Subscribe
A New Jersey man is facing down Verizon Communications after the company sent him a $2,345 bill for the company’s equipment lost in a devastating fire.
Jarrett Seltzer has been a Verizon FiOS customer for six years. A February fire destroyed virtually all of his property, including four Verizon cable boxes and a router installed six years ago. After notifying Verizon about the fire, Seltzer says Verizon continued to charge him for two additional weeks of service and then sent him a final bill for $2,345 to cover the lost equipment.
Seltzer called Verizon to complain about the bill and says he was transferred not less than 14 times during the call, which lasted about an hour and a half. At the end of the call, nothing was resolved.
“[Verizon] should be ashamed,” Seltzer said in a YouTube video describing his debacle.
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Verizon FiOS billed me 2,345 for my burned cable boxes 9-21-12.flvJarrett Seltzer says a February fire left him with nothing… except a $2,345 bill from Verizon Communications for equipment that was destroyed in the fire. (2 minutes)
Seltzer says he has spent more than $18,000 as a Verizon FiOS customer over the last six years, and is astounded the company is aggressively trying to recoup damages for six year-old equipment. He is now at the point where he would not accept a credit from Verizon even if offered.
“I’d rather pay $2,345 for [equipment] I lost in a fire, along with everything else I’ve ever owned, than not make people aware of this,” Seltzer said.
Stop the Cap! regularly covers stories about customers facing enormous bills for lost or damaged provider equipment. While most companies will forego billing customers fees in high profile cases, and Comcast claims it will not charge customers for lost equipment if they don’t have insurance, many other companies are less understanding. One cable company asked a customer to search their tornado-devastated neighborhood to unearth lost equipment. Others demand advance payment while the insurance companies sort out claims in progress.
Renters are traditionally the most likely to face lost equipment charges because many mistakenly believe a landlord’s own insurance policy will cover their losses. That impression can leave customers with nothing after a fire. But even with a personal renter’s insurance policy, some insurance companies still refuse to cover lost cable equipment or only offer to pay the depreciated, actual value of equipment, not the full retail price most companies demand. That may be the case with Geico — Seltzer’s next target.
http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/KDKA Pittsburgh Arson Victim Billed For Cable Equipment Lost In Fire 5-18-12.mp4KDKA in Pittsburgh got Comcast on the record — it will not bill people for lost or damaged equipment if they lack renter’s insurance — after this victim of an arson fire reported the company billed her more than $600 for lost cable equipment. (2 minutes)
Other stories of interest:
- Charter Cable Tells Family Tough Luck: Pay Us $1,600 for Cable Equipment, Batteries Lost in Fire
- AT&T Wanted Disabled Fire Victim to Pay for Damaged Equipment; Media Intervenes
- Man Dies, Couple Loses Everything In Massive Fire, Time Warner Cable Demands $438 for Equipment
- Charter Cable: “Where’s Our Money?” Reno Woman Faces Huge Cable Bill, E-Mail Held Hostage After Tragic Fire
- Time Warner Cable Reminds Storm Victims They Won’t Charge for Damaged/Lost Equipment
Bob Elek at Verizon here. We became aware of Mr. Seltzer’s video over the weekend. At the moment we are going over the record of his interaction with our service center representative to understand the details of his call.
In general, Verizon provides and owns the equipment but our customers are responsible for maintaining the equipment in good condition while in their possession. In the case of equipment destroyed by fire, flood or some other accident, Verizon would expect that the homeowner’s insurance company would cover the loss. If the customer’s insurance company declined to cover, Verizon would attempt to work out a reasonable solution directly with the customer.
We are in the process of determining how the communications were handled with Mr. Seltzer to help shed light on our process as it unfolds in a real-time situation (albeit a rare one). We do know that he was told twice that the equipment likely falls under his homeowner’s or renter’s insurance and should be included in any claim he files for the fire. We are working with him now and will not seek to collect any charges for the equipment while his insurance company works through the claim.
Even though this is a part of the terms of service with all of our customers, we need to be empathetic with our customers in such difficult situations. So far, it sounds like we could have done a better job of communicating with him and been more helpful in addressing next steps. At the same time we are reviewing our internal processes to ensure we are providing appropriate consideration for customers in situations like these.
In general, Verizon provides and owns the equipment but our customers are responsible for maintaining the equipment in good condition while in their possession. In the case of equipment destroyed by fire, flood or some other accident, Verizon would expect that the homeowner’s insurance company would cover the loss. If the customer’s insurance company declined to cover, Verizon would attempt to work out a reasonable solution directly with the customer.”
No if you force people to rent them with no choice to own them then you should have your own insurance covering them or take the customer’s insurance company offer of the what they think the price is and not the full price of a new box for ones that are 6 years old.