TiVoCommunity.com
(c)opyright 1995-2005 All rights reserved
indexcheckTC
This area is a static history of posts in the TiVo Community Forum Archive.
This archive history was made for the simple indexing of search sites like
Google.
Pages:1 2
Service Theft Scam
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: huntersa
Just wanted to warn people out there to be wary of buying a used Tivo with Lifetime Service from someone they don't know.
I did this, buying a unit on eBay. It arrived with a dead modem, but I never got anywhere with the seller and managed to get it working with my US Robotics modem.
Anyway all was well until last weekend when I got the warning that the grace period on my "Lifetime Service" unit was about to expire.
Calling up Tivo we found out that the Lifetime Service had been transferred to a new box by the guy I bought mine from.
He had claimed the unit I was using was defective and returned under warranty and so Tivo tranferred the service to the new unit.
Tivo acknowledged the daily calls emanating from my phone number to this device, proving that the unit had not been returned as defective by the seller.
I also faxed them over 30 pages showing the sale of the device from eBay and the subsequent mail exchanges the seller and I had regarding the box. As far as icould see it was irrefutable that I had and was using the device that had Lifetime Service on it, and that the Tivo rules on transfer of service had been violated.
However at the end of the day after escalating as far as I could ,"Myrna" told us that Tivo would not do anything because the original owner had paid for the Lifetime Service - not me, and that I hadn't had the account ownership changed when I took delivery of the machine.
I had them on that one, because when i got the device I went to tivo.com and filled in one of their email forms telling them about the ownership change and asking for them to update records.
They claim they responded to that saying that had to be done over the phone - I never got that email, do you know why? Because they emailed back the original owner!!!!!!!!!! And of course he wasn't about to forward it to me was he?
The guy I bought it from has moved, Tivo won't tell me the phone number he is making his daily calls from so I can't track him down that way, and my "grace period" expired today.
Of course I am angry with the seller, but I am even more angry with Tivo, after having the initial problems with the modem once I got sorted out I was comforted by the fact that I had the Lifetime Service on the machine and I didn't think it could be taken away - the service goes with the device, remember?
So today I relented and signed up for monthly service, but in all good conscience I can no longer recommend the service to other friends and colleagues - I'm no longer an advocate for Tivo, because while the system itself is superb, I cannot condone a company who asked for and was given evidence of such a scam and at the end of the day they do nothing at all about it.
Stuart
Posted by: Lord Nimon
No offense, but TiVo's policy is clear and simple. The original owner is the only person who has the authority to transfer a lifetime ownership. Otherwise, there would be plenty of scams of the other kind: people claiming that they bought the service from someone else, and expeting TiVo to transfer the service without the approval of the original owner.
I think it's wrong of you to blame TiVo.
Posted by: feldon23
Actually, TiVo's policy is CLEAR AND SIMPLE.
The original owner CANNOT TRANSFER LIFETIME OWNERSHIP FROM ONE TIVO TO ANOTHER!
Only Hughes, Sony, Philips, or TiVo are allowed to do this once they have received a broken TiVo and sent out another.
TiVo is breaking their own rule here and trying to back out. What utter BS!
Posted by: willardcpa
Any recourse through Ebay. You obviously didn't get what you bot??
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by feldon23
Only Hughes, Sony, Philips, or TiVo are allowed to do this once they have received a broken TiVo and sent out another.
What happens when a TiVo is replaced under a store extended warrantee? Do they have to send the unit the original back to the manufacturer to switch the service?
Posted by: SAFW
How did you pay for the item? If you used PayPal, you can initiate a claim through them to refund your payment. eBay may intercede on your behalf, but all they can do is blacklist the seller, hardly helping you.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by SAFW
eBay may intercede on your behalf, but all they can do is blacklist the seller, hardly helping you.
Ebay claims to provide up to $200 of fraud insurance.
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Nimon
No offense, but TiVo's policy is clear and simple. The original owner is the only person who has the authority to transfer a lifetime ownership. Otherwise, there would be plenty of scams of the other kind: people claiming that they bought the service from someone else, and expeting TiVo to transfer the service without the approval of the original owner.
I think it's wrong of you to blame TiVo.
But surely they can only do that if the device was under warranty and has been returned?
I can prove it wasn't - and have proved it, and Tivo even admit that.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by willardcpa
Any recourse through Ebay. You obviously didn't get what you bot??
Difficult that one, it had the Lifetime Service when I purchased it in September, I don't think they would be liable for something that happened several months later.
They later cancelled the seller's eBay account because a couple of people contacted me about troubles thay had with high-ticket items.
I might try SquareTrade though - the seller was a member and they cancelled his membership when he wouldn't arbitrate on the dead modem which was my initial problem.
Stuart
Posted by: brettatk
What kind of unit was it? I know that older SA's TIVO extended a clause that if you bought it before I certain date that you could transfer the lifetime subscription to another TIVO unit. I'm not sure what the date was, something like Jan 2000. If the unit is a newer one then I would say TIVO screwed up and they need to rectify the situation and give you a new lifetime subscription.
Brett
Posted by: jmoak
huntersa,
Bless your heart, it looks like the seller, upon receiving the email you were suppose to get from tivo, saw the opportunity to get "free" lifetime service on his new box and put the screws to you in the process.
I hope a tivo rep sees this thread and can help you out.
For those of you who are reading this and considering buying a tivo with lifetime service off ebay, beware.
As SAFW posted, there's not a lot ebay will do to help. They made their cut of the sale and that's all they care about and the seller is free to do it again with another username, at the worst.
Keep in mind you have almost no recourse on bad deals through ebay. The payment method you choose can help some times, but ebay will not.
Please be careful.
Posted by: drake3
I bought a Tivo Series 2 60 hour unit with lifetime service. It went bad and I exchanged at best buy in the same week I bought it.
I transferred the lifetime service to the new unit on the Tivo website and my new unit registered the change after 1 day of making the web entry.
I don't know if there was a grace period in there, that never appeared on the system information screen.
I assume Tivo got the broken unit back, however, it did not appear that they needed to transfer the service. It looked like the service was trasferred after I made the change on the website.
Posted by: phone1
Well something's not right here. It was my understanding that when an authorized repair (swap) is made, the service center notifies TiVo with the new SN and your sub is switched.
TiVo is not going to switch a sub to a new box based only on a phone call. They'd certainly want proof of some kind. Maybe the seller's got an even more involved scam going.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by drake3
I bought a Tivo Series 2 60 hour unit with lifetime service. It went bad and I exchanged at best buy in the same week I bought it.
I transferred the lifetime service to the new unit on the Tivo website and my new unit registered the change after 1 day of making the web entry.
That reminds me. I had an obscure problem with my SA TiVo(s) and my cable system and I took it back to the store and swapped it for another twice. TiVo had no issue accepting my word on the phone. It hadn't occurred to me until now that I could have sold those as LNIB with Lifetime on ebay instead of actually exchanging them.
Posted by: dslunceford
I think Pony or someone else needs to address this -- is the policy that service stays with the box or not?
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by dslunceford
I think Pony or someone else needs to address this -- is the policy that service stays with the box or not?
The policy is clearly stated. It's their enforcement of the policy that seems to be questionable.
Posted by: BlankMan
I thought eBay's SafeHabor stuff was suppose to help with things like this? You're decision to bid an amount was based on the features the item was described to have. The item then not having those features, in this case the lifetime sub, affects the value of the item, therefore if the value is not what was stated, that is fraud. IMHO you should be able to get eBay to ante up something, $200 is $200. I'd push it with them big time. The seller may be gone, but maybe they'll go after him to recoup or maybe they'll just pay and write it off. You've got nothing to lose but some time spent, but there could be something to gain.
Posted by: ADent
TiVo honors the extended warranty work of BB, CC, etc - but there appears to be no contractual relationship with them.
Several people have called TiVo and told them they just got their replacement unit from BB, CC, even Phillips, and the CSR transfers the lifetime over.
Even if it is a legitimate replacement, what happens to the original dead unit. I assume there is a scenario where the CC/BB tech gets his hands on it and sells it.
Even if you called TiVo and asked them if you unit has lifetime on it, the owner can call the next day and get the CC replaced unit activated with that lifetime account.
Posted by: korn316
I sold my tivo with lifetime on ebay. Everything is fine, what you need to do is contact the seller in advance. Tell them you would want to change the information on the lifetime service, so you would then be in control of the lifetime service and they wouldn't be able to transfer it. Also the feedback is key, try to buy from someone with at least 10 if not 30 feedback.
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by brettatk
What kind of unit was it? I know that older SA's TIVO extended a clause that if you bought it before I certain date that you could transfer the lifetime subscription to another TIVO unit. I'm not sure what the date was, something like Jan 2000. If the unit is a newer one then I would say TIVO screwed up and they need to rectify the situation and give you a new lifetime subscription.
Brett
It is a Sony SVR-2000, can't tell when it was manufactured though unless the machine number is an identifier.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
Well something's not right here. It was my understanding that when an authorized repair (swap) is made, the service center notifies TiVo with the new SN and your sub is switched.
TiVo is not going to switch a sub to a new box based only on a phone call. They'd certainly want proof of some kind. Maybe the seller's got an even more involved scam going.
That could be, he certainly had another Tivo for sale at the same time and when I was investigating him I saw he himself had bought another from eBay the day before I picked mine up.
Stuart
Posted by: stevel
Note that TiVo offers a 30-day period after buying Lifetime in which you can cancel it. A scam which has been known to occur is someone signs up for lifetime, gets the box to acknowledge it, unplugs the box and cancels Lifetime, and the box gets sold as having Lifetime. But once TiVo's server catches up with the cancellation, "bye-bye lifetime!"
Service is also transferrable if you have the unit replaced under factory warranty.
Posted by: turls
Ditto. You've got the unit in your hands that should have had to been returned to Tivo or a close partner before any transfer of lifetime service was made. I'd be surprised if you couldn't get TivoPony or someone to go to work for you on this.
Some people!
quote:
Originally posted by feldon23
TiVo is breaking their own rule here and trying to back out. What utter BS!
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by turls
Ditto. You've got the unit in your hands that should have had to been returned to Tivo or a close partner before any transfer of lifetime service was made. I'd be surprised if you couldn't get TivoPony or someone to go to work for you on this.
Some people!
I'm sorry, but who is TivoPony?
Some people indeed, it's not so much the money that i have lost but the feeling of being shafted by this idiot, not once but twice. And the second time apparently with the collusion of Tivo Inc - that bit me hard.
Stuart
Posted by: stevel
Stuart,
TiVoPony is the forum name for a TiVo [edited] marketing guy. But in my opinion, I'm sorry to say, I can't see TiVo deciding to grant you a freebie (from their perspective) Lifetime sub just because you got scammed. It isn't TiVo's fault and not their "collusion". All you have is a box which, temporarily, had Lifetime Service. You were scammed by the seller and not by TiVo.
Given TiVo's generous policy of allowing a 30-day "return" of a lifetime sub, there's no foolproof way of knowing whether or not the lifetime status on a box you're about to acquire is permanent.
Your beef is with the seller (and perhaps eBay), not TiVo.
Posted by: TomK
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
TiVoPony is the forum name for a Sony marketing guy.
Did TiVoPony get new employment? :)
Posted by: stevel
quote:
Originally posted by TomK
Did TiVoPony get new employment? :)
No, just the Percocet kicking in... I edited the post.
Posted by: JTAnderson
quote:
Originally posted by TomK
Did TiVoPony get new employment? :)
Maybe Dr. Fortran knows something we don't about these rumors of Sony acquiring TiVo.
Posted by: Mike Farrington
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
I can't see TiVo deciding to grant you a freebie (from their perspective) Lifetime sub just because you got scammed.
I don't think TiVo needs to grant him a freebie. They can revoke the lifetime subscription from the seller and give it to Stuart.
Stewart, I think you should print out all of your documentation and send it to someone at TiVo. Find some VP in charge of subscriptions or some such person. I wouldn't drop it so easily. You have a lot of good arguments. Don't forget to ask for a refund for any monthly fees incurred while trying to straighten this out.
Good luck,
-Mike
Posted by: stevel
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Farrington
I don't think TiVo needs to grant him a freebie. They can revoke the lifetime subscription from the seller and give it to Stuart.
On what grounds could they do that? Did the seller pay TiVo for the subscription? If so, then he is entitled to it. TiVo has no right to insert itself into this transaction - if they did, it would set a dangerous precedent.
I feel sorry for Stuart, really I do. But TiVo doesn't have a role to play here.
Posted by: BrettStah
Wow, this sucks. I have also sold a standalone Tivo with lifetime service on eBay, and may do the same for my other standalone in the future when I get another DirecTivo. I hope this isn't a common scenario, as I'd hate the resale value to be diminished due to crap like this!
Posted by: DarkHelmet
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
On what grounds could they do that? Did the seller pay TiVo for the subscription? If so, then he is entitled to it. TiVo has no right to insert itself into this transaction - if they did, it would set a dangerous precedent.
I feel sorry for Stuart, really I do. But TiVo doesn't have a role to play here.
I beg to differ. Tivo very clearly state that lifetime service is not transferrable, unless the machine was replaced in the process of repairing it. The original owner lied to tivo in order to shaft the guy that he sold the box to. IMHO, tivo should cancel the seller's fraudulently transferred service and throw him to the wolves, and move the original lifetime back to the original box like they say it should be.
One of the reasons people buy lifetimes because they know they have resale value - because they are explicitly tied to the box. If this is no longer the case, then the resale value goes down the toilet because anybody on eBay will have to suspect they're going to lose the lifetime and get shafted.
I say this with concern because I have two boxes with lifetime that I'd like to sell at some point. I dont want the $200 and $250 to be devalued at that point due to recurring fraud.
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
Stuart,
Your beef is with the seller (and perhaps eBay), not TiVo.
No, he DOES have a beef with TiVo (and the seller) but TiVo is the one who VIOLATED their own policy by transferring a lifetime sub that is supposed to die with the box, and facilitated the fraud. Without their cooperation the scam would not have worked.
It should not matter who originally bought the sub, or whether it was officially transferred. it should stay with the box, no matter what.
That is what they have stated over and over and over again...
Your theory of the buy / cancel scam wouldn't be valid here because he had the unit for over 2 months before it quit.
About the only way I can see that TiVo is completely innocent in this is if it was one of the original units that was grandfathered in for the one time transfer deal..
Although, I don't think that SVR-2000's were included in that, were they ?:confused: :confused:
Posted by: Compwiz312
Hi, I've been selling and buying on eBay for about 2 years now, and while I haven't sold any Tivos, I recently bought my SVR-2000 SA on Ebay for a very nice price because it had a "software problem" (downloaded image, works flawlessly with one of those $40 compusa 120GB HDs)
Anyway, a few tips for all people considering buying on eBay:
1. Always buy from a seller with a decent feedback rating >10. Also, don't only check the feedback rating, but click on it and read the feedback; if he has any neutral or negative feedback, then read them and decide if they were genuine or just from someone who was peeved.
2. Always READ ALL AUCTION TERMS CAREFULLY, then read them again and maybe even a third time. You'd be surprised how many times you think that there is a warranty or return policy when in fact the item is sold AS-IS with no returns whatsoever.
3. USE PAYPAL. I can't stress this enough. Even if you are skeptic about using your credit card and/or bank account on line, use PayPal anyway. Not only will the seller get your payment faster, leading to faster shipping, but their insurance and buyer protection policies are great.
4. If weary, USE ESCROW. For the most part, if you are willing to pay the fees, a seller will be willing to use an escrow service. This way, if your item is a dud, such as the Tivo here, then you can get your money back without having to wait months for PayPal and/or eBay insurance to reimburse you, if they do. Also, if the seller refuses escrow, there might be a reason A.K.A. you might be getting scammed.
5. REQUEST INSURANCE AND A TRACKING NUMBER. Most eBay sellers ship using UPS Ground, USPS Priority Mail or Fedex Ground. All of these services offer insurance ($100 free with UPS, >$.50 per $100 for USPS, $100 free with Fedex) and a tracking number (UPS = free, USPS = free if seller uses electronic option or $.35, Fedex = free). If you have both of these options, if the package gets lost or damaged, you are not screwed. Remember, a good number of eBay seller provided warranties (including mine) are void if the buyer doesn't pay for insurance.
6. Realize that AS-IS means AS-IS. If an item is sold AS-IS, there is a good chance it is broken, although a lot of times, if you know simple repairs, you can get a steal (like I did with my Tivo). Also, if an item is being sold AS-IS, there are almost always NO RETURNS.
7. If a seller's e-mail is down, REQUEST THEIR PHONE NUMBER. A little known fact is that if you have actually completed a transaction with the seller (bought the item and/or won the auction), you can request their phone number. Here is the link.
8. HAVE COMMON SENSE. The Rule of life: "If it seems too good to be true, it probably is."
Posted by: tivoforme
A few suggestions for you that may or may not work:
1. If the Tivo was mailed to you. Send a letter detailing the fraud to the postmaster at the the person's last zip code asking it be forwarded to the postal inspectors.
2. Talk with the police department in the city where the person lived as well as the district attorney (please note that district attorney is a generic name and may have a different title). See if a report can be filed. Also contact the attorney general consumer affair branch of the state the guy lived in. If this guy is committing fraud on a widescale basis they might get interested.
3. To try and locate where the guy moved to send a letter to his old address with the words *Address Correction Requested* right above his name and address. Sometimes the post office will be more than willing to provide you with a forwarding address instead of actually forwarding it on. This does not always work but hey it only costs you 37 cents.
Finally, make sure that everybody you complain to above knows that the daily call is being made and TiVo can give them the phone number. I am sure TiVo would be more than happy to turn it over to the proper authorities (espcially if they have a subpoena).
Good Luck!!!
tivoforme
P.S. The following is totally in jest and is not meant to be anywhere near as helpful as the stuff up above and is only put in since every thread seems to have at least one response. Have tried Direct TV. No flames please, this part was in jest which is why it appears after the signature
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by tivoforme
A few suggestions for you that may or may not work:
Finally, make sure that everybody you complain to above knows that the daily call is being made and TiVo can give them the phone number. I am sure TiVo would be more than happy to turn it over to the proper authorities (espcially if they have a subpoena).
I'm not sure that TiVo has the guys number just from the call-ins.
While it *is* certainly possible, I think it is not very probable that the UUnet server would capture the DNIS info, and forward it on to TiVo. Why would they want that info, and what would they do with it ? It's just a whole bunch of data for them to store on a server somewhere.
Now the Customer information data they have, but being the scammer this guy is, he could have easily given all fake info except for the TiVo service number itself...
Posted by: LoadStar
Compwiz: I understand where you are coming from when you say "only buy from those who have positive feedback greater than 10" - really, I do.
However... that kinda makes becoming a seller on ebay really tough. I sold my first TiVo on ebay - it had actually been my first transaction on ebay, ever... thankfully, someone right here in my area bought my TiVo at an extremely fair price, the transaction was done immediately, and everything worked out great. I now have a feeback of +1. :)
I'm considering selling another TiVo that I have on ebay as well soon, and hoping it will work out just as well. Just a little evidence that those of us who don't have +10 ratings might still be honest. :)
(Like I said, I do understand, though - I would be a little bit wary of buying from me too! Contact the seller, and buy on escrow if you don't feel comfortable. If available, use credit card and take advantage of your buyer protection features on your credit card.)
For all Compwiz raves about PayPal, there are 10 stories about how Paypal wouldn't lift a finger to get money back after it went to a scammer. Search the web - they're out there in spades. I'm not a huge fan of PayPal myself - I used them, but while it existed, I preferred eBay Payments.
Personally, as a buyer, I'd prefer to use my credit card whenever possible. Of course, do NOT give the seller your credit card number - duh! Use the checkout feature available on eBay to use your credit card. Credit cards have MUCH better buyer protection than PayPal does.
I'd say "if the person's email is down - don't buy from them." If you intend to sell on ebay, you had better have a real, fairly permanent email address that will remain active for at least a good couple of weeks after the sale completes and delivery is made. Corollary to this rule: I'd be wary of anyone who's email was one of the free providers - it's just too easy to get a fake email address, set up an ad, complete a sale, and then disappear and never be heard from again.
As-is may NOT mean "broken." As-is simply means you are getting the item in it's current state. I included that in my auction ad, just to legally protect myself... it was a new-in-box TiVo, so I had not tested it. I included "as-is" to let the buyer know that I wasn't responsible if he opened it and it didn't work. (I did have a modifier that said if the buyer discovered it didn't work in the first xx days, contact me and I'll refund the money.)
Posted by: snoop
Hmm, I find the Paypal/Ebay protection schemes wanting.
I've done a few hundred buy/sells on ebay and the majority went surprisingly well.
However...
In one case I experienced a problem seller who shipped me an item that wasnt as described and arrived damaged due to poor packing. In specific it was a game console that was advertised as "New, in box". It arrived in a thin cardboard box (not the original, a luggage box), with no packing material, no power cord, no manuals, and no cd's (two were included with the new product). Further, the item was physically broken due to (I assume) the shipping/packaging and after I got it working was clear it wasnt new (it had game save information on it). The seller then acknowledged "Well, I hooked it up a few times and played it, it just wasnt my thing".
I complained to ebay and paypal that I received a poorly packed, broken item that didnt meet the listing description by a long shot.
The ebay response was that they would look into the situation and linking a bunch of ebay standard FAQ items. No further response. My subsequent requests went unanswered. Four months later the seller was no longer a valid seller. I received no benefit from ebay.
The paypal response was more direct "Paypal does not guarantee the condition of shipped goods". I inquired "So if I bought $300 worth of anything and received a box of rocks that would be ok with Paypal?". No response to that or subsequent inquiries.
Another item was more benign but equally irritating. I bought an item that received no other bids, hence getting a pretty good price.
Initially the seller tried to increase the shipping costs to cover "residential shipping" as he had only factored in commercial shipping costs and residential delivery would be another $125. I dont think so. He relented on this. Then he asked me to sign a liability agreement that included a clause that (I'll paraphrase but the intent is clear), 'even if there are defects known about or caused by the seller, the seller is not liable for any injury or accident'. This was a motorized vehicle. In other words, he may be aware of a defect or have implicitly caused a defect, but he's free and clear. Nothing about this agreement or anything else was included in the auction description. I refused to 'sign' the agreement, noting that its impossible to sign away legal liability in a case where one party is aware of a problem and doesnt disclose it, and the seller subsequently refused to sell.
So he threw up cost constraints and then a document nobody with a brain would sign, with no specifics in the auction.
I had already paid. He refused to ship. I asked for my money back. Initially he refused. I threatened. A week later and a couple of emails and a phone call later I had my money back. I complained to ebay and paypal. No response ever from paypal. Ebay sent me an initial stock response, nothing further. The seller is still selling on ebay although he has included a statement "Buyer must sign a standard liabilty release". Only problem is there is neither anything 'standard' nor 'legal' about his release.
My read is if he doesnt get the price he wants, he can throw out post-auction requirements until the buyer relents, and neither paypal nor ebay really cares.
Bottom line: Caveat Emptor rules with ebay purchases. Do Not presume ebay or paypal will enforce any rule or require a transaction complies with the specifications of that transfer. Somewhat surprisingly, most buyers and sellers are pretty good. But you're the only one who will cover your ass.
Posted by: Smiles
I think feldon23's right; I think TiVo violated its own policy - or, it was far too easily duped into transferring the lifetime service. If it's that simple to transfer, maybe you don't need proof that you had the unit repaired under warranty. That would be a giant hole in the no-transfers rule.
Posted by: The Bird
TiVo can fix this on going problem. May I suggest simply creating a "Owner Transfer Pending" Status
Where the seller with lifetime creates a transfer account at TiVo.com provides the buyers name and email address.
TiVo then suspends the units service and sends to the buyer a password to check its status.
The buyer can then send payment to the seller.
When the product is received. he/She logs in to tivo.com and accepts the transfer thus re-enabling the lifetime status.
TiVo would charge the seller a fee for this service ($25.00). It seems like win win and TiVo gets a new revenue stream.
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Farrington
I don't think TiVo needs to grant him a freebie. They can revoke the lifetime subscription from the seller and give it to Stuart.
Stewart, I think you should print out all of your documentation and send it to someone at TiVo. Find some VP in charge of subscriptions or some such person. I wouldn't drop it so easily. You have a lot of good arguments. Don't forget to ask for a refund for any monthly fees incurred while trying to straighten this out.
Good luck,
-Mike
Yep, that is what i wanted. Given that I have proven the seller did not return the machine under warranty, I would expect Tivo to be able to transfer the service back to me.
However, I did send all the documentation I had - 36 faxed pages to a customer executive and it was she that decided there was nothing they could do.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
On what grounds could they do that? Did the seller pay TiVo for the subscription? If so, then he is entitled to it. TiVo has no right to insert itself into this transaction - if they did, it would set a dangerous precedent.
I feel sorry for Stuart, really I do. But TiVo doesn't have a role to play here.
Is it or is it not the case that the subscription follows the unit if it is sold. I thought the answer to that was quite clear.
Stuart
Posted by: feldon23
quote:
stevel said:
On what grounds could they do that? Did the seller pay TiVo for the subscription? If so, then he is entitled to it. TiVo has no right to insert itself into this transaction - if they did, it would set a dangerous precedent.
On the grounds of fraud. The seller called TiVo and stated a bunch of things that were not true and screwed the buyer out of lifetime. It would set a proper prescedent that would eliminate this kind of lifetime service scam.
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by DarkHelmet
I beg to differ. Tivo very clearly state that lifetime service is not transferrable, unless the machine was replaced in the process of repairing it. The original owner lied to tivo in order to shaft the guy that he sold the box to. IMHO, tivo should cancel the seller's fraudulently transferred service and throw him to the wolves, and move the original lifetime back to the original box like they say it should be.
One of the reasons people buy lifetimes because they know they have resale value - because they are explicitly tied to the box. If this is no longer the case, then the resale value goes down the toilet because anybody on eBay will have to suspect they're going to lose the lifetime and get shafted.
I say this with concern because I have two boxes with lifetime that I'd like to sell at some point. I dont want the $200 and $250 to be devalued at that point due to recurring fraud.
And that is what i did, I paid $250 over the value of the unit itself for the Lifetime Service. Would I have paid that amount if the unit didn't have Lifetime Service - of course not.
I bought the device on the basis that the subscription went with the device and not the user.
And I bet if I had asked this question here months before I bought it everyone would have said that categorically the subscription stays with the device and cannot be transferred. It's right there in black and white - that is what bothers me.
Of course if my machine dies there is absolutely no way I would ever buy a Lifetime Service unit from eBay or anywhere else for that matter as it seems the seller can take back the Lifetime service whenever they like.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
Well something's not right here. It was my understanding that when an authorized repair (swap) is made, the service center notifies TiVo with the new SN and your sub is switched.
TiVo is not going to switch a sub to a new box based only on a phone call. They'd certainly want proof of some kind. Maybe the seller's got an even more involved scam going.
Well I do know he has (had) at least two other Tivos. One he had at the same time I bought mine (because he initially offered to replace my one with the dead modem for the other one - which he later renegged on), and the one he bought on eBay the day after I bought mine.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
I'm not sure that TiVo has the guys number just from the call-ins.
While it *is* certainly possible, I think it is not very probable that the UUnet server would capture the DNIS info, and forward it on to TiVo. Why would they want that info, and what would they do with it ? It's just a whole bunch of data for them to store on a server somewhere.
Now the Customer information data they have, but being the scammer this guy is, he could have easily given all fake info except for the TiVo service number itself...
When I was proving to them that I in fact had the device the seller claimed had been returned on warranty and that I had been using it quite happily for a couple of months, they said that they could see the daily calls being made from my number. Now whether that is what they actually meant or whether they could just see calls being made from the device ID I don't know.
Stuart
Posted by: huntersa
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
Note that TiVo offers a 30-day period after buying Lifetime in which you can cancel it. A scam which has been known to occur is someone signs up for lifetime, gets the box to acknowledge it, unplugs the box and cancels Lifetime, and the box gets sold as having Lifetime. But once TiVo's server catches up with the cancellation, "bye-bye lifetime!"
Service is also transferrable if you have the unit replaced under factory warranty.
Yes, but if you lie about it and do not replace the unit under factory warranty do you think you should be allowed to transfer the service?
Stuart
Posted by: stevel
I went back and read the initial posting and all the follow-ups. If I understand things correctly, the sticky part is this...
Seller bought the TiVo, ordered lifetime. Now, while Stuart says the box was "returned under warranty", the only way that all of this makes sense is that if the seller told TiVo he returned the box to the store for an exchange under the store's return policy. I have to assume that this happened within 30 days of the Lifetime purchase, as that would permit TiVo to "transfer" the Lifetime status to the new box under their policy.
The only other way this could happen under policy is if the seller actually shipped his TiVo back to Sony, in which case there is a mechanism to transfer the subscription status to the box sent as a replacement. But it's obvious it wasn't done this way (or else the seller wouldn't have had the bad box to sell to Stuart.)
The only way I see for Stuart to have a legitimate gripe with TiVo is if they did this transfer after the 30 days - that suggests that anyone can, at any time, cancel a Lifetime sub on a box, and I find it hard to believe that happened.
That Stuart has invoices and eBay listing notices that say that the box was sold with Lifetime service is uninteresting to TiVo - that's simply fraud on the seller's part. He could have done this without TiVo really being involved at all.
As I understand it, the "grace period" applies to a unit that was never set up. A box that had its lifetime status cancelled would change to a status of "unsubscribed". I suppose at that point, whatever guide data it had would be used up and perhaps this is what Stuart meant by the "grace period". I thought that one would start getting nag screens as soon as the status changed to "unsubscribed", though I don't have experience with this.
While one can wonder at a couple of months going by before TiVo's accounting system caught up with the change, I don't see that this really has any effect on the overall matter.
Could TiVo come up with some sort of system that allows independent validation of account status? Sure, but that information would be good only up to the time the inquiry was made. The one useful thing would be a "beyond 30 days" indication that means the lifetime status was locked to the box, as per TiVo policy. But even then, I can imagine an unscupulous seller could find a way around that.
This whole thing stinks, to be sure. But I still don't see anything to support a notion that TiVo itself is partially at fault. I know this is an unpopular view, so I won't argue it any further. This story definitely highlights a big danger of buying products from unknown sellers where you have to take the seller's word that some attribute increases the value - similarly to authentication of autographed memorabilia.
Sure, it would be nice if TiVo helped Stuart out in some way, and I hope they do. But if so, I hope it doesn't turn around and bite them later by inviting a flood of similar claims.
Posted by: lew
Sorry Steve--Tivo is 100% wrong and OP should file a BBB complaint.
It is 100% clear that LS service is supposed to stay with the original unit. Tivo had no basis to accept the claim that the unit was replaced under warranty since the original unit was continuing to make daily calls. The fact that Tivo's accounting system allowed this to happen for months is not relevant.
Tivo should either eat their mistake and allow for an extra LS or reverse the transfer of LS.
There have been several people who have posted being given a refund (under an extended service arrangement) and being allowed to transfer LS to a replacement box. I suspect Tivo has been overly accommodating in some of those courtesy transfers. The rules say LS stays with the original unit. The original unit is in service Tivo really doesn't have a leg to stand on.
Posted by: TheDoctor
What if the seller was a BB employee who took an open box unit home after discovering that it had been returned with lifetime service? I have seen a number of stories about someone lucky enough to get an 'open box' with lifetime. The purchaser of the lifetime service may not be the individual who sold the unit on eBay.
The fraud was between the seller and the buyer. Tivo honored its contract with and recieved payment from its customer. Attempting to revoke their contract with the the purchaser of the service, who may or may not have been the eBay seller, would open them to legal action without necessarly punishing the eBay seller at all.
If the buyer has the evidence he claims then he has the right to take legal action based on the contract he made, but I don't see a legal ground to involve a third party. If the seller had simply manually changed the database to show lifetime, would tivo be liable? What if the unit had been stolen, would tivo be obligated to supply a new one once the stolen one had been returned to its owner?
eBay's poor consumer protection, and a lack of due delligence on the part of the buyer, as well as deliberate fraud on the part of the seller resulted caused this. Tivo is honoring it commitment to its paying customer, the only safe thing for the company to do.
The buyer is free to presue the issue via a number of legal channels, but Tivo should not be one of them.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by huntersa
Is it or is it not the case that the subscription follows the unit if it is sold. I thought the answer to that was quite clear.
If sold, it follows the unit. If replaced under a retailer warrantee service it follows the original buyer. The problem is that in your case it appears to have been both. Once the retailer makes a replacement under his warrantee, I assume it's the case that the replaced TiVo is his and he can legally do whatever he wants with it - including selling it for as much as he can get to anyone he wants. (Does anyone have information to the contrary?)
The fact that your TiVo arrived with a dead modem (which the seller also didn't admit) suggests to me that he really did replace it under a store warrantee and then bought it back for a few dollars.
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by TheDoctor
The buyer is free to presue the issue via a number of legal channels, but Tivo should not be one of them.
Of course Tivo should be the company OP goes after. LS stays with the unit. Tivo had no right to transfer service. In fact OP notified Tivo of the change of ownership and they still transferred service.
Tivo created the problem by allowing the service to be transferred without verifying that the prior unit was out of service. They buyer did everything right, Tivo screwed up. The unit was sold and Tivo was notified of the sale. At that time Tivo had no authority to transfer LS and was obligated to notify the purchaser if LS had already been transferred.
Posted by: DBCooper
quote:
Originally posted by feldon23
Actually, TiVo's policy is CLEAR AND SIMPLE.
The original owner CANNOT TRANSFER LIFETIME OWNERSHIP FROM ONE TIVO TO ANOTHER!
Actually, that's not the case. Lifetime service purchased before 21 January 2000 (?) (as I recall) can be transferred once to a new TiVo. That may not have been the case in point, but it does constitute another avenue for such a fraud.
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by stevel
The only way I see for Stuart to have a legitimate gripe with TiVo is if they did this transfer after the 30 days - that suggests that anyone can, at any time, cancel a Lifetime sub on a box, and I find it hard to believe that happened.
Well it sounds like this is EXACTLY what happened. Stuart states that he had the box, Working for TWO MONTHS. that should have been PLENTY of time to negate the "trial period"
I know some folks here hold that TiVo cannot, and does not ever do anything wrong, but if the facts as presented are true, then they are certainly wrong here.
They set a very dangerous precedent by casting doubt on the validity of lifetime subs. If people have to wonder whether TiVo will arbitrarily transfer the service out from under them, then the resale value of lifetime subs will plummet.
(of course, that would be a good thing from TiVo's perspective)
I hope that TiVo does the right thing, and returns the LT back to Stuart that they fraudulently removed.
edit: I re-read Stuart's orignal post, and he did not mention that he had it for more than 2 months here. He did, however on the newgroup message when he originally posted it there. (alt.video.ptv.tivo) So I guess most people here may not have the benefit of that knowledge (definately a major point)....
Posted by: papabrody
This thread is now 3 pages long and I am sure that many are anxiously awaiting to see if huntersa gets his LS back from TIVO. (FWIW, I vote he gets it b/c it appears TIVO didn't flollow it's own policy.) What I think is interesting is that TIVO is willing to endure more bad publicity over something like this. If something like this gets more exposure than just on this forum it can't help TIVO sales any. The LS doesn't cost TIVO $250, in fact its actual cost is pennies. I cannot figure out why they would risk it. Even though there are contrary opinions, it seems at a minimum, half the people here believe TIVO is partially at fault for not following their own policies. What's in it for TIVO to continue to argue the contrary?
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by susanandmark
Oh and, to get back on point, I agree with others who say that TiVo has nothing to do with this person's issues. I feel for you and you're certainly getting the shaft. It sucks and it's totally unfair, but it's not TiVos fault and I, personally, don't want them to start arbitrarily swapping lifetime subscriptions based on a supposed "new owner's" word (kind of a scary idea, actually).
I agree with everything you wrote except the above paragraph. Tivo's rules state LS stays with the unit. Since the unit is still in service unit errored in transferring LS in the first place. They should correct their mistakes.
It seems that LS on E-bay is a gamble. Too easy to hack the unit, cancel service in 30 days or transfer it. From other posters it seems Tivo is not very good in confirming LS on a unit for sale.
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by papabrody
If something like this gets more exposure than just on this forum it can't help TIVO sales any. The LS doesn't cost TIVO $250, in fact its actual cost is pennies. I cannot figure out why they would risk it. Even though there are contrary opinions, it seems at a minimum, half the people here believe TIVO is partially at fault for not following their own policies. What's in it for TIVO to continue to argue the contrary?
How does this jeopardize sales of new units and new subscriptions? While I sympathize with the OP, TiVo could care less about the sales of used units with subs they have already been paid for.
As to the OP's claim against TiVo. I don't think we have enough information as to the circumstances of the "transfer" to make a decision. TiVo may have been as much a victim of fraud as the OP, but lacking sufficient information, they have to protect the customer who paid for sub originally. How would you feel if you legitimately transferred your sub over a service issue and then had it taken away? For that matter, we don't even know if the seller is the original purchaser of the sub. TiVo (correctly) shouldn't divulge that information without a warrant.
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
How does this jeopardize sales of new units and new subscriptions? While I sympathize with the OP, TiVo could care less about the sales of used units with subs they have already been paid for.
As to the OP's claim against TiVo. I don't think we have enough information as to the circumstances of the "transfer" to make a decision. TiVo may have been as much a victim of fraud as the OP, but lacking sufficient information, they have to protect the customer who paid for sub originally. How would you feel if you legitimately transferred your sub over a service issue and then had it taken away? For that matter, we don't even know if the seller is the original purchaser of the sub. TiVo (correctly) shouldn't divulge that information without a warrant.
I agree we don't have complete information. OP notified Tivo of the sale and the unit was making daily calls. If the LS had already been transferred Tivo should have notified the OP immediately. It sounds like the transfer occured after notification. In that case Tivo had no right to transfer ownership. The original unit was still in service. Either way Tivo is at fault.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by lew
I agree we don't have complete information. OP notified Tivo of the sale and the unit was making daily calls. If the LS had already been transferred Tivo should have notified the OP immediately. It sounds like the transfer occured after notification.
Trouble is, from TiVo's point of view they were never notified. If you were in their position and received a claim of ownership form someone new, I assume that you too would contact the owner of record. (If someone claims ownership of my TiVo, I hope TiVo asks me to confirm that.) For all we know, the owner of record responded to that email by telling TiVo that the OP was mistaken. I think we need a judge to sort this out, not a company.
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
Trouble is, from TiVo's point of view they were never notified. If you were in their position and received a claim of ownership form someone new, I assume that you too would contact the owner of record. (If someone claims ownership of my TiVo, I hope TiVo asks me to confirm that.) For all we know, the owner of record responded to that email by telling TiVo that the OP was mistaken. I think we need a judge to sort this out, not a company.
Tivo really doesn't have to be concerned with ownership, if the unit is still in use LS isn't supposed to be able to be transferred. If the service was transferred prior to OP notifying Tivo, Tivo should have promptly E-mailed OP back and told him the unit no longer had LS and then canceled the service. If the seller asked service to be transferred after OP notified Tivo, Tivo should have declined and told the seller the unit was still in service and LS stays with the unit. Either way Tivo is at fault.
I guess if the seller asked Tivo to transfer service because the unit was stolen than we might need a judge otherwise ownership is not relevant.
Tivo created the problem by first tying LS to the unit but allowing exceptions without proper precautions.
I think the OP should file a BBB complaint. Tivo improperly cancelled LS on his unit.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by lew
Tivo really doesn't have to be concerned with ownership, if the unit is still in use LS isn't supposed to be able to be transferred.
Consider this:
Modem fails (as it did on this unit.)
Replaced under extended warrantee. (As claimed)
What happens to replaced unit? As far as I can tell - the retailer can do anything he wants so...
Somehow replaced unit shows up in someone else's hands.
New owner hacks up an exernal modem (as OP did.)
Now is clear to TiVo the the original unit coming back into use negates the transfer under the store's warrantee? If so, anyone replacing a TiVo in this way had better watch the store take a sledge hammer to their old TiVo before leaving. (However, since the store now owns the replaced TiVo, you may not be able to make that demand.)
Posted by: lew
Dave--Under your scenario LS would have been transferred before the unit was sold. Tivo should have 1) removed LS from the defective box (so the new owner wouldn't have thought the unit still had LS and 2) immediately responded to the new owner that LS had been transferred to a different unit. Tivo did neither.
What's worse, it appears in this case Tivo transferred LS after the new owner registered the product with Tivo.
Dave, if this situation happened with us we'd have documentation showing that we were given a new unit or cash to buy a new unit under an extended warranty. In this case OP has evidence that LS was sold to him and I suspect no evidence of any type of replacement under warranty.
I stick with my suggestion of a BBB complaint.
I suspect these type of situations is one of the reasons Directv seems to be tying LS to the original account but not allowing transfers to others.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by lew
removed LS from the defective box
They did but possibly quite slowly as they have done in other cases. Sloppy but not usually something a customer complains about.
I have a friend who has had free cable for more than 4 years after terminating it and he isn't complaining. ;) Seriously, I think it's going to be hard to accuse a company of providing free service for too long.
quote:
Originally posted by lew
I suspect no evidence
That's why I think he needs a judge and not TiVo. Both of us are sitting here reading one side of a story via a web forum and we've both had to say "I suspect".
Posted by: lew
The difference is your friend knew he wasn't entitled to "free" cable but the OP had paid for LS and had contacted Tivo for confirmation. Tivo should have deactived the original unit at the same time they activated the replacement unit. No reason Tivo shouldn't have immediately contacted OP with the problem.
Tivo is in an even weaker position if LS was transferred later but in either case TIVO CREATED THE PROBLEM.
If Tivo is going to be this sloppy than they have the responsibility to make it right.
I agree going to a judge (small claims court) is a solution but I think a BBB complaint is an easier alternative.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by lew
The difference is your friend knew he wasn't entitled to "free" cable but the OP had paid for LS and had contacted Tivo for confirmation.
But my friend is not analogous to the OP. The analogy to the OP would be the person who my friend sold/subletted/rented to with the understanding that the cable was free/prepaid. (Of course I'm speaking hypothetically – my friend is not a scam artist.)
quote:
Originally posted by lew
TIVO CREATED THE PROBLEM.
No - the fraudulent seller created the problem. You might be right in accusing TiVo of being sloppy or too trusting or in allowing lifetime to be transferred in the case of a replacement on a retailer warrantee, but they did not create the fraud. I could accuse Rolex of making their watches too easy to counterfeit, or too easy to steal, but I don't think I'd get very far with that.
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
I could accuse Rolex of making their watches too easy to counterfeit, or too easy to steal, but I don't think I'd get very far with that.
Well that also is a poor analogy. Unless Rolex took part in making a counterfeit...
More accurate would be someone who swiped a blank check from my register and duped the bank into cashing it for them. Yes, the theif is the person to blame, but it is the BANK that I will go to to get my money back, because THEY facilitated the fraud. It is then THEIR responsibility to prosecute the crook to recoup their loss.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
Well that also is a poor analogy. Unless Rolex took part in making a counterfeit...
Oh they do (by the logic of this thread anyway.) Many people blame them for NEVER changing their designs and using cheap fold-over bracelet links that are found on every legitimate and non-legitimate cheap watch. This makes Rolex forgeries much easier than other watches.
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
More accurate would be someone who swiped a blank check from my register and duped the bank into cashing it for them.
It's more like the guy sold his wallet with his bank card in it and you're able to make withdrawals for awhile and then it stops. So you call the bank and say he really sold it to you. You then claim that the bank helped the fraud by taking too long to shut down his card. An interesting case but I think it's up to you to pursue it. The bank is going to protect their customer. What the customer said to you is between you him and a judge.
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
It's more like the guy sold his wallet with his bank card in it and you're able to make withdrawals for awhile and then it stops. .
But if the Banks policy was that this particular wallet had an unlimited card attached to it, and that it cannot be used with a different wallet, then you should EXPECT it to keep working forever (as per their policy)
Your analogy of the Wallet / card implies that they BUYER didn't have the right to use the liftetime service he paid for. He bought a unit with lifetime service, and expected TiVo to stick to their published policy. It absoloutely should not matter WHO contacted TiVo. If the policy is the LT stays with the box, then it should STAY WITH THE BOX.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
But if the Banks policy was that this particular wallet had an unlimited card attached to it, and that it cannot be used with a different wallet, then you should EXPECT it to keep working forever (as per their policy)
Yeah but not necessarily for me. Remember the bank will transfer the card to a new wallet if your wallet fails under the wallet dealer's warrantee ;)
The buyer in this case bought the failed wallet and repaired it.
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
Your analogy of the Wallet / card implies that they BUYER didn't have the right to use the liftetime service he paid for.
That's not what I meant - that's why I said to see a judge. Someone needs to sort out the conversation between the buyer and the seller. It should not be a CSR hearing one side of a story on a phone or via email.
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
Yeah but not necessarily for me. Remember the bank will transfer the card to a new wallet if your wallet fails under the wallet dealer's warrantee ;)
The buyer in this case bought the failed wallet and repaired it.
That's not what I meant - that's why I said to see a judge. Someone needs to sort out the conversation between the buyer and the seller. It should not be a CSR hearing one side of a story on a phone or via email.
Really no reason to sort out the conversation. LS is supposed to stay with the unit PERIOD. The question is when and why did Tivo transfer service. Obviously the unit was neither repaired nor replaced under warranty since the seller retained possessiion of the unit. OP has a right to assume Tivo is going to follow their policies.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by lew
Really no reason to sort out the conversation. LS is supposed to stay with the unit PERIOD.
Around and around we go. Where we stop nobody knows :D
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
The buyer in this case bought the failed wallet and repaired it.
Well, then the bank screwed up AGAIN, because the BANK should have had possession of the wallet, if the wallet was SENT IN and exchanged for a new one. Why did the BANK let the wallet BACK into circulation, without either destroying it, or resetting it back to 0 ?
IF the user sent the wallet to the bank because it failed, then the user WOULD NOT have the unit to sell, would they ?
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
Well, then the bank screwed up AGAIN, because the BANK should have had possession of the wallet, if the wallet was SENT IN and exchanged for a new one. Why did the BANK let the wallet BACK into circulation, without either destroying it, or resetting it back to 0 ?
Why would the bank receive a wallet? Does my wallet store have a special arrangement with the bank? I suspect not. What's in it for the store? They sold me the extended warrantee. They can replace or repair at their option. If they replace, the old wallet is theirs not the banks. (That's how I understand these warrantees to work, but as I said before if someone actually knows differently, please chime in.)
Posted by: randyf
**** whatever *****
Posted by: richNYC
The bottom line is that the OP should have LS and the seller should not (and perhaps the seller should face charges of fraud, but that's beside the point).
So the question is whether TiVo is empowered to make things right. To make it right they need to deny LS to the seller; to do nothing denies service to the OP. Do they have a stronger case in denying LS to the OP or the seller?
If it's the seller (which I suspect it is, since the seller entered the LS agreement with TiVo, so the seller would have to authorize any switch of LS from one box to another - even if the first switch shouldn't have happened) then the OP needs some other authority (court?) to empower TiVo.
Posted by: mtchamp
If a seller does not deliver a product or service as promised to the buyer and the seller doesn't make good, then the buyer must pursue the seller in court if necessary.
Posted by: Raj
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
But if the Banks policy was that this particular wallet had an unlimited card attached to it, and that it cannot be used with a different wallet, then you should EXPECT it to keep working forever (as per their policy)
The best analogy to selling a TiVo with LS is like selling a car. You must hand over ALL copies of the car key you made to the new owner. You can't keep a copy of the key so that you can steal back the car at a later date!
Posted by: TheDoctor
From the opening statement the buyer recieved a notice that the 'grace' period was going to expire several days after he got the modem working. If the unit had ever previously contacted tivo the grace period would have already been expired, and is not regranted just because you run setup again, or even if you call tivo and tell them you are selling the unit. If the unit had EVER called in before, the first time the user connected the account status would immediately have moved to expired with no grace period.
It has also never been confirmed that the ebay seller is the same person who purchased lifetime and according to tivo's records had to cancle it because the unit was defective. It HAS been confirmed that the addresses for the account do not match with the ebay sellers. From the presence of the grace period, the origional buyer never even got the unit set up.
If I had set up lifetime on a new unit only to discover that it was defective when I unpacked it I would certainly would have taken it back for a diffrent one and demanded that the account be moved to the new machine. What the store does to the unit is not my problem, and if someone buys the unit and sells it fraudently its not my problem.
The lifetime status hack has been floating around for a long time, and only works on units that are never allowed to call in. The fact that the seller failed to mention the deffective modem should have been a clue that the buyer was in for more suprises.
Posted by: MighTiVo
Amazing that with all the hassle of buying a TiVo on Ebay whenever someone suggest that TiVo should allow us an opportunity to "Upgrade" by transferring our lifetime to a new box for a fee the answer always seems to be "sell the unit on Ebay".
Please TiVo - provide an upgrade service and allow us the ability to transfer a subscription to a new box.
1) You keep your current customers happy and encourage an upgrade to another TiVo box instead of a competitive model.
2) You expand the TiVo customer base. Now instead of buying an expensive TiVo with lifetime on ebay and have the hassle of transferring ownership more units on ebay will be cheap unsubscribed units. Now customers that can not afford a new box or a box with lifetime can purchase one and enjoy the service.
3) What seems like the most likely scenario - Owners can give their old TiVo to other family members without the high cost of giving away lifetime membership. Again expanding the user base.
Posted by: smak
Unless he got some total CS newbie who didn't understand the rules, the original owner couldn't have just called up tivo and had his service transferred over (unless he was grandfathered)
He would have had to have returned it to the retail store he bought it from, and in that case, how did he get the box back? He would have gotten a new one, and would have dropped off the non-working one.
Unless he had someone at the store (or he worked at the store), to fiddle around with things and ended up with both tivo's.
So if Tivo mistakenly transferred service for the original owner over the phone, they should reverse that transfer, and leave the lifetime with the original box.
But, if this is not the case, than I don't understand how the original owner was able to transfer to a new box AND keep the old box. It wouldn't make sense.
-smak-
Posted by: KKemp
Seems to me that in the past RB would have chimed in no later than page 2. Where the heck is TiVo on this one??
Posted by: dd9
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
No - the fraudulent seller created the problem.
No they didn't. If Tivo had correctly transferred the lifetime ownership as requested by the new owner, the seller wouldn't have been able to do what he did.
Posted by: richNYC
Does TiVo have a legally-binding relationship with the new owner in the absence of authorization from the seller? I don't think so. I think TiVo is bound to the seller until the seller notifies TiVo that he transfers his rights to the new owner.
Posted by: Binkish
I think the real problem here is that TIVO is not a device but a service, by their own definition. The fact that you have to have a device to use the service makes this line muddy.
To clarify that line, TIVO had stated that the service will follow the device -- that it would be linked to the device. If they intend not to water down that claim, they need to turn on his LS.
There are no analogies that capture the problems here. TIVO has a device calling in and reporting itself. They have the proof that device is still in action (matter of fact they sold another LS on that device). If the device was supposed to be defective, then its their responsibility to make sure its in that classification. If its defective the LS should be turned off immediately.
That wasn't the case here.
Here the person had the service for a period of time, which should not have been possible per the TIVO agreement. I don't think the person could have been granfathered in the old contract because this is reported to be a Series 2 device.
TIVO is the one that linked the service to the device. Since they are the only ones that have a method of determining which devices are in use (through call in), its their responsibility to enforce this link and provides a black and white solution to the problem. If the device is in service, the LS should be linked to it. If its 'defective,' that service should have never been on and the device should have not been resold.
We need some clarity and a definitive statement from TIVO and TIVOPONY.
Posted by: Polcamilla
quote:
Originally posted by huntersa
Yes, but if you lie about it and do not replace the unit under factory warranty do you think you should be allowed to transfer the service?
Stuart
I understand this is a very difficult situation. I've read through many of the posts and can't honestly say what is right or what is not. However, I thought I might give a little more info on transfering a LS, since I've done it not once, but twice.
We bought a TiVo with a LS and an extended warranty through The Good Guys in June of 2001. That September (well past the 30 day period), the video card in the TiVo went haywire. After several calls to TiVo and Phillips tech support to determine the problem, they offered to replace the unit. However, since that would take several weeks, I asked if I could exchange it under the extended warranty instead and they said that was fine. Went to Good Guys, swapped units, came home, called TiVo, gave them my case number for the problem and the new serial number for the unit and Lifetime Service was transfered to the new box. No other authorization of any kind was required, so far as *I* saw.
February 2002, I noticed that the box only listed half the recording time it should. Again called TiVo and they eventually concluded the second hard drive died and again offered to replace the unit. Again, I opted to swap it through the extended warranty and again, came home, gave them my case number and the new serial number and had LS transfered.
Now I don't know if Good Guys sent the defective units back to Phillips or not. I also don't know if I could've just pretended to swap it under extended warranty and sold it (TiVo wouldn't even have a way of knowing if I HAD extended warranty or not). Certainly, TiVo did not wait until they'd received a unit from GG before reinstating my LS.
I would suspect this is a very obscure loophole in the process and I don't know if TiVo should be held responsible for it or not. Certainly, any countermeasure they put in would likely greatly inconvenience anyone who did have to legitimately transfer LS.
Good luck!
Posted by: MakingNews
quote:
Originally posted by KKemp
Seems to me that in the past RB would have chimed in no later than page 2. Where the heck is TiVo on this one??
I was thinking the same thing. I don't think TiVo is the wrong here. But it would be nice to hear their explanation.
And it does seem like the kind of mess Tivolutionary would have just quietly "fixed."
Posted by: papabrody
So unless we hear differently from TIVO we take away from this thread:
1) Don't buy a LS box on e-bay b/c it might really not have LS.
2) If you want to transfer a LS, just call up TIVO and tell them you are exchanging a box under an extended warranty plan.
3) If you buy a LS box and attempt to transfer the account to your name, don't expect TIVO to even reply to your attempt.
I do learn alot here.
:rolleyes:
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by papabrody
So unless we hear differently from TIVO we take away from this thread:
1) Don't buy a LS box on e-bay b/c it might really not have LS.
2) If you want to transfer a LS, just call up TIVO and tell them you are exchanging a box under an extended warranty plan.
3) If you buy a LS box and attempt to transfer the account to your name, don't expect TIVO to even reply to your attempt.
I do learn alot here.
:rolleyes:
1) I think "buyer beware" is excellent advice for anyone contemplating buying on ebay.
2) Yes, if you want to defraud TiVo.
3) If you're buying a legitimately subbed box from the owner, they should assist you with this. If it's a third party, refer back to number one.
:rolleyes:
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
1) I think "buyer beware" is excellent advice for anyone contemplating buying on ebay.
On a wristwatch forum they keep repeating the motto: "Buy the seller, not the watch." It solves a lot of problems.
Posted by: papabrody
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
2) Yes, if you want to defraud TiVo.
"defraud" is a pretty strong word. It appears all one has to say is that they are replacing the box under an extended warranty. I don't think TIVO in this case asked for any warranty info. When we replace a box ourselves, isn't that just like a self-insured extended warranty?
TIVO is the one who is making the statement that LS stays with the box. They have publicly been adamant about this, but privately don't follow their own public policy
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by papabrody
"defraud" is a pretty strong word. It appears all one has to say is that they are replacing the box under an extended warranty. I don't think TIVO in this case asked for any warranty info. When we replace a box ourselves, isn't that just like a self-insured extended warranty?
TIVO is the one who is making the statement that LS stays with the box. They have publicly been adamant about this, but privately don't follow their own public policy
I'd still have to call it cheating them. If you lie about the circumstances under which TiVo was replaced in order to get a free subscription, knowing it's not following their policy, I'd call it that. You are also harming them financially. No HW is going to last forever, I'm sure the cost of the lifetime sub is carefully calculated based on the product's expected lifecycle. (BTW, I don't mean you personally of course, but if one uses a more formal tone around here, one tends to have fun poked at oneself. ;) )
I like the "self-insured warranty" angle, but I don't think TiVo will buy it. They'll just tell you to have the bad unit repaired - if it's done by an authorized repair center and has to be exchanged, they will transfer your sub. If you replace a drive yourself, your sub is intact. So your self-insurance covers the cost of the repair/replacement, not an "upgrade" to a new unit, just as a real XW would have.*
And we still don't know all the circumstances of the transfer (and probably never will.)
*Yes, there have been cases where stores refunded a warranty holder's money (store didn't carry TiVo any longer) and they were able to transfer sub to a new machine, but that's an exceptional circumstance, and the owner would have kept his original unit if it had been working.
Posted by: shady
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
On a wristwatch forum they keep repeating the motto: "Buy the seller, not the watch." It solves a lot of problems.
Hang on a minute. Are you telling me that they have forums that discuss wristwatches?:D
Posted by: jcblack
quote:
Originally posted by Binkish
I think the real problem here is that TIVO is not a device but a service, by their own definition. The fact that you have to have a device to use the service makes this line muddy.
OT, but i still don't get it. How can they be a service when you buy this from them.
Posted by: TiVoPony
Just a quick note...I'm aware of the thread, but not of the details yet. I'm just back today from a long trip, and wouldn't want to comment until I'm caught up and have had the opportunity to check on a few things.
Pony
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by shady
Hang on a minute. Are you telling me that they have forums that discuss wristwatches?:D
Quite a few really. I know one guy who's been averaging about 1 new watch per week for the last 4 years (and his typical watch is around $15K too.) If you have an addiction like that, you need a support group ;)
(Not to stop you but to tell you it's OK of course :D)
Posted by: holee
You know if the transfer had been done for legitimate issues, I think folks would be praising TiVo CSR's for "bending" the rules. And as far as the CSR was aware, the customer was telling the truth.
Now they're being slammed for doing something that 99% of would be in favor of? What if someone's TiVo died for real and the CSR did in fact allow for the LS to be transffered, as a service. We'd all be praising TiVo for that. There's no way a CSR to know about all the scams out there.
As far as the CSR was concerned, he/she was doing someone a favor. It's like getting upgraded to first class for free or getting to go home early. It happens once in a while even if it's not the policy.
I feel bad for the OP, but I really think that the ebay seller is the only guilty party here. We all know TiVo's policy of LS. I'd rather it remain a situation where some discretion is given to the CSR versus a draconian one with no wriggle room at all.
If you buy it from ebay, you have to deal with the risks involved. TiVo can't police everyone, especially in the second-hand market.
Posted by: unixadm
quote:
Originally posted by TiVoPony
Just a quick note...I'm aware of the thread, but not of the details yet. I'm just back today from a long trip, and wouldn't want to comment until I'm caught up and have had the opportunity to check on a few things.
Pony
The prodigal son has come home :D
Welcome back TP....I just started a thread in the DirectTiVo forum listing you MIA :)
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by holee
You know if the transfer had been done for legitimate issues, I think folks would be praising TiVo CSR's for "bending" the rules. And as far as the CSR was aware, the customer was telling the truth.
Now they're being slammed for doing something that 99% of would be in favor of? What if someone's TiVo died for real and the CSR did in fact allow for the LS to be transffered, as a service. We'd all be praising TiVo for that. There's no way a CSR to know about all the scams out there.
As far as the CSR was concerned, he/she was doing someone a favor. It's like getting upgraded to first class for free or getting to go home early. It happens once in a while even if it's not the policy.
You're right, but your scenario doesn't apply here. This transfer was not done for "legitimate" reasons. Suppose someone tells the airline that you won't be showing up for your flight, and therefore they should let him upgrade to your first-class seat. But then you show up and legitimately ask for your seat back. Does the airline tell you "sorry, we've already given it to the liar, you're out of luck"? No, they kick the liar out of his seat and give it back to the rightful owner (you).
The "slamming" against TiVo isn't because they bent the rules to help someone. I don't think anyone can fault TiVo for believing the original seller and doing what they asked.
The complaint is that once it was demonstrated to TiVo that they were deceived and that--even while trying to be nice--they took an action that cost an innocent third-party his service, TiVo's response was "tough luck". It should have been "oops, sorry, we'll rectify that immediately."
Posted by: richNYC
They can't rectify it immediately. They have a contract (the LS) with the seller. They can't transfer it without his permission.
Posted by: smak
But if you look at Polcamilla's two legitimate cases, in both he returned his
defective unit to good guys, got a new one, and called Tivo to swap the lifetime.
So there's no way his old box could be sold by him, because he dropped it off to GG.
Now from his post it looks like he called Tivo afterwards and said his original machine died, he replaced it with his GG extended warranty and got LS on the new machine.
That's wrong, Tivo should never transfer the LS under any circumstance to a person who calls on the phone, unless it's a grandfathered pre 2000 one.
The only way the lifetime should have been transferred is if GG called tivo, or philips had done it if he sent it back to them for warranty work, and they replaced it.
If the case in this thread ends up being that the original owner called tivo and told them his box broke and he returned it for another one, and they granted him new LS on his new box, than Tivo is at fault and must rectify the situation.
The old box should have been taken out of service to be refurbished, and never should have been able to be sold on ebay.
I've returned a few electronic items, mainly a few cell phones in the last year, and they always want the old one back or they'll charge me for the new one.
No company should take the word of someone on the phone that their machine is broken. They need proof either from a retail location, or by sending the device back...
-smak-
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
They can't rectify it immediately. They have a contract (the LS) with the seller. They can't transfer it without his permission.
A. What's this "without his permission" clause? The contract does not allow a service transfer PERIOD! Except for cases of replacing a repaired unit, which doesn't apply here. But besides that, the seller violated his contract with TiVo. He misrepresentated his situation to TiVo in order to con TiVo into giving him something he wasn't entitled to. TiVo has every right to call him on that violation and retract what they gave him.
B. Regardless of what action TiVo takes or doesn't take against the original seller who deceived them, when the innocent third-party calls up and proves that he is the rightful owner of that which was stolen from him according to TiVo's own rules, TiVo should provide him with that service. Whether they transfer it from the original seller or just give him a freebie, TiVo should right their wrong. When you order something and a company ships it to the wrong address, they say "oops, our mistake" and they send you another one. Yes, it costs them twice, but that's their problem, not the customer's.
Posted by: richNYC
Replacing a repaired unit does apply here. In the first post the buyer said: "He (TiVo CS rep) had claimed the unit I was using was defective and returned under warranty and so Tivo tranferred the service to the new unit."
The seller (scammer) somehow retained possession of the "defective" TiVo and fraudulently sold it as having LS.
I agree that TiVo should have detected that the unit wasn't defective (since the buyer was now making daily calls) and it took too long for the LS on the "defective" unit to expire.
But those failures, in my opinion, don't require TiVo to give away a free LS to the buyer. Of course the buyer should be compensated for being scammed; but that is the responsibility of either the scammer or eBay or his credit card company, but not by TiVo.
Posted by: richNYC
Here's a question: What if the buyer's TiVo never indicated that it had LS? So, the buyer would have immediately known he was scammed. Would the people who think TiVo is responsible still hold that view?
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by papabrody
So unless we hear differently from TIVO we take away from this thread:
1) Don't buy a LS box on e-bay b/c it might really not have LS.
2) If you want to transfer a LS, just call up TIVO and tell them you are exchanging a box under an extended warranty plan.
3) If you buy a LS box and attempt to transfer the account to your name, don't expect TIVO to even reply to your attempt.
I do learn alot here.
:rolleyes:
You forgot the most important thing..
4) No matter what the circumstance... TiVo is NEVER at fault :D
Posted by: gleffler
By the by, if you are a seller with low eBay feedback, I strongly suggest you get ID Verified. It greatly increases buyer confidence in you if your feedback is low or nonexistent, and it only costs $5.
/gleffler
PS: I think TiVo owes the OP a lifetime sub and to cancel the lifetime sub of the seller. I'm not arguing about it though :)
Posted by: richNYC
I don't want to argue it either :)
It is an interesting quetsion, though. Sucks for the OP. I hope it works out for him.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
Replacing a repaired unit does apply here. In the first post the buyer said: "He (TiVo CS rep) had claimed the unit I was using was defective and returned under warranty and so Tivo tranferred the service to the new unit."
That only explains why TiVo did what they did in the first place. They believed the seller, and I don't see a problem with that. But it turns out that it was a lie. That's why I said a replaced unit doesn't apply here. It wasn't a replaced unit. The seller claimed it was a replaced unit so he could keep his lifetime service. But he was lying.
quote:
The seller (scammer) somehow retained possession of the "defective" TiVo and fraudulently sold it as having LS.
I agree that TiVo should have detected that the unit wasn't defective (since the buyer was now making daily calls) and it took too long for the LS on the "defective" unit to expire.
TiVo only transferred the LS because they believed the original unit was out of circulation. It was not. Had they known it was not, they never would have transferred LS in the first place. All I'm saying is that once they realized they were duped into transferring it, they should untransfer it.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
Here's a question: What if the buyer's TiVo never indicated that it had LS? So, the buyer would have immediately known he was scammed. Would the people who think TiVo is responsible still hold that view?
How about this? If the scammer had TiVo transfer the LS three months after he sold the unit, would the people who think TiVo has no responsibility still hold that view?
Posted by: holee
How the heck can TiVo reasonably tell if the customer is lying or not? They can't right now. If I call in and say my machine is broken, I don't want to go through a process of sending documentation and RMAs and all that.
I really don't think we would want a situation where TiVo believes the customers are out to get them, especially in a rare occurance such as this.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
How about this? If the scammer had TiVo transfer the LS three months after he sold the unit, would the people who think TiVo has no responsibility still hold that view?
This is not an argument, just am interesting discussion right? In that vein...
Your question assumes that the buyer never tried to get his name on the account for 3 months. If the buyer did have his name put on the account then TiVo must ignore the request from the scammer. If the buyer did not put his name on the account then TiVo must recognize that the unit is not damaged.
So, I would change my view. It's now TiVo's fault if they switch the LS, but that's a totally different scenario.
By the way, I am NOT a TiVo apologist. I was all over them with the bad modems on the early SAs and the removal of the 800 number (among other questionable decisions). I'll be happy if TiVo steps up and solves the buyer's problem. I think I'm being somewhat logical. It seems obvious to me that the scammer caused the scam.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by holee
How the heck can TiVo reasonably tell if the customer is lying or not? They can't right now. If I call in and say my machine is broken, I don't want to go through a process of sending documentation and RMAs and all that.
I really don't think we would want a situation where TiVo believes the customers are out to get them, especially in a rare occurance such as this.
I agree completely
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by holee
How the heck can TiVo reasonably tell if the customer is lying or not? They can't right now. If I call in and say my machine is broken, I don't want to go through a process of sending documentation and RMAs and all that.
I really don't think we would want a situation where TiVo believes the customers are out to get them, especially in a rare occurance such as this.
No, no, no! I'm not saying that TiVo should have known or investigated whether the claim was legitimate! It's a reasonable policy to just accept the customer's word.
What I'm saying is that afterwards, once they determined that the original seller lied, then the responsible thing to do is to undo the transaction! Tell the seller, "we transferred the LS to you because you told us you returned the unit. But it turns out that you didn't return the unit. Therefore, in accordance with our standard policy, you are not entitled to the transferred LS, and we're taking it back and giving it to the rightful owner."
I'm not saying that TiVo erred in transferring the LS in the first place. I'm saying that once they discover a TOS violation, they have a responsibliity to return the LS to its rightful owner.
Refer back to my comment on the first-class airline upgrade analogy. I wouldn't blame the airline for believing the scammer and giving my seat away. But once I show up at the gate and provide evidence that they were deceived, I would be very angry if they told me "oh well, what's done is done. But you can buy another ticket if you want."
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
It seems obvious to me that the scammer caused the scam.
Yes, that much is obvious to me, as well. But if a scammer cons Visa into sending him a card in my name, and then I call Visa and prove to them that I did not make the bogus purchases, Visa does not make me pay. They say, "we took the caller at his word, but it turns out that he lied. We will decide whether or not to go after the scammer, but in the meantime we won't hold you responsible. That's the cost of doing business, and we made a corporate decision to eat the occasional scam rather than require every customer to prove their claim."
Similarly, since the buyer bought a TiVo that according to TiVo's policies should have LS on it, and a scammer conned TiVo into fraudulently transferring it, then they buyer should not have to pay for that.
Posted by: Mark Lopez
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
What I'm saying is that afterwards, once they determined that the original seller lied, then the responsible thing to do is to undo the transaction! Tell the seller, "we transferred the LS to you because you told us you returned the unit. But it turns out that you didn't return the unit. Therefore, in accordance with our standard policy, you are not entitled to the transferred LS, and we're taking it back and giving it to the rightful owner."
I'm not saying that TiVo erred in transferring the LS in the first place. I'm saying that once they discover a TOS violation, they have a responsibliity to return the LS to its rightful owner.
I agree. After reading this whole thread, I find it hard to believe that there are some people that think TiVo has no responsibility to fix this (assuming the circumstances stated by the original poster are accurate).
Posted by: dslunceford
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
What I'm saying is that afterwards, once they determined that the original seller lied, then the responsible thing to do is to undo the transaction! Tell the seller, "we transferred the LS to you because you told us you returned the unit. But it turns out that you didn't return the unit. Therefore, in accordance with our standard policy, you are not entitled to the transferred LS, and we're taking it back and giving it to the rightful owner."
Exactly. Though they are not tranferring back to the owner, they are transferring back to the original box per the service agreement where LS is linked to the box, not the owner.
Posted by: GBL
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
What I'm saying is that afterwards, once they determined that the original seller lied, then the responsible thing to do is to undo the transaction! Tell the seller, "we transferred the LS to you because you told us you returned the unit. But it turns out that you didn't return the unit. Therefore, in accordance with our standard policy, you are not entitled to the transferred LS, and we're taking it back and giving it to the rightful owner."
I'm not saying that TiVo erred in transferring the LS in the first place. I'm saying that once they discover a TOS violation, they have a responsibliity to return the LS to its rightful owner.
Let's add one more wrinkle to this situation:
Let's assume the original seller also sold the second unit to an innocent buyer who now also pays for the LS.
What's TiVo to do now?
They have no relationship whatsoever with the original seller who in fact sold the LS (fraudulently) twice thanks to TiVo's generous transfer of LS service. TiVo could only transfer LS from one innocent party to another innocent party, harming one Innocent party in the process.
TiVo's only recourse would be to eat the cost of a second LS given to the OP.
TiVo's only fault is in either not alerting the OP of the unit's non-LS status at the first call in or in allowing the LS transfer after the original unit was still calling in.
This and other instances (e.g. turning LS off after 2 years of service for non payment) leads me to the conclusion that TiVo needs to improve their tracking and accounting of all units' service status, preferable on a real time basis.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
Yes, that much is obvious to me, as well. But if a scammer cons Visa into sending him a card in my name, and then I call Visa and prove to them that I did not make the bogus purchases, Visa does not make me pay. They say, "we took the caller at his word, but it turns out that he lied. We will decide whether or not to go after the scammer, but in the meantime we won't hold you responsible. That's the cost of doing business, and we made a corporate decision to eat the occasional scam rather than require every customer to prove their claim."
Similarly, since the buyer bought a TiVo that according to TiVo's policies should have LS on it, and a scammer conned TiVo into fraudulently transferring it, then they buyer should not have to pay for that.
I kind of see your point, but the VISA scenario doesn't apply here.
In this case a service was stolen and then fraudulently re-sold. Here's another less-than-perfect analogy... Let's say I buy some gift certificates from Victoria's Secret. I then call them up and lie and tell them that the certificates are lost, and VS is kind enough to issue me replacements and cancel the originals. I then sell the originals to you. You try to redeem them, but VS says, "Sorry. Those were reported lost and they won't be honored". Should VS reimburse you because you were scammed by me? No.
This is why they don't let you "replace" gift certificates. So, my guess is that TiVo will now have to tighten up is policy of transferring LS and not do it until there is harder proof that the damaged box is truly damaged.
Further, it would be nice if re-sellers/buyers could somehow register/query with TiVo pre-sale, so that the buyer is assured that his name can go on the account immediately upon payment to the seller. Is this possible today?
Posted by: papabrody
quote:
Originally posted by GBL
Let's add one more wrinkle to this situation:
Let's assume the original seller also sold the second unit to an innocent buyer who now also pays for the LS.
What's TiVo to do now?
They have no relationship whatsoever with the original seller who in fact sold the LS (fraudulently) twice thanks to TiVo's generous transfer of LS service. TiVo could only transfer LS from one innocent party to another innocent party, harming one Innocent party in the process.
TiVo's only recourse would be to eat the cost of a second LS given to the OP.
TiVo's only fault is in either not alerting the OP of the unit's non-LS status at the first call in or in allowing the LS transfer after the original unit was still calling in.
This and other instances (e.g. turning LS off after 2 years of service for non payment) leads me to the conclusion that TiVo needs to improve their tracking and accounting of all units' service status, preferable on a real time basis.
I thought of that too, considering the they seller pulled off one scam, it is likely that he/she sold the second unit too. That is why companies have policies in place. Most co's require a credit card # inorder to cross ship a return/replacement. It is not unreasonable for TIVO to ask for a CC # and if they haven't received the original box or certification that it has been removed from circulation within a reasonable time, then they will charge the CC another $250. This is not brain surgery and is done everyday thousands of times.
Posted by: Mark Lopez
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
Here's another less-than-perfect analogy... Let's say I buy some gift certificates from Victoria's Secret. I then call them up and lie and tell them that the certificates are lost, and VS is kind enough to issue me replacements and cancel the originals. I then sell the originals to you. You try to redeem them, but VS says, "Sorry. Those were reported lost and they won't be honored". Should VS reimburse you because you were scammed by me? No.
I dissagree. If the buyer of the 'lost' gift certificates can prove that they were sold to them by the original owner instead of being lost, then VS should then be obligated to honor them and go after the person who falsly reported them lost.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Lopez
I dissagree. If the buyer of the gift certificates can prove that they were sold to them by the original owner instead of being lost, then VS should then be obligated to honor them and go after the person who falsly reported them lost.
ok, then we'll agree to disagree :)
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by GBL
Let's add one more wrinkle to this situation:
Let's assume the original seller also sold the second unit to an innocent buyer who now also pays for the LS.
What's TiVo to do now?
...
TiVo could only transfer LS from one innocent party to another innocent party, harming one Innocent party in the process.
All TiVo needs to do is adhere to its own policy. It should still transfer the LS back to the original box. The second buyer needs to pursue the seller for fraud on their own.
Yes, there are two innocent buyers in your scenario, and one of them will be unhappy. But I'm not saying that TiVo has obligation to make everyone happy. I'm saying they have an obligation to make sure their rules are followed. And rule #1 is that LS cannot be transferred except for a circumstance that did not occur. They need to blindly, objectively ensure that the LS remains bound to an active box.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
I kind of see your point, but the VISA scenario doesn't apply here.
In this case a service was stolen and then fraudulently re-sold. Here's another less-than-perfect analogy... Let's say I buy some gift certificates from Victoria's Secret. I then call them up and lie and tell them that the certificates are lost, and VS is kind enough to issue me replacements and cancel the originals. I then sell the originals to you. You try to redeem them, but VS says, "Sorry. Those were reported lost and they won't be honored". Should VS reimburse you because you were scammed by me? No.
I agree. But this analogy isn't complete either. :) To make it more complete, assume you can pay extra to have them stamp "the bearer of this certificate is entitled to a free bra", and they have a policy that the stamp must appear on an original certificate to be valid.
Now let's say you give them a sob story and con them into giving you another stamp on a new certificate you bought, then you sell the originals. Now the unwitting buyer tries to get their free bra and is told the stamp was transferred. In this case, the buyer is legitimate to say, "your policy is that the stamp is only valid on an original certificate and cannot be transferred. I am holding an original certificate, and therefore the stamp should be valid. I'm glad your CSR bent the rules to try to help out the other guy, but he lied and your CSR was duped. I am the holder of the original certificate, and I expect that you will conform to your own rules and policies. And by the way, you have the power to cancel the liar's stamp, and you are justified to do so, so you will suffer no loss because of this."
Posted by: phone1
Mmmmm - discussions of women's lingerie - this thread's really heating up! :D
Posted by: dd9
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
All TiVo needs to do is adhere to its own policy. It should still transfer the LS back to the original box. The second buyer needs to pursue the seller for fraud on their own.
No, no, no. Tivo is the bottleneck here.
Let me quote the OP:
quote:
However at the end of the day after escalating as far as I could ,"Myrna" told us that Tivo would not do anything because the original owner had paid for the Lifetime Service - not me, and that I hadn't had the account ownership changed when I took delivery of the machine.
I had them on that one, because when i got the device I went to tivo.com and filled in one of their email forms telling them about the ownership change and asking for them to update records.
They claim they responded to that saying that had to be done over the phone - I never got that email, do you know why? Because they emailed back the original owner!!!!!!!!!! And of course he wasn't about to forward it to me was he?
As you can see, Tivo forked up the transfer and communications of lifetime service and should never have allowed it; therefore, they are responsible. Tivo should step up here and do the right thing.
Posted by: richNYC
The "stamp" does not exist in the case of TiVo - the only thing "on" the TiVo is its serial number. The closest analogy to a "stamp" is the confirmed account status for the box as reported and stored at TiVo HQ. The buyer could have contacted TiVo prior to purchase to confirm the status of the box.
If you respond by saying that TiVo's "policy" = "stamp" (or the fact that the box said it had lifetime for a while = "stamp"), then we'll agree to disagree on this.
We do agree that the proper ending to this story is that the OP gets LS and the scammer has to pay for LS again (and/or suffers more severe consequences). I think it would be great if TiVo decides to make that happen, but I don't think they are legally bound to do so (but I'm no lawyer). The original LS was removed because the the box was returned as damaged. Now the box has been fixed. That doesn't entitle the box to its original LS.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by dd9
As you can see, Tivo forked up the transfer and communications of lifetime service and should never have allowed it; therefore, they are responsible.
I don't understand your conclusion. Can you clarify?
Posted by: rseligman
Look at it this way. The buyer wasn't scammed. TiVo was scammed. Now if TiVo decides to overlook that and let things stand (for example, if the seller actually had kept both boxes himself), then that's up to them. But at the point when the scam draws an innocent third-party into the mix, TiVo should step up and say "no, no, you can't do that. The box was either returned and the LS was transferred, or it wasn't returned and the LS wasn't transferred. You can't have it both ways."
TiVo's policy is that if a box ever had LS, then it will always have LS (unless it was returned and an authorized repair shop wipes it clean and puts it back into the system). A buyer therefore has a reasonable expectation that the box he's buying, since it once had LS, and it's not returned (since he's holding in his hands), will continue to have LS. Then you have the seller calling TiVo and lying to trick them into believing the box is out of commission. When the buyer calls up and says "what's the deal?" TiVo needs to say "oops, sorry, we were told your box was returned, but it's obviously not, so we'll return to you what we took under false pretenses."
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
I don't understand your conclusion. Can you clarify?
He's just saying that TiVo did something that, after the fact, once the cards are all on the table, an objective observer will conclude that they shouldn't have done. Therefore, they should undo it.
It's really basic give-and-take. If someone says they mowed your lawn and so you pay them, then you discover they lied to you, you'd want your money back. So the seller said he returned the unit and so TiVo allowed the transfer, then they discover that he lied to them, so they should take the LS back. The fact that there's a third-party innocent buyer involved only adds to the urgency of this, but not to the basic equitableness.
Posted by: richNYC
TiVo wasn't scammed. The buyer was scammed.
I think you are misstating the policy in your 2nd paragraph(2 posts up). Here is the policy from www.tivo.com: "The subscription remains in effect if your DVR needs to be repaired or replaced due to a malfunction (see manufacturer warranty details). " Nothing about wiping it clean. Is there any indication that this policy wasn't followed? This unit was reported to TiVo as being replaced.
The fact that the returned unit was not "wiped clean" is the scam and that has nothing to do with TiVo (assuming TiVo isn't the manufacturer).
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
TiVo wasn't scammed. The buyer was scammed.
The scam is this: the seller fraudulently claimed that they returned their box, thus deceiving TiVo into transferring a LS that--according to TiVo's policies--should have remained with the in-service box. The word "buyer" doesn't even appear in that description, so if you agree to these facts then the scam was perpetrated against TiVo. That the seller then sold the box to a buyer served only to reveal the scam.
quote:
The subscription remains in effect if your DVR needs to be repaired or replaced
...
Is there any indication that this policy wasn't followed?
Yes. It is...
quote:
This unit was reported to TiVo as being replaced.
But in reality, it wasn't replaced. It was right there in the seller's grubby little hands. He lied. That's your indication that the policy was not followed.
quote:
The fact that the returned unit was not "wiped clean" is the scam and that has nothing to do with TiVo.
Sure it does. It's the responsibility of TiVo and its TiVo-authorized repair centers to make sure that a replaced unit is not returned to the owner, but instead is put back into the pipeline to be resold/recycled/trashed. They failed to do this.
Posted by: papabrody
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
The fact that the returned unit was not "wiped clean" is the scam and that has nothing to do with TiVo (assuming TiVo isn't the manufacturer).
This has everything to do with TIVO. TIVO is the sole distributor of LS. Its policy is that a LS stays with box unless returned through an authorized repairer. "Authorized" means that they are under the control of TIVO.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
It's the responsibility of TiVo and its TiVo-authorized repair centers to make sure that a replaced unit is not returned to the owner, but instead is put back into the pipeline to be resold/recycled/trashed.
Does the policy actually say that?
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by papabrody
This has everything to do with TIVO. TIVO is the sole distributor of LS. Its policy is that a LS stays with box unless returned through an authorized repairer. "Authorized" means that they are under the control of TIVO.
it does? i don't think so.
rseligman: i appreciate your last points. i just don't agree with any of them.
since we're saying the same things over and over again, I'm done (if I can control myself). it's been fun discussing this with you....
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
It's the responsibility of TiVo and its TiVo-authorized repair centers to make sure that a replaced unit is not returned to the owner, but instead is put back into the pipeline to be resold/recycled/trashed. They failed to do this.
See, I can't help myself :)
If what you say here is true then TiVo's proper response is to seize the OP's TiVo and put it back in the pipeline to be "resold/recycled/trashed".
Posted by: Polcamilla
quote:
Originally posted by smak
But if you look at Polcamilla's two legitimate cases, in both he returned his
Okay, I'm being nitpicky, but I'm female. :)
quote:
defective unit to good guys, got a new one, and called Tivo to swap the lifetime.
So there's no way his old box could be sold by him, because he dropped it off to GG.
Now from his post it looks like he called Tivo afterwards and said his original machine died, he replaced it with his GG extended warranty and got LS on the new machine.
That's wrong, Tivo should never transfer the LS under any circumstance to a person who calls on the phone, unless it's a grandfathered pre 2000 one.
Just to give further details and hopefully clarify---I called TiVo/Phillips FIRST (I say TiVo/Phillips because apparently they can transfer a call between TiVo customer service and Phillips customer service. I eventually spoke to both). TiVo/Phillips had authorized a return for my unit and to transfer LS to the new unit I received from them. They gave me a couple codes to write on the box when I shipped my TiVo to them. Since I was getting a new unit with my old LS tranfered *anyway*, I asked TiVo/Phillips if I could simply swap it at GG instead of waiting the six weeks for it to turn around in the mail. They said that was fine. So I *then* called GG, explained what had happened with TiVo/Phillips and had them hold a unit for me so I could bring mine in later in the day. After returning from GG, I called TiVo again to make the LS transfer and generally activate the new box.
I'm guessing once they've decided to exchange a unit, they don't care what the source of the new unit is. The problem here is that, apparently, they should be *very* concerned about the fate of the old unit. In at least one of my two cases, the unit which was returned was quite repairable (just needing a hard-drive swap, most likely) and had it fallen into the wrong hands, I can see this same situation arising. In this thread, most people seem to have been assuming that the seller was the person who originally bought the TiVo, paid the lifetime fee, then lied about it being replaced and got the lifetime transfered. I think TiVo's CS is concerned that Person A bought a TiVo, purchased LS, then found the TiVo to be defective, returned it, and had service transfered according. Person B (the seller) somehow got his hands on the unit (maybe he worked at the store it was returned to?), sold it on eBay to Person C (the original poster) who used it until lifetime was cut off. Now, in this scenario, if they cut off lifetime to Person A (who, as far as he knows, did everything legitimately) they are punishing an innocent, potentially breaking a contract, *AND* not at all affecting the life of the person who defrauded them (the seller/Person B).
quote:
The only way the lifetime should have been transferred is if GG called tivo, or philips had done it if he sent it back to them for warranty work, and they replaced it.
All I'm saying is, to my knowledge, TiVo didn't seek any proof/authorization from GG that a defective unit with lifetime had been received before activating lifetime on the new unit. I'll admit this is a generous policy. Given the number of different vendors that offer extended warranties, I'm glad that TiVo won't make me wait (hours? days? weeks? months?) to hear from a third party or have the physical evidence of the exchange (in the form of the defective machine) before reinstating a service I paid them for on a machine they authorized me to use it on. I exchanged through GG precisely to avoid that delay (because I'll admit I can't live without my TiVo!).
quote:
No company should take the word of someone on the phone that their machine is broken. They need proof either from a retail location, or by sending the device back...
Yes, but the added layers of mistrust do not engender much customer satisfaction/loyalty.
I don't think there is a GOOD answer here.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
See, I can't help myself :)
I feel your pain. :)
quote:
If what you say here is true then TiVo's proper response is to seize the OP's TiVo and put it back in the pipeline to be "resold/recycled/trashed".
In a perfect world, yes. That's what was supposed to happen in the first place. Otherwise, an owner might wind up with 2 units and be able to sell one of them and pocket an illicit windfall (now who would do that? :)
In reality, TiVo may choose to not force the physical return due to logistical reasons. But even if they allow the seller to scam them out of a physical unit, they shouldn't additionally allow him to scam them out of a LS also. Fixing that requires only the flick of a mouse at headquarters.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
But even if they allow the seller to scam them out of a physical unit, they shouldn't additionally allow him to scam them out of a LS also. Fixing that requires only the flick of a mouse at headquarters.
The scammer didn't scam TiVo out of a physical unit; he scammed the retailer (or manufacturer) out of a physical unit. If TiVo was the retalier I'll have to rethink my position.
The scammer didn't scam TiVo for an LS; he paid for 1 LS and there is 1 active LS.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
The scammer didn't scam TiVo out of a physical unit; he scammed the retailer (or manufacturer) out of a physical unit.
When I say TiVo here, I mean "TiVo and its authorized resellers". The debate isn't about the phyical box, though. I was just responding to your question.
quote:
The scammer didn't scam TiVo for an LS; he paid for 1 LS and there is 1 active LS.
True, but he scammed ownership of that LS. He sold the box and the LS was supposed to go along with it. He scammed TiVo into stripping the LS from the box and returning it to him.
Look at it this way: If the CSR at the time asked the seller "where is the box now?" and the seller replied "I sold it", would the CSR still have transferred the LS? I'd expect them to say "sorry, we only transfer the service if you returned the unit. Since you sold it, the LS stays with the box."
So if that's how it would have gone if the true facts were known at the time, the honorable thing is for all parties to try to reach that same resolution in hindsight.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
He scammed the retailer (or manufacturer) out of a physical unit. If TiVo was the retalier I'll have to rethink my position.
I don't think we can even be certain of that. He may have paid what the retailer or manufacturer thought was a fair price for a unit with a blown modem. There's just too many details missing and we're filling them with assumptions. This thread is like a Rorschach test ;)
Posted by: FUBAR
Well, i work at the service department in best buy. Within the MFG warrenty on a series 2 tivo(with our 'service plan') you get a new tivo box. Best buy(or tivo) has not informed the techs that we must contact tivo when a unit is returned/exchanged outside of the thrity day 'grace period' We just ship the unit back to tivo(this shipping takes about a month to finally make it back to tivo) The customer goes home with a new tivo that day, do you expect TiVo to make them wait a month to get that unit back before they can use their new Tivo? And who says that a tech at best buy can't buy that defective series two from best buy and repair it himself. Best buy owns the defective tivo and can do what they want with it including sell it. As far as i can see the LS policy needs a little tweaking. Cause we all know the retailers arn't going to do anything about it.
Posted by: richNYC
exactly, so it is the buyer's responsibility to confirm that the purchased unit has LS and that the seller has initiated the change of ownership of the LS to the buyer.
in this case, the seller misrepresented what he was selling, so the buyer's fight is with the seller (and the parties that engaged in the sale: eBay and credit card), not TiVo.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by FUBAR
Well, i work at the service department in best buy.
...
Best buy owns the defective tivo and can do what they want with it including sell it. ...
Thanks! I ASSumed that was the case but it's good to hear it from someone who knows.
Posted by: richNYC
and if they sell it, it doesn't come with LS. agreed?
and if they sell it and say it does come with LS, then they are being fraudulent. agreed?
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
exactly, so it is the buyer's responsibility to confirm that the purchased unit has LS and that the seller has initiated the change of ownership of the LS to the buyer.
in this case, the seller misrepresented what he was selling, so the buyer's fight is with the seller (and the parties that engaged in the sale: eBay and credit card), not TiVo.
While I generally agree, it cannot be denied that TiVo shares part of the responsability for this mess. Because of their sloppy business practices the scam was possible. At a minimum they should offer the OP the opportunity to purchase a lifetime at a discounted price.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
While I generally agree, it cannot be denied that TiVo shares part of the responsability for this mess. Because of their sloppy business practices the scam was possible. At a minimum they should offer the OP the opportunity to purchase a lifetime at a discounted price.
The only thing I see as sloppy on TiVo's part was that the buyer's TiVo had LS on it for some period of time. However, had TiVo been less sloppy, the LS would have been turned off after the 1st daily call and the buyer would be in the same spot he is today.
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
The only thing I see as sloppy on TiVo's part was that the buyer's TiVo had LS on it for some period of time. However, had TiVo been less sloppy, the LS would have been turned off after the 1st daily call and the buyer would be in the same spot he is today.
No, actually if TiVo had been less sloppy, they would have canceled the lifetime transfer as soon as it was confirmed that the old unit is still active.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
No, actually if TiVo had been less sloppy, they would have canceled the lifetime transfer as soon as it was confirmed that the old unit is still active.
Is a repaired TiVo never allowed to have service? Is this another unstated policy?
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
No, actually if TiVo had been less sloppy, they would have canceled the lifetime transfer as soon as it was confirmed that the old unit is still active.
No. As far as TiVo knows, it was legitimately transferred.
If a damaged unit is returned, has its LS is transferred to a new unit and the the damaged unit is repaired and resold, then the repaired unit has no claim to its original LS
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
No. As far as TiVo knows, it was legitimately transferred.
And that's the other facet of "sloppy practices". They never confirmed whether the unit had been returned or not.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
And that's the other facet of "sloppy practices". They never confirmed whether the unit had been returned or not.
Read FUBAR's post
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
Read FUBAR's post
And that's the third facet of "sloppy practices" - not requiring their designated service centers to report back a returned unit.
Posted by: richNYC
ok. so you are advocating making the legitimate transfer of LS a much tougher and more lengthy process. i guess that's a valid point of view. but it's not mine.
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
ok. so you are advocating making the legitimate transfer of LS a much tougher and more lengthy process. i guess that's a valid point of view. but it's not mine.
Exactly. Make it more thorough. Be consistent with their own policies. It's not that hard!
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
and if they sell it, it doesn't come with LS. agreed?
and if they sell it and say it does come with LS, then they are being fraudulent. agreed?
Yes. The authorized retail shop appears authorized to re-market the unit in accordance with TiVo's policies, which may allow them to repair it and resell it.
However, that is not this situation. The unit in question was not returned to an authorized retail shop. The seller retained ownership. An individual seller, by TiVo's own rules, is not allowed to have LS transferred except for reasons that did not occur. TiVo bent its own rule. It should unbend it.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
Is a repaired TiVo never allowed to have service?
Sure, but TiVo normally first makes sure that the unit was taken out of circulation, refurbished, and given to an authorized reseller. By TiVo's own policies, an individual owner has no grounds for having the LS transferred.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
Sure, but TiVo normally first makes sure that the unit was taken out of circulation, refurbished, and given to an authorized reseller. By TiVo's own policies, an individual owner has no grounds for having the LS transferred.
It's not what they "normally" do. See FUBAR's post. Is it what they should do? That's what Cletus and I were just discussing above.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
No. As far as TiVo knows, it was legitimately transferred.
Not anymore! Now the facts are revealed that it was not legitimately transferred. So they should undo what they did, even though they thought it was correct at the time.
quote:
If a damaged unit is returned, has its LS is transferred to a new unit and the the damaged unit is repaired and resold, then the repaired unit has no claim to its original LS
Correct. Assuming "repaired and resold" by an authorized seller. In this case, the seller was not authorized to transfer the LS before reselling it. TiVo just "allowed" him to.
Posted by: MichaelK
first let me state that theres NO WAY I want tivo to make it harder to trnasfer lifetime on a 'defective unit'. If your ticked off already that your tivo dies 3 hours before the super bowl, would yourather shuffle down to the CC and get a swap that takes 15 minutes, or wait around on super bowl sunday for the tech to get free from all the big screen tv repairs he's doing to call in to tivo the box swap. You might not get a new box till monday after the game.
Next, its been half mentioned but has seemd to been glossed over but what about this scenario:
Buyer bought a tivo, activated lifetime. Modem died soon after(so unit still says lifetime since no call in). He returns it to whoever with the warrnety and they give him (or Her) a new one. Tivo gratiously makes the swap like i would want them to do.
No the tech at the cc tells his boss its garbadge since the modem is dead- so he's going to throw it in the dumpster. Tech has friedn rummage in the trash and get tivo. They sell it on ebay. OP gets this broken box and fixes it with external modem.
For those of you who say cancel the original owners LS and give it to OP- how do you justify that? A third party is completly at fualt in the whole transaction. There's no way tivo should take away the first guys LS.
Also for those of you who say they fouled up on the transfer of ownership attempt- as others have said do you want me to be able to email tivo and tell them i now own your box? Of couse they should contact you to confirm reality.
I think tivo probably should have told OP that the original owner needs to call in to swap ownership
And also i do kinda see them having some partial blame for being so slow with their accounting (but even that isnt clear to me from the little bit of facts we have- I think i saw in the underground something about certian situations it wont upgrade software or change account status at the same time, so maybe the poor OP got 3.2 downloaded at the first call since the box hadnt called in so long and also downloaded 2 weeks of data. SO the 'grace period' might have been the 2 weeks of data getting used up- anyway.)
But i dont think under the above scenario the minor mess ups are so bad they owe the poor OP a free $250 lifetime. However i bet Tivo Pony works something out for the poor guy- since they seem to have always done something in the past.
Posted by: richNYC
It was legitimately transferred.
The only thing that is not legitimate is that the damaged unit was re-sold as having its original LS. If the seller had sold the unit without the LS then all would be fine and dandy. Right?
How the seller came to retain or regain possession of the damaged box is not relevant.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
ok. so you are advocating making the legitimate transfer of LS a much tougher and more lengthy process. i guess that's a valid point of view. but it's not mine.
Clearly TiVo could make the process more foolproof. But that costs money. So they decided that the current practice is good enough. That's fine with me, I don't advocate them making things tougher if they don't want to.
However, there are consequences to cutting corners. One is that someone might take advantage of the loopholes in your policy. A company has to decide that that's the cost of doing business, and that they will make good to anyone who lost out because they implemented a less-rigorous return verification policy. In the cost-benefit analysis, they likely come out ahead by just trusting people. But in this case, TiVo's policy of trusting people hurt a third-party. So it's up to TiVo to make it right with the buyer by giving him his rightful LS, and they can recover the LS from the seller if they choose.
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
ok. so you are advocating making the legitimate transfer of LS a much tougher and more lengthy process. i guess that's a valid point of view. but it's not mine.
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
Exactly. Make it more thorough. Be consistent with their own policies. It's not that hard!
So you're saying TiVo should make it harder on its customers to enjoy the service they paid for in order to protect someone like the OP who has never given TiVo a nickel?
We need to get real here. TiVo stays in business by keeping its paying customers happy, not people who buy used TiVos on ebay. If TiVo's going to make a mistake with their procedures, I'd rather they err in my favor than that of non-customer.
It's not like they broke the law. :sheesh:
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
The only thing that is not legitimate is that the damaged unit was re-sold as having its original LS. If the seller had sold the unit without the LS then all would be fine and dandy. Right?
No, not at all. I would love to be able to call TiVo and tell them that my unit is damaged and have them send me another one for free, then turn around and sell my current unit on eBay. I get a free replacement, and I get to sell my original and recover what I paid for it!
But it doesn't work that way. When I call TiVo and ask them to replace my damaged unit, they tell me to send it in. There's no way TiVo is going to allow me to possess two units when I've only paid for one.
In this case, it wasn't TiVo directly, but an authorized reseller that allowed the owner to retain possession of both units. But TiVo still sets the policies for their authorized resellers. Rigorous or sloppy, it's TiVo's policy to enforce.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
In this case, it wasn't TiVo directly, but an authorized reseller that allowed the owner to retain possession of both units. But TiVo still sets the policies for their authorized resellers. Rigorous or sloppy, it's TiVo's policy to enforce.
TiVo does not set policies for return of the BOXES. They set policy for the SERVICE. You make it sound like TiVo is in control of Circuit City's (or any retailer's) return department. That is silly.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
If TiVo's going to make a mistake with their procedures, I'd rather they err in my favor than that of non-customer.
Yes, that's exactly the point. They erred. I, too, prefer that they make such an error rather than make things harder on people. The issue is that after someone points out your error, you have a responsibility to fix it, even if it was committed with good intentions.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
Sure, but TiVo normally first makes sure that the unit was taken out of circulation, refurbished, and given to an authorized reseller.
So far, I've only seen evidence that TiVo does NOT normally do this.
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
TiVo does not set policies for return of the BOXES. They set policy for the SERVICE. You make it sound like TiVo is in control of Circuit City's (or any retailer's) return department. That is silly.
Not what I'm saying. They don't control the boxes, but they can decide what level of confirmation they require from retailers to confirm that a box was damaged and replaced, and that the LS should be transferred. If they choose a lax approach to the confirmation, then they should be prepared to compensate anyone who gets screwed because of it.
Posted by: rseligman
Let's say someone pays for a lifetime newspaper subscription, but the subscription is tied to the house--the address, not the person. The only way the subscription can be transferred to a new address is if the house is irreparably damaged.
So he decides to move, and he calls the newspaper and lies to them. He tells them that the house has burned down. So they agree to transfer the subscription. They decide not to verify the claim because that's too time-consuming for them, so they take a risk by trusting him.
Now you move into the house, after being told by the previous owner that the house comes with a lifetime subscription. You call the newspaper office, and they say that yes, the house had a lifetime subscription, but they were told it burned down. You prove to them that the house has not burned down, that you are the new owner, and you remind them of their policy that the subscription cannot be transferred unless the house was destroyed.
I believe that if you expect the newspaper to honor the subscription on the original house, then you also should think TiVo should give the LS back to the buyer. But this might just be a fundamental disagreement about how companies ought to treat their customers
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
If they choose a lax approach to the confirmation, then they should be prepared to compensate anyone who gets screwed because of it.
How would you propose that they tighten their approach? - keeping in mind that a TiVo returned under an extended warrantee is the property of the store and that TiVo is a little company with no leverage over a large retailer like Circuit City.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
irreparably damaged.
There's the problem with the analogy - "irreparably" - should the TiVo policy require that? Who defines it? The OP's TiVo was damaged but he got it working with an external modem. So... no lifetime xfers for busted modems?
Posted by: rseligman
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
How would you propose that they tighten their approach?
I don't propose they tighten their approach at all. It is what it is for practical and business reasons, including the ones you stated.
I'm just saying that when a rare situation pops up in which someone was screwed because of some wiggle room in the company's policy, then the company should "make it right" as best they can.
Posted by: randyf
So let's interject one more (meaningless) thought...
Maybe RePlay had the right idea in the first place ....
(with the exception of the current line of units) There is nothing that could be done to a bought / sold / stolen / traded / gifted / repaired / returned / warrantied / etc unit that would cause this kind of problem...
If you buy an old Replay or Showstopper off of eBay you can be CERTAIN that it WILL have lifetime service...
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
I don't propose they tighten their approach at all. It is what it is for practical and business reasons, including the ones you stated.
I'm just saying that when a rare situation pops up in which someone was screwed because of some wiggle room in the company's policy, then the company should "make it right" as best they can.
I think we're getting down to more of "what it would be nice to do" rather than "what TiVo must do". I'm comfortable with "opinions vary" on that one.
I still believe the seller scammed him, not TiVo. I think the "case" some people were trying to make against TiVo is similar to the Betamax argument - i.e. that Sony made equipment that allowed easy convenient copyright violation - therefore Sony was liable. The Supreme court said they were suing the wrong entity. They should have sued the people who actually used the VCRs. Supplying the means was not enough. I don't think there's any kind of "case against TiVo" here but some sort of gesture might be nice anyway. TiVo has to think any such gesture through though or they could encourage this "rare situation" to become unrare.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
So let's interject one more (meaningless) thought...
Maybe RePlay had the right idea in the first place ....
(with the exception of the current line of units)
For this case yes. On the other hand I knew some people who questioned what would keep the Replay Service going after everyone had bought a box. (With TiVo you can count on the monthly folks to keep them around.)
There's a lot of other pros and cons about the two pricing models. Combining a service with a box is interesting - for example the cell-phone model is to give away the hardware and charge forever for the service.
quote:
Originally posted by randyf
If you buy an old Replay or Showstopper off of eBay you can be CERTAIN that it WILL have lifetime service...
Although if you buy it from this seller, it's likely to arrive busted (like this TiVo did) or not arrive at all. I have a feeling that if he can't run scam A, he'll run scam B.
Posted by: smak
To continue disecting polcamilla's return, she :D said she had a broken unit. She called tivo/philips to return the unit, and get a new one that would have the transferred LS on it. No problem, Tivo/Philips sends out new unit, notes in her account to expect another unit to be returned to them, just like a ton of places get returns.
But....Than she asked a good question, can i just return it to good guys, under their warranty, and have them replace it on the spot for me.
Tivo said ok, but had still noted in their system that she was going to get LS transferred, she went to Good Guys picked up her new box, called Tivo and they transferred LS to her new box.
But that's like telling mom that Dad says it was ok to go to Johnnie's house, and telling dad that mom said it was ok.
I just don't think that if i call Tivo right now, and say i just returned my old box to Good Guys and they replaced it, can you please transfer my LS, they should do it.
I don't know what they do when you get an exchange at a retail store, but it just seems to easy to defraud by just allowing anybody to call up to do it. The retailer should be the one to call, or fax, or fill out a webpage with all the details...
-smak-
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
So you're saying TiVo should make it harder on its customers to enjoy the service they paid for in order to protect someone like the OP who has never given TiVo a nickel?
We need to get real here. TiVo stays in business by keeping its paying customers happy, not people who buy used TiVos on ebay. If TiVo's going to make a mistake with their procedures, I'd rather they err in my favor than that of non-customer.
It's not like they broke the law. :sheesh:
But it is hurting them, and you, and me as a paying customer. If scams like this become common, nobody will pay extra for a used unit with lifetime on eBay. I have had my series1 SA with lifetime since july 2000; it still goes strong, but sometime in the future I could conceive replacing it with a new unit. If I can't sell my old one for what it's worth, I will not upgrade, therefore not pay for another subscription. TiVo loses.
TiVo needs to enforce their policies. Or drop them altogether. We need to know where we stand.
Posted by: randyf
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
Although if you buy it from this seller, it's likely to arrive busted (like this TiVo did) or not arrive at all. I have a feeling that if he can't run scam A, he'll run scam B.
Oh, no doubt... Scammers are scammers and they WILL find a way..
but there would not be a question as to whether Sonic Blue played any part in the scam. at least you know exactly what you are dealing with ..
although that would be little consolation.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
But it is hurting them, and you, and me as a paying customer. If scams like this become common, nobody will pay extra for a used unit with lifetime on eBay. I have had my series1 SA with lifetime since july 2000; it still goes strong, but sometime in the future I could conceive replacing it with a new unit. If I can't sell my old one for what it's worth, I will not upgrade, therefore not pay for another subscription. TiVo loses.
Well that will be one less used TiVo on the market so maybe TiVo can sell a new one to your potential customer. Personally, I never planned to resell my lifetime service. It's strangely wonderful to learn that I could but like you I've already saved a bunch of money over monthly. I think though that you'll find that there's always people ready to take a chance on ebay. If not ebay will have to improve its fraud insurance protection because people trusting each other is their only business. In the worst case, sell it to a friend or a relative.
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by dgh
Well that will be one less used TiVo on the market so maybe TiVo can sell a new one to your potential customer. Personally, I never planned to resell my lifetime service. It's strangely wonderful to learn that I could but like you I've already saved a bunch of money over monthly. I think though that you'll find that there's always people ready to take a chance on ebay. If not ebay will have to improve its fraud insurance protection because people trusting each other is their only business. In the worst case, sell it to a friend or a relative.
So, TiVo'll lose credibility, but they will be able to sell one more unit... why is it that it doesn't reassure me? <g>
I'm going to bed. G'night!
Posted by: phone1
quote:
Originally posted by rseligman
Yes, that's exactly the point. They erred. I, too, prefer that they make such an error rather than make things harder on people. The issue is that after someone points out your error, you have a responsibility to fix it, even if it was committed with good intentions.
Responsible to whom? The OP was never their customer. If anything they have a responsibility to themselves to make certain people aren't scamming TiVo by switching subs under false pretenses. But they have no responsibility to make someone "whole" who was never their customer to begin with. He was a victim of fraud by a third party, not TiVo.
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by phone1
Responsible to whom? The OP was never their customer. If anything they have a responsibility to themselves to make certain people aren't scamming TiVo by switching subs under false pretenses.
Which is exactly what happened.
quote:
But they have no responsibility to make someone "whole" who was never their customer to begin with. He was a victim of fraud by a third party, not TiVo.
And now, he's not likely to ever become a paying customer. Are you really advocating "let's only think of our current customers, to h**l with everyone else"? Because this is what all the naysayers seem to imply.
Posted by: Mark Lopez
When someone calls in and claims their unit has been replaced and to transfer the LS, why can't TiVo just put their new one on 'Internal testing' or whatever it's called when there is a problem and they need to temporarily give someone service. Next they should immediately turn off LS on the old box. Then they can wait 30-60 days to see if the old one is still calling in or if anyone calls to complain that their newly purchased LS box lost service. If not, they can then make the 'internal testing' one LS, completing the transfer. Most of this could be automated. This might not be a perfect solution, but might spot scams like this where the 'broken' unit is still in service.
Posted by: FUBAR
quote:
Originally posted by richNYC
and if they sell it, it doesn't come with LS. agreed?
and if they sell it and say it does come with LS, then they are being fraudulent. agreed?
Well, every tivo we sell the customer is instructed to call tivo to subscribe. we only sell the boxes, not the service. so that case shouldn't happen.
Posted by: dgh
quote:
Originally posted by FUBAR
Well, every tivo we sell the customer is instructed to call tivo to subscribe. we only sell the boxes, not the service. so that case shouldn't happen.
Not with you as the seller, but if someone re(re)sells and doesn't pass that information along... (Not that that's your fault of course.)
Posted by: FUBAR
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelK
No the tech at the cc tells his boss its garbadge since the modem is dead- so he's going to throw it in the dumpster. Tech has friedn rummage in the trash and get tivo. They sell it on ebay. OP gets this broken box and fixes it with external modem.
Well, first off, the retailer can return the unit to the MFG(tivo) for a refund of what the unit cost the company (within the MFG warrenty). After that they'd have no reason to take it back unless the customer had some type of extended warrenty, in wich case the unit could be written off to a insurance company.
For no reason would it be thrown in the trash. Also there is no LOGICAL reason why a retailer would re-sell the unit, it's defective and they can return it to TiVo or the insurance company for full credit.
Posted by: TheDoctor
quote:
Well, first off, the retailer can return the unit to the MFG(tivo) for a refund of what the unit cost the company
But it is sometimes returned to the shelf, at least at my local BB. There was an obvious open box tivo, closed with the inspected tape, and having been tagged with a orange dataed return sticker sitting on the shelf. The sales clerk insisted that it was not a returned item and that instead the tape had been damaged on the way from the warehouse and that was why it had been 'inspected'. He tore off the return sticker when I pointed it out to him. (They seem to have a lot of items damaged in shipping this way.) Over the next two months the unit went out twice more and was returned each time to the self, even after someone had written 'BAD HARDDISK' in 3 inch letters all over the box. The clerks then insisted that the unit had been serviced, it was sold and returned again at least once. (I was interested in how low the price would fall since I was planning on pulling the drive anyway.) After another months the unit finally dissapeared, don't know if it went to the factory or ebay.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by FUBAR
Well, every tivo we sell the customer is instructed to call tivo to subscribe. we only sell the boxes, not the service. so that case shouldn't happen.
when i said "they" i meant an individual selling a unit on ebay, not you guys
Posted by: stangm
Been away from the forum for awhile. I saw this in the original post
quote:
Originally posted by huntersa
Just wanted to warn people out there to be wary of buying a used Tivo with Lifetime Service from someone they don't know.
I did this, buying a unit on eBay. It arrived with a dead modem, but I never got anywhere with the seller and managed to get it working with my US Robotics modem.
How do you replace a dead modem with a US Robotics one? My modem has been flakey and I thought my only option was going to be Turbonet.
Posted by: Cletus
quote:
Originally posted by stangm
Been away from the forum for awhile. I saw this in the original post
How do you replace a dead modem with a US Robotics one? My modem has been flakey and I thought my only option was going to be Turbonet.
Thread running in the Underground forum. See there.
Posted by: avaloncourt
quote:
Originally posted by BlankMan
I thought eBay's SafeHabor stuff was suppose to help with things like this?
Yeah, right. Not too long ago ebay discontinued safeharbor's email address. They only way you can contact them now is through a form on the website.
Posted by: dslunceford
quote:
Originally posted by Cletus
Thread running in the Underground forum. See there.
Can you post thread title or link?
Posted by: GBL
External modem SUCCESS!!!
Posted by: MichaelK
quote:
Originally posted by FUBAR
Well, first off, the retailer can return the unit to the MFG(tivo) for a refund of what the unit cost the company (within the MFG warrenty). After that they'd have no reason to take it back unless the customer had some type of extended warrenty, in wich case the unit could be written off to a insurance company.
For no reason would it be thrown in the trash. Also there is no LOGICAL reason why a retailer would re-sell the unit, it's defective and they can return it to TiVo or the insurance company for full credit.
ya know i didnt think that through all that well. I suppose they should return it to phillips or whoever for the wholesale cost back if its within the regular warrenty.
But theres still plenty of other scenarios that i can think of were someone steals it. Or it could wind up back on the shelves (theres a ton of those posts if you look) First people steal crap- it happens. And its probably alot easier if its a return, but stuff can get stolen at any point along the chain.
about your 'written off to an insurance company"- what the hec does that mean? If you total a car does the insurance company demand you send it back before they mail your check? Basically they trust some third party to say its dead. Back in High School my wife had a little crappy escort. Got "totaled" and insurance paid my wife. The owner of the place that towed the car in, fixed it and gave it to his daughter. I would imagine that it got a 'salvage title'. If the daughter sold it to someone would Ford be obligated to continue the warrenty?
I know its comparing apples to oranges, but it's a real world example of how "broken beyond repair" items suddenly wind up back in the market place.
So again i ask, should tivo just revoke the lifetime of whoever currently owns it? I think theres at least a chance that that person is an innocent victem also.
So tivo basically has no choice but to be swell - Like them seem to have done every time int he past- and eat the missing revenue for good will and give the OP a freebie. But i dont thing they are obligated.
Posted by: richNYC
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelK
I think theres at least a chance that that person is an innocent victem also.
If you're referring to the seller, I don't see any way that the seller is innocent in this case.
Posted by: Nihilator
Items returned to major retailers are "packaged" on pallets and resold to liquidators, who in turn resell to anyone willing to take their chances on returned, untested items. Any goofball with a storage locker can buy a pallet and sell the contents on eBay, and likely generate a decent profit. Just because the unit is returned to BB or CC doesn't mean that it winds up in the trash heap.
My favorite site is liquidation.com. Here's a sample auction in the consumer electronics section. $20,000 worth of returned crap which will likey sell for under $2000.
I personally bought two TiVo's from RealCrazyMo on eBay, which is the "distressed merchandise" arm of ReturnBuy. They work just fine, and I have no complaints, but I could have had much worse luck.
This isn't really germane to the OP's problem, but I thought I would shed a little light on the returned merchandise issue.
--Chris
Posted by: lew
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelK
about your 'written off to an insurance company"- what the hec does that mean? If you total a car does the insurance company demand you send it back before they mail your check?
Actually yes, you have to sign your title over to the insurance company and you won't get the check until they get the title. The insurance company than (usually) has the car auctioned off for parts.
Posted by: FUBAR
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelK
about your 'written off to an insurance company"- what the hec does that mean?
'Written off' as in, we just gave the customer a brand new unit out of our current stock, so in some way, we have to be compensated for taking back the old unit, so the insurance behind our extended warrenty makes sure all the returned units ourside of MFG warrenty are defective, and then gives best buy a pre determined price for that defective unit.
That means that we send the units outiside of MFG's warrenty out to a processing center where they are verified defective by the insurance company that is behind the 'extended warrenty' Yes, after this happens, the units are sold off, per pound, as junk, but the whole process takes a month or two. It is POSSIBLE that the unit was returned to the store, sent to a processing center(or whatever you want to call it) sold as junk, and the the buyer sold the unit on ebay and claimed it had a LS. but it is not likely.
Sorry if i didn't explain everything in detail, but there is a twenty page manual on how to exchange/process a cell phone, and that's just at the store level. There's even more to it when it leaves the store.
Posted by: Polcamilla
This thread has swelled to ten pages with a lot of speculation about what TiVo *should* do and what they *could* do, but, after TiVopony poked his head in (hope you had a good vacation!), we never heard anything more.
Any chance we'll ever find out the final outcome of the story? I'm incredibly curious as to what TiVo *did* do. I think knowing their final position on this scam will give us some needed insight into how TiVo resolves sticky conflicts and what we, as concerned customers, can do to protect ourselves and potential buyers from such scams.
Posted by: richNYC
protecting yourself is easy. verify the status of the box with TiVo immediately, if not prior to finalizing your purchase.
Posted by: TiVoPony
quote:
Originally posted by Polcamilla
...after TiVopony poked his head in (hope you had a good vacation!), we never heard anything more.
I haven't had a vacation in quite a while.
And, I haven't been able to follow up on this yet. I'm sorry about that, but I wasn't able to connect with the right people late last week, and I'm not in the office again until later this week.
I haven't forgotten.
Pony
Posted by: papabrody
Hey Pony,
Did you shave or something?:)
vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2009,
Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
vB Easy Archive Final ©2000 - 2009
- Created by Stefan "Xenon" Kaeser
Modified by Adam J. de Jaray