed off this one
person it hardly seems worth it. But I think they're both legally and morally
in the right here, not that it really matters much.

~~~
Turing_Machine
From the update it looks like they already have a policy of forgiving
equipment loss in a case of this type. Someone gave the customer bad
information.

