- Report: #147720
Complaint Review: Cingular Wireless And Jamie Levi Manager - Santa Monica California
-
Author Confirmed
Why?
Cingular Wireless And Jamie Levi Manager
808 Wilshire Blvd. Santa Monica, 90401 California, U.S.A.
Phone:
310-210-2024
Web:
N/A
Categories:
Business Rating:
(0)
Tell us has your experience with this business or person been good?
Cingular Wireless And Jamie Levi Manager REFUSED TO PROVIDE RECORD OF CALLERS MADE BY THIEF OF CELL PHONE Ripoff Santa Monica California
My automobile was broken into and valdalized. Three cingular telephones were stolen. The car was damaged in an amount estimated to exceed $5000.00. Property was stolen in a similar value. We went to Cingular to get a copy of our latest bill and the calls from the stolen phone in an effort to apprehend the thief. The sales persons were able to get the information, and were about to provide it to me, but they were overruled by Cingular manager, Jamie Levi, who stated that she would not permit me to view the information nor would she provide me with a copy of it. She said I could get the information from the company's fraud department and gave me a number, which was not the fraud department. The company failed to provide me with any one from the purported fraud department or proof that a fraud department in fact exists. We tried to get the information about our bill from all of the numbers and the internet. It appears that the company has frozen our billing information and has refused to provide access.
It appears that the company does not want to recover loss or stolen phones and the company merely uses its purported insurance on such phones as a sales tool to get customers to purchase new phones. It appears that the company is discouraging customers from taking action to recover loss or stolen phones. There might be a legitimate privacy interest if a third party sought information concerning calls, but there is no privacy interest when a customer seeks information concerning their own calls. The failure of the company to timely provide calling information also appears to shield the company's fraudulent billing practices from customers who seek information on a timely basis so as to check the calls purported made from the customer' cell.
I also learned that Cingular was engaged in anti competitive activity against private cingular dealers in violation of ant-trust provisions similar to those set forth in the United States Supreme Court case of United States vs. General Motors. It anti-competitive activity which appears to have as its goal driving private vendors out of business appears to be motivated by its monopolistic goals so that when customers are dissatisfied they may ultimately have no choice.
Richard
Santa Monica, California
U.S.A.
It appears that the company does not want to recover loss or stolen phones and the company merely uses its purported insurance on such phones as a sales tool to get customers to purchase new phones. It appears that the company is discouraging customers from taking action to recover loss or stolen phones. There might be a legitimate privacy interest if a third party sought information concerning calls, but there is no privacy interest when a customer seeks information concerning their own calls. The failure of the company to timely provide calling information also appears to shield the company's fraudulent billing practices from customers who seek information on a timely basis so as to check the calls purported made from the customer' cell.
I also learned that Cingular was engaged in anti competitive activity against private cingular dealers in violation of ant-trust provisions similar to those set forth in the United States Supreme Court case of United States vs. General Motors. It anti-competitive activity which appears to have as its goal driving private vendors out of business appears to be motivated by its monopolistic goals so that when customers are dissatisfied they may ultimately have no choice.
Richard
Santa Monica, California
U.S.A.
