Works every time.
But sadly there have been more times than I can count where I told them I have a speech impairment, it’s difficult for me to say certain things in the way they need me to right now, and I’d prefer to send them an email (even offer to send them an email for them to open while we are still talking)... And they said no they cannot do that for one reason or another.
People without an ADA issue should send their cancellation notice to the registered corporate agent, return receipt, which sets the date of cancellation and gets their (expensive) lawyer involved. Threaten to sue them under your deceptive trade practices statutes if they continue to bill your account. Lawyers shed these kind of nuisance things quickly and cut through the bureaucracy. Your file will be stamped "service terminated" posthaste. There is no better way to communicate your desire to terminate service than to notify their registered agent in writing.
I don’t live in the US, so no idea which department handles that.
I’ve once signed up for a service and I didn’t know beforehand that their “delete account” button would take me to a page telling me that in order to shut it off I had to email them at least three business days in advance. I don’t have a general issue with having to inform people to shut things off the old fashioned way like via telephone or email.. but that’s for when I had to communicate over phone or email in order to begin the agreement. Such as with a consultant or contractor.. Not when they made signing up a quick and simple online process and then want to make it difficult to shut off so they can squeeze an extra payment out of you.
So I resorted to CC-ing a fake legal@ email address in the cancellation email, thinking maybe they would think I’ve CC-ed one of my lawyers (I didn’t have a personal lawyer, but they didn’t know that). They took care of it immediately.
Have you tried using the NATO alphabet? I don't know if that would be easier or more difficult for you to say, but it's worth a shot, since it'd be less ambiguous over the phone: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_phonetic_alphabet
It seems a bit more tedious, but the slower pace with reduced ambiguity means you almost never have to repeat yourself.
Worth giving it a shot, speech impairment or not.
"Matt, spelled Mike-Alpha-Tango-Tango"
And get the response:
"Ok Mike, now I need..."
We ribbed him pretty good for that. I even created my own Completely Useless Alphabet from that incident:
A as in Aerie
B as in Barry
C as in Carrie
D as in Dairy
There is a joke version of the alphabet that messes with all those rules. http://i.imgur.com/3CbAxSp.jpg
One thing though, when speaking to a robot, they’re not usually programmed for that. They want exact letters and numbers that their speech-to-text engine can convert. Eventually the robot takes me to a human after it fails enough times but there’s usually a queue, which isn’t always great because the wait times can be very long.
Often hitting # repeatedly did the trick. But lot always.
I learned the other day that the CA Franchise Tax Board has a live chat via GetHuman  which saved an insane amount of time on hold. I was originally just trying to find alternate dial in numbers to actually talk to a person, not a robot.
I don't remember which ones, but I've found several companies whose automated systems hang up on you after giving you a certain number of 'tries' to enter a menu option.
I'm currently 3 for 3 but I guess you have a lot more attempts than I do.
If your goal is to just end your contract (as permitted), I should not have to jump through any more hoops than telling them we're done.
If you saw that a soda machine always dispensed a Coke when you pressed the Dr. Pepper button would you feel bad pressing that button to get the Coke you wanted?
There are times when it's moral to lie, other times when it's immoral to lie, and still other times when morality hardly has anything to do with it at all (such as the above scenario.) We tell small children that it's immoral to lie because we don't trust their moral judgement and would prefer they always tell us the truth.
None of this should suggest I think it's obviously wrong to lie to a stranger about whether you're deaf in order to avoid a conversation - that might be permissible according to generally accepted social rules. My point is more that when you start talking about deciding for yourself when to obey moral rules, you are on shaky ground, no matter how wise or logical you are.
While I agree with your first two sentences and think that they are well said, the third doesn't demonstrate the first; it demonstrates only that "hurting people can be done without lying", not "lying can be done without hurting people."
Is it ever morally acceptable to tell a lie? Kant thought not. His example of the would-be murderer explains his reasoning. Read by Harry Shearer. Scripted by Nigel Warburton.
Should you kill a person to save two? Kill two to save one? Does matter who the people involved are? Anti-Kantian philosophies don't have good consistent answers to this -- at least they don't live according to their philosophical answers.
This is a utility-maximizing lie. You're saving both yourself and the other person time. Unless you subscribe to some belief-system that holds truth-telling to be some sort of moral good in and of itself, everyone is better off.
And that's aside from the fact that the patter you'll hear trying to keep you paying is going to be full of, at the very least, deceptive statements lacking any objective truth or falsity.
I was reading a Matt Levine column in which he described some litigation over selling bonds that was very analogous to the car dealer situation. And apparently what happened is that it was decided that lying about the price paid was ok per se, but creating falsified documentation to back it up was fraud. Which seems weird!
It’s like the squares/grid stuff used by car salespeople to get you to get a car loan instead of buying the car with cash.
You can take that as "not at all guilty".
Also chargebacks penalize the merchants both in fines/fees but if they rack of enough, they'll pay higher processing fees.
Banks seem to occupy a weird space in the minds of consumers. You can open as many accounts as you want at as many banks as you want. If you're paying fees, switch to a bank that doesn't have those fees. If you can't get somebody on the phone, switch to a bank that staffs its call centers. If their website sucks, switch to a bank with a good website.
Try a few out. See what you like. It's just like any other consumer product.
Verizon/Comcast's handling of recurring cancellations is directly tied to Visa's cost of doing business with them.
I thought maybe I had the wrong phone number for cancellation. Turns out, when you google "cancel Equifax phone number", there are several phone numbers listed by Equifax itself, on various sections of its "help" pages.
Took me about half an hour to finally reach a human operator. Surprisingly, the cancellation process was quick with her with no haggling. But I imagine the process is so frustrating overall that a good number of people just give up.
Every. Single. Day.
I would like to give executives the option to stop this or go to prison for this never ending nonsense. I think most would choose to stop.
Every single flight, the boarding announcements start with something along the lines of "this plane is going to be more full than usual, so we're going to need to check some of your carry-ons".
Well guess what, United? Maybe if you didn't cram passengers into the fuselage like sardines in a goddamn tin can, you'd have enough room for everyone's carry-on luggage in the bins.
I would agree, but they charge for checked bags.
And in emails they put in "We're experiencing a higher-than-usual volume of support requests and we encourage you to look at the FAQ instead".
Every. Damn. Time.
To be fair, you wouldn't believe the number of people that will send a request to support before looking at the FAQ when the item (and resolution) is in the FAQ.
I honestly believe almost nobody reads FAQs, and the presence of an item in an FAQ is a symptom of a UX failure somewhere down the line.
There are laws around this in other areas, it's not unprecedented.
You are missing the "as". Please listen closely, as our menu options have changed. I know it by heart and can hear the same voice over and over again in my head. Crap!
My brain tried really hard to read "IVR gauntlets" as a description of wearables, like AR goggles, before I realised what you meant.
The insurance agent reported me to DMV (the relationship had soured pretty badly before this all happened) for not having insurance. It was a 2 minute call to my new insurance agent to let them to know to send proof of coverage to DMV. Problem solved in ~10 minutes of my time instead of 2 hours.
This wasn't necessarily a malicious act on their part, most likely regulatory, and you probably didn't have to do anything to rectify the situation.
I don't know what state you live in but when I was working for an insurance broker (~2004) CA, TX, PA, FL, and GA all received at least monthly if not nightly uploads of vehicle coverage.
I also know that GA shares that info and DMV records with FL and NC.
I've long deprecated phone calls as a method for businesses to reach me. I don't know why businesses don't get it already.
I got my way after about 7 e-mails with Comcast. Still saved time at ~1 minute per e-mail.
Can Google Assistant please stop working on the haircut reservation systems and make "automatically fight with customer service departments" the priority feature?
I don't understand — how does stopping payments verify your identity?
This seems extremely valuable for managing subscriptions, tracking your funds, and of course, some modicum of privacy where your original credit card is only shared with one party.
edit: Seems like privacy.com is a direct-to-bank connection instead of depending on a credit card for funding.
I suspect that Privacy.com uses gift cards as proxies, and some merchants reject payments made with gift cards. If so, this could be why I experienced the above.
If someone knows better than I do, please correct me. Genuinely curious how the service works under the hood.
It also allows instant wire transfers between accounts in different banks using a phone number, and to withdraw cash at virtually any national ATM.
Honestly, it always seemed to me that it was actually easier to cancel than the sign up.
And then there are services where people sign up but only a very small percentage would voluntarily come back no matter how good or bad your service is because they sign up out of impulse. Gyms are good examples for those — people sign up because they want to lose weight/stay fitter, etc but only a small percentage actually goes there after the first few times. This of course sucks for the regular customers who want to pause their membership because they are too busy for a few months or move, etc (but on the other hand, those no-goes also subsidies the regular goers because the gym can offer a lower price for everyone).
For those companies, we need laws that make it equally as easy to cancel as to sign up.
Yeah, I'd wanted to pause my gym membership for 3 months a couple years back because I was going to be traveling a lot, and wasn't going to be in town. Only option was to cancel, then pay a new "processing fee" to start again months later. Really pissed me off. I'd been a member for 2 years at that point, using regularly. no exceptions to their policy. i left. i did go back a couple years later, when they had a 'sign up and we waive the processing fee!' promotion (closest/best combination of pool/gym - everything else is miles further). They'd have had my monthly money for another couple years with minimal use by me during that time, save for a stupid policy that "we can't change". ugh...
Of course with Netflix, I've never thought that.
I know Symantec is unpopular here on HN, because of the certificate authority fiasco and a (quite reasonable) distrust of antivirus software, but really kudos to them for handling the cancellation so well.
I think your bar is far far too low.
People who cancel frequently come back, unless you make canceling hard and you burn the relationship.
> 1. Interception, oral communications prohibited. Except as otherwise specifically provided in this section any person who? willfully commits an interception, attempts to commit an interception, or procures any other person to commit an interception or to attempt to commit an interception of any wire or oral communication shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars, or imprisoned in the state prison for not more than five years, or imprisoned in a jail or house of correction for not more than two and one half years, or both so fined and given one such imprisonment.
and defines interception as
> 4. The term 'interception' means to secretly hear, secretly record, or aid another to secretly hear or secretly record the contents of any wire or oral communication through the use of any intercepting device by any person other than a person given prior authority by all parties to such communication;...
Certain keywords like "lawsuit" can break the strictly regimented conversation tree too.
Remember that any company that doesn't empower the phone support people to help you probably didn't empower them enough to go off-script.
If you had just been polite to me on the phone, I probably could have fixed your issue in 15 minutes.
But you're not exactly right.. you can record phone conversations in the US provided you let them know before you push the 'record' button.
"Dave Maass of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) argues that what Davis did is likely illegal. 'Just because Comcast told the customer that the call was being recorded, that doesn’t mean it’s legal for him to record the call without notification,' Maass tells the Daily Dot. 'To stay on the right side of the law, everyone has to let everyone else know if they’re recording a conversation.'"
Plus it's guaranteed to get the charge removed immediately, and you'll be hurting the company by adding to their charge-back tally, increasing payment processing costs for them and potentially completely cutting them off.
And If you are cancelling multiple subscriptions per month with regularity, then you may want to reflect and consider if you actually are committing fraud.
I am not a lawyer, but this is what happened to me.
I honestly wonder what legal theory my bank or financial service is using to justify transferring my money or incurring debt under my name to pay someone I explicitly tell them not to simply because a guy at a call center making a snap judgement believes there is a valid contract and that the other party has honored it.
But perhaps rather than suggesting that everything in a contract is always valid, maybe you are referring to DIRECTV, Inc. v. Imburgia. And somehow that decision can be stretched to cover this case. Even so, it is clear that the call center is not acing as remotely as an arbitration court in any definition of the term because arbitration courts do have to meet some minimal legal set criterion.
So I have a counter theory: the legal theory they're using is they can do whatever they want because the consumer could never afford the legal fees to challenge them on it. And pooling resources by class action is explicitly prohibited by the above decision. So I contend no, it's not legal but it is conveniently un-enforceable now.
I didn't suggest anything like that. Rather, things in contracts are valid by default.
This isn't even a matter of onerous arbitration clauses (for disputes between the business and the consumer) being burried in fine print that no one reads. (Those have been regulated in some jurisdictions, but are mostly legal.) For credit cards, the arbitration is between the consumer and a 3rd party to the consumer's contract (the merchant), and literally is part of the value provided. People would use credit cards less if the service was discontinued.
Not only that, but the business will get an additional chargeback fee before losing the chargeback.
PayPal does this.
I didn't realize PayPal could dip into my checking account any time they wanted to. I thought it required my manual action. No more PayPal for me.
This is a standard procedure for many merchants these days: Offer an attractive initial price, then add fine print that states your account will autorenew at "then current" rates, and you have to make a phone call (where you have to hold for 20 to 30 minutes for the next available representative) if you want to cancel.
I am glad California is taking action. They still have a for-the-people government in California.
The only way this happens is you create a "billing agreement" when you first signup. Its a feature of Paypal that then lets sites bill more stuff to you without much in terms of prompting. Its useful because services like Steam use it to avoid prompting users over and over again to login but other sites use it....because they can. Problem is its not very obvious to perhaps the majority of users they are creating a billing agreement.
You can terminate these agreements any time in the paypal site. But you have to do it yourself as otherwise it'll just sit there indefinitely.
The account numbers aren't even secret, they're written on the bottom of every check!
I use examples from a bad embezzlement in my pitch deck. Checks are a joke.
EBay did this to me once, I think this is an American thing, doesn't happen here in Canada like that.
If someone has your bank account number they can withdraw money from it. For example the errands bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took. I honestly could not believe it.
It gets better: if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them. It would literally be easier to tell your bank (say etrade or whatever) that it was your bank account.
That’s why all these absurd abank payment systems exist in America. The act of just giving someone money is incredibly hard.
> bank account authentication mechanism is to withdraw some money from your account, and then ask you how much they took
In my experience, it is usually the reverse - they put a small sum there, and then withdraw it back after auth. But the end result is the same, of course (except if you have less than $1 on your account).
> if you have someone’s bank account number you still cannot transfer money to them
That's indeed weird, because I see no technical reason (at least with my knowledge about ACH - btw HN had recently a couple of nice articles about it) why that would not be possible, but my bank only allows me to transfer money to my accounts. No idea why. Maybe some legal stuff?
OTOH there are apps like venmo which make it easier.
In the US you give them /your/ bank account, and /they/ initiate the withdrawal. Anyone with your account details can pay for something from your account, including to a service they can withdraw from.
Better yet fraud insurance covers credit cards, not debit or “cheque”. Specifically: if someone uses your bank a/c# you are responsible for recovering the money.
Looks like you've missed the "or have an agreement with a bank".
> if someone uses your bank a/c# you are responsible for recovering the money.
I do not think this is true. Of course credit card fraud liability policy only covers the credit card, but there are rules about bank transfers. My reading of https://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/4A/part_2 is that the customer is liable for the payment only if it is authorized and passes "commercially reasonable" security procedure. If somebody just gets you bank account number, it's clearly not an authorized payment (unless they make it look authorized, i.e. by stealing your identity or passwords, etc.) and you will not be liable for it.
That is crazy! I remember Paypal doing the opposite in the UK, they made 2 or 3 tiny deposits and asked how much they were.
I followed eBay's "Buyer protection" to the letter...and guess what? I wasn't covered...even after escalating -- and saying, "They have my money and I still don't have my product, I'm trying to understand which part of 'Buyer Protection' I am missing here."
I called my credit card company, explained what was going on, and had my money back in 3 minutes.
Chargebacks are great, whenever they are used effectively...and ebay/paypal is the devil.
Why are you looking to cancel your phone plan?
Leaving the country.
They know they can't win me over and so they don't even try.
I told the agent that same thing, and he said "Is that really what she wants, or is that just what you want?"
I kept things polite, but he really had me boiling by the end of the call, which took way too much time.
Though nowadays, in the era of pervasive financing and Wall Street investors that care more about revenue than cash flow, I wonder if that would even work. Maybe "I'm being investigated by the Feds and all of my financial relationships are considered suspect, and so would prefer to have as few of them as possible"?
I've had people still try to sign me up when I've said this. I had just moved country, had no job, and was literally living off my credit card. I ended up getting stopped by some people on the street trying to sign me up for some charity, because I'm too nice to tell them to fuck off.
Even after I explained that I literally arrived in the country a week ago, and that I literally have no money, they were still trying to get me to sign up for a recurring donation. Sure, I understand that they get commission, so they want to make a sale. But not only is it extremely unethical to try and get unemployed people to sign up, it's also trying to extract blood from a stone.
I've tried telling the truth, I've tried assertively stating I'm not interested, I've tried so many things...
...at this point, when I pick up a call, I wait for the other side to introduce themselves, and if they call with an unsolicited offer, I just hang up without saying anything. Am I a bad person?
It's my favorite answer, because it normally creates enough awkwardness on the call to make the other party want it over as quickly as possible.
And getting them on your side is always step 1.
Bonus points if they ask "I hope it's nothing we did" and you respond with an extra long pause and "I think it's best for everyone involved if we get this cancelled as quickly as possible."
"Please cancel my service"
"We'd like to retain your business is there anything we can do?"
"Is my service cancelled yet?"
"Why are you cancelling your service?"
"My service is still working, can you cancel it? Is this the cancellation department? Who will be cancelling my service?"
Just pretend like I didn't hear anything they said or asked and keep asking variations of that in an increasingly childlike wondrous tone. Sometimes you can hear the person on the other end getting audibly frustrated until they give in and cancel it just to get you off the phone-and when they finally go "Your service will be cancelled on this date, is there anything else I Can help you with?"
"NOPE THANKS!" and hang up.
Never fails to make me giggle madly. Is it patronizing? Sure. Do I care? No not really-I've asked nicely that I want my service cancelled. That really ought to be the start and end of it. Meeting retention rates is their problem, not mine.
Same thing with upselling at retail establishments. No I'm not a rewards member. No thanks I don't want to sign up. Yep I'm sure. Oh I'm quite aware that I can save 10% over $2500 spent. Hey can I just buy this pair of headphones and gtfo?
Do you also maliciously fill out surveys with less than "excellent" ratings even after you are told that constitutes failure according to corporate management?
I understand the attitude of refusing to play the game, but that doesn't justify making things worse for other victims.
It's not my job to go out of my way to help these folks meet their retention KPI. Categorically, full-stop and quite literally, that is not my responsibility. I'm a customer who used to pay money for a service, not a call-taker responsible for meeting certain metrics. I don't work for the cable company. I'm not their employee. I'm their customer.
If I don't want to be a member anymore, and I state as such, and repeatedly state as such when said company makes it as difficult as possible to cancel my membership-then I've satisfied my end of that particular transaction. I've stated my business request, I'm asking them in various manners to please honor that request. Where is the malice? If you want to point out that it's probably immature, then I'll probably agree with you. Comparing it to deliberately trying to tank a call-taker though by giving a deceitful and dishonest review I think is an incredible exercise in reaching.
So can you explain this for me? How are you drawing a parallel from me repeating my request to have my service cancelled with maliciously filling out customer response surveys in such a way that deliberately gives the call-taker a negative score?
I've started doing this, although I wouldn't characterize it as malicious. I bought a car last fall and that started a ridiculous number of surveys coming my way. I contacted the dealership, the manufacturer, and the survey company asking for the surveys to stop. The dealer and manufacturer both responded saying they would take car of it. The survey company never responded.
The surveys keep coming so I fill them out randomly and return them. It isn't malicious because I'm genuinely dissatisfied with them because they can't stop the surveys.
Because I have explosive diarrhea...
I made the mistake of joining a Goodlife gym in Canada many moons ago...
The place was disgusting. Always crowded. Mould growing in the bathrooms. Stunk very badly, etc...
So I stopped going regularly... and one day I was in the area I decided to stop in and cancel my membership.
"Oh sorry, you'll need to make an appointment with management in order to cancel."
"OK, is a manager in right now?"
"Yes, the manager is in but I was told not to disturb her right now."
"OK, well can you tell her a customer is waiting paitiently to cancel his account?"
"No, sorry, I am not allowed to disturb her. You're going to need to make an appointment and come back."
So I did that...
And about 3 weeks later I went in at the agreed upon time to cancel my subscription and I was just sitting... waiting... for over 1 hour...
Right beside a poor old lady that was trying to cancel her subscription as well!!!
She was overly polite and was dealing with this overagressive meathead trying to keep her locked into the service...
"I hate coming here... I never come... I never should have signed up... I just want to cancel..."
"But do you have any friends that might want to take on your subscription? It's at a discounted rate and you might be able to help them out by transferring it over to them."
"No, I do know know anyone who wants to come here."
"Ok, let me go talk to my manager about this."
And he left for like 20 minutes and came back and gave her the gears again.
When my turn came... I just said "I'm moving to england and I don't know a single person here who might want to absorb my contract".
It was a total lie... but it was the only answer that would get me out of there in under 10 minutes.
Companies abusing politeness really are terrible to society.
They have to pay you back AND THEY GET CHARGED an additional $20-$30 that your credit card company takes from them as punishment.
Please don't abuse chargebacks unless the merchant deserves it, though.
The way it works (cause I tried) is that you call (or in bank to dispute membership) and guess what? they made you wait on the line/ in the branch until they contact ABC customer support that knows exactly what membership you have when you have it etc. They were even able to fax over my photo (!!) to the banker to prove it wasn't a fraud. I was actually quite happy because I need that kind of chargeback service for my companies when anyone can call (and does) and usually says "my child ordered this". Unfortunately banks will only work this way with merchants pushing hundreds of millions of dollars in memberships, as I was told by a friend of mine who works for Bank of America.
I don't know in Canada, but in USA most membership programs are continue to be a cancer on our society (despite the fact its easier to dispute transaction than it was years ago) and most banks will help in this bad behavior because they don't want too many disputes for credit card companies they underwrite and represent.
They had me sign over my direct withdrawal banking details the day I signed up. I regret doing that.
Not only that but any mistaken withdrawal is refunded.
If I cancelled without formally ending our contract (with their demanded appointment in order to cancel)... they would have dinged my credit score with a complaint of non-payment for an agreed upon contract.
I wish I was joking.
Now, if the gym in question would fully inform the person that they have nearly impossible cancellation procedure and obtained informed prior consent, that would be different. But that never happens.
"Fully inform" is that not simply what we in real life call "the small print"?
Taking advantage of people is never ok in my book. If you think you're allowed just because you are a little smarter than us I would question your moral and welcome any basic consumer protection.
It depends. We can easily get into the sophistry of "what is understanding", "what's the nature of knowledge" and "how many gains of sand makes it a heap". But usually the most common, though definitely imperfect, test would be whether a random reasonable commoner would be able to understand it. I.e., if somebody is told "we have a contract for 12 months, for X dollars per month, if you want out earlier, you'd have to pay fee of Y dollars" and you say "yes, I agree" - that is voluntary transaction. If you are told "the price is X per month, don't worry about cancelling, it's easy" and then you have to jump through hoops and pay Y dollars because it was printed in unreadable font somewhere in the 2-inch pile of documents you've been given to sign - it's not voluntary, because average reasonable person wouldn't realize it.
> Taking advantage of people is never ok in my book.
Neither it is in mine. There is, however, a wide area of situations where some consider it to be "taking advantage", while others, sometimes including the individuals supposedly being taken advantage of, consider it a free choice. I am against paternalistic approach which says some people can define for other people what's best for them and must protect them from voluntary transactions because it looks to the paternalists like "taking advantage". On the other hand, if it looks for everybody, including the participants, as "taking advantage", and involves hiding substantial information that alters the meaning of the deal, then it's not voluntary. I know it's a more complicated position than fits on a bumper sticker, but life is complicated, so there's no reason not to have complicated positions.
And more importantly I think you put in too much trust in the good will of people. To me it is important to factor in the "human nature" which not always conform to higher ideals. And that does put me firmly in the paternalistic camp.
Not to say I want to remove all liberty. But with the gym examples they clearly show they need to be regulated. They've shown no intent to listen to reasonable random commoners.
I live a place with better consumer protection. I have never in my life had to do a charge back. And have the same bank account. Reasonable consumer protection makes life better - not worse. With the added benefit of making the market more fair for the reasonable players and not cater for the buccaneers.
You're stuck with a bad govt law, no efficient weeding out process exists.
The free market self regulates well in some areas. Others need some assistance.
It's a real racket they have going!
I actually came here to say the same thing. I realized “I’m moving” was the best way to get results in these situations when I was actually moving out of the country for a bit. It’s like a magical incantation that immediately gets them to stop trying to upsell or retain you, no questions asked.
Example: on the Vegas strip they always have people selling strip clubs and pestering you. I'll say "can't do that tonight but do you have any (insert legit magician) tickets?"
They'll go oh man sorry don't have those tonight. Was going to get some, oh shoot. Have a nice night and take care!!!!
It's like the sale that got away. You're still cool to them so they back off.
I do this with the CD artists - don't have a CD player, you streaming? Nah man.
So always be a buyer of whatever they don't have to sell haha.
Just tell them you're moving to another continent then... or Antarctica!
Please keep in mind the difference between counterfeit vs fraudulent. Making your own currency is inherently illegal; making your own lease contract or job offer is not. Its very easy for the people/orgs named on a contract to sue for fraud if a counterfeit contract is attempted to be used, very difficult for an unrelated 3rd party. If you use google to make sure your counterparty or property do not exist, its very difficult for the contract counterparty to sue you, given they don't exist and there are no financial damages. Note that bank collateral or financial industry KYC verification or accounting revenue / SOX or insurance fraud is obviously not "unrelated". If you own a small company, which is cheap and you probably should, you can easily issue yourself a job offer in any location; wanna winter over in Antarctica?
They almost intentionally are not trying very hard; they could trivially demand state ID card / drivers license from the new address. Obviously they just want a speed bump as a dark pattern of customer retention.
Why waste any of your precious time with some scheming/sleezy salesman of that level?
There's no way I'd be relying on a manager's schedule to cancel their services.
That first visit ended with my berating the staffer for being useless and working for a shitty company.
I was not proud of that moment, but what I said was not untrue.
They really had me in their grips... if I just stopped paying without formally ending the contract with the agreed upon "cancellation appointment" (that I apparently agreed to in the original contract) then they would have dinged my credit score for not paying my bills on time essentially.
I was told that I could cancel any time after a free trial. It turns out I was lied to. I went to see the salesman again as it was on my way. Telling him that I switched my accounts made shut up and look defeated. Felt so good.
My appointment was for 2pm... when the rep showed up at 3pm... his first response was literally "oh hey... you're actually 30 minutes late for our 2:30pm appointment so I'm going to have to cancel.."
I told him I had been waiting there since 2pm (and he had seen me waiting there since 2pm) and then he began to take my fraudulent cancellation data of my moving to another country.
My name is MEGACORP. I am a member of the polite society that contains us both. A polite person follows the rules with a smile. The rules say that I get to eat you.
This has not been true for years now. I have a Planet Fitness account happily billed to my credit card right now. I actually go 2 times a week, though, and the one time that I did have to cancel it, the process was painless and quick.
No thanks, no bank details. I'll pay by cash, every month. I don't care if I'm paying "double" because that "half price" is accounting for crap like this.
That's exactly how they got me iirc.
I could have paid a few dollars more per month to be pay as you go... but I was "gonna do this" and I was going to "stick to my gym habits" and keep at this for years so why not sign my life away???
I now happily badmouth Goodlife Fitness whenever I get a chance like this.