🚀 go-pugleaf

<go@stop.com> wrote in message
news:kqc9n35gcbl1dhiorgvgnbs09ls56cp6nc@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 00:32:10 GMT, "Anonymous" <com@com.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>It seems that hardly a day goes by now that I don't get
>>a call from ATT, selling Uverse. I would think an unlist-
>>ed number(a feature for which I am billed monthly), might
>>be a clue not to solicit on the line.
>>
>>Just as a sample, these recent calls have occurred on
>>12/24, 12/26, and again today, on 12/27.
>>
>>Perhaps they even called on 12/25, don't know, I wasn't
>>home, and they're just too shy to leave a message.
>>
>>When ATT's FIOS alternative first surfaced, they loaded
>>my neighborhood with an army of sales droids. As our
>>turn for the pitch came, I listened attentively, and agreed
>>to accept the introductory service.
>>
>>However, I was only interested in the IP support, and
>>not the TV portion. I stated such to the droid, and he
>>assured me the Uverse segment could be cancelled
>>after a relatively short designated period.
>>
>>Fearing that the droid just might not fully communicate
>>my Uverse wishes effectively, I chose to write on the
>>contract, near the signature:
>>
>>"No Permanent Uverse"
>>
>>The droid happily took the sale. assured me the process
>>would begin shortly, and moved on to his next mark.
>>
>>Over the last 60 days, that was the last I've heard from
>>ATT concerning that contract.
>>
>>So, ATT take note, I don't want to talk to you about
>>Uverse. And you might also try targeting your solicita-
>>tions only to those openly listing their numbers.
>>
>>
>
> If you are on the DO NOT CALL list, you can report them and they can
> get fined up to something like $7,000.  If you are not on the DNC
> list, you got nothing to complain about.





Perhaps, and I'm not on the DNC.

But, I seem to recall the DNC containing a few except-
ions. Charities, governments, and organizations that one
may have a pre-existing relationship, like maybe a doc-
tor's office.

Well, I think ATT qualifies for this relationship clause.

As my local/LD, as well as ISP, they certainly could
claim an existing relationship. Not to mention that they
certainly have access to my unlisted phone line.

#28-#35
http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt107.shtm