Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Privacy The Almighty Buck The Media

Wired Strongarms Subscribers? 492

yali writes "Wired has apparently been sinking to some rather low tactics with ex-subscribers. Namely, siccing a collections agency on them. If you let your subscription run out, you might get one of these. Nerds beware." From the article: "First came the usual letters warning McMillan, 36, that his subscription was up and that he wouldn't get any more copies of Wired unless he ponied up some cash. Then Wired's correspondence took a different turn. In May, McMillan received a letter from North Shore Agency, a leading debt-collection firm. The letter, headed 'Please Respond,' said he owed $12 for his Wired subscription."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Wired Strongarms Subscribers?

Comments Filter:
  • That's it (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:42PM (#13018808)
    I just cancelled my subscription.
    • by rindeee ( 530084 )
      Me too (not that I read it). I can picture the meeting in which some junior exec concocted this idea. It probably began with "Okay, check this out guys."
      • by IOOOOOI ( 588306 )
        "Listen to this one then; you open a company called the Arse Tickler's Faggots Fan Club. You take an advert in the back page of some gay mag, advertising the latest in arse-intruding dildos, sell it a bit with, er . . . I dunno, "does what no other dildo can do until now", latest and greatest in sexual technology. Guaranteed results or money back, all that bollocks. These dills cost twenty-five each; a snip for all the pleasure they are going to give the recipients. They send a cheque to the company name, n
        • Re:That's it (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Walter Wart ( 181556 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:16PM (#13018997) Homepage
          Ah, but you fail to grasp the true beauty of capitalism. I'd put out ads everywhere ATFFC products were sold saying:

          "Bought a Bobbie's Bits product? Embarassed to cash the refund check? I'll pay you fifty cents on the dollar in cash for your refund cheque."

          Then I'd take them into my bank by the hundred weight without a shred of self consciousness. Bring in one, you're a pervert. Bring in a thousand, you're a businessman.
        • Troll? The parent is a reference to Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels [imdb.com]. Puerile, perhaps, but actually on-topic nonetheless.
    • Re:That's it (Score:3, Informative)

      by kyle74 ( 896634 )
      Also beware of Best Buy's Sports Illustrated free 6 issue offer, once it runs out they hit you for $29.99 because you didn't "opt out."
  • 'wired' alright. Must be some pretty good sh*t too, by the looks :p
  • It's just a letter. Debt collection agencies try to sound tough, but they don't really have any teeth, do they? Don't they have to stop contacting you if you ask, just like telemarketers?
    • Re:Beware? (Score:5, Informative)

      by tomlouie ( 264519 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:59PM (#13018918)
      If the letter is regarding legit debt, like an overdue credit card bill, then they can continue to send you letters and/or call you, within certain limits.

      If you reply in writing that you don't believe that the debt is legit, as in they say you owe them for a mag subscription, but you never signed up for such, they have to stop pending further investigation. Usually, it ends here.

      Know your rights, and don't be afraid to push back. Even if a collection agency is after you for legit debt, there are limits to what they are allowed to do.

      This Wired thing, on the other hand, is bogus. It's just a "renew, please!" letter written to said vaguely legally threatening.

      Tom
      • Know your rights, and don't be afraid to push back. Even if a collection agency is after you for legit debt, there are limits to what they are allowed to do.

        His rights have already been violated because the debt is bogus.

        How, exactly, do you think he's going to push back? He can complain here [gsa.gov] but the credit agency can lose a maximum of $500,000 for this fraud. Is he going to hire a lawyer over this? What lawyer is going to want work that will pay them a maximum of $1,000 for an individual's case? I'd

      • In 2001, I had lost my job and finding a new one in NYC in October was, let's say "difficult."

        I had a credit card with $4,000 on it, from Citibank. It went default; rent was more important then this debt. I told them I intended to pay the debt but I would have to find work first.

        They sent it to a collection agency and let me tell you, this guy was a fucking dipshit. He'd call four times a day, and every time I'd ask "who is this" (because they're only allowed to call once a day, they don't like to id
    • AFIAK it is also ILLEGAL for them to auto renew your subscription without your consent. If they do auto renew and then sick a collections agent on you, you have a case for $1000 in small claims court if they don't remove any and all bad marks pertaining to the collection.
    • debt collection. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Erris ( 531066 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:13PM (#13018984) Homepage Journal
      First, some pleasant words from your Government [gsa.gov]. They sound so soothing, don't they? Your tax dollars at work protecting you from harassment. yah, right. What kind of employer would approve of you being called for a bill you supposedly did not pay? Oh, but if you send them a written letter saying you don't owe any money they have to knock it off until they send you a copy of a bill saying you do.

      Now check out what North Shore Agency promisses their customers [northshoreagency.com],

      • Continuous Customer Contact, by phone, e-commerce, even their very own US Post office.
      • A whole team of specialists with 65,000 square feet of office space!
      • "Art of the Collection Letter," for maximum intimidation.
      • Total Data Processing - I'm afraid to ask, but they got computers, perhaps their very own line to credit agencies.

      The limits of liability are galling:

      What can you do if you believe a debt collector violated the law? You have the right to sue a collector in a state or federal court within one year from the date from the date the law was violated. If you win, you may recover money for the damages you suffered plus an additional amount up to $1000. Court costs and attorneys fees also can be recovered. A group of people also may sue a debt collector and recover money for damages up to $500,000, or one percent of the collectors net worth, whichever is less.

      So how many thousands of dollars can be made by abusing thousands of people? Yet the limit is $500,000. Disgusting.

      I'm sure I've only scraped the tip of the iceburg here. I've never been served one of these letters and am unaware of anything on my own credit record. Be aware however that bad credit will cost you dearly when you try to buy a car, house or anything else you can't buy outright. Is that teeth enough for you?

      If this story is true, it's deplorable. Wired is not, I hope, so stupid as to burn the world's good will $12 at a time.

    • Debt collection agencies try to sound tough, but they don't really have any teeth, do they?

      One of the first things a debt collection agency does is submit your name to CheckSystems. Try opening an account at any bank with an outstanding debt.
  • dear scumbags (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Alien Being ( 18488 )
    cc: attorney general
    cc: better business bureau

    I'm not paying your fraudulent bill. Stop harassing me.
    • cc: your local zoning office.

      cc: your (dis)approving employer. Dear Alien Being,

      Thank you for your kind and cosiderape and amusing letter. We needed a lift after the shock of losing a suit yesterday and having to pay the maximum fine of $1,000. Your letter more than makes up for our loss of office cash for our weekly Hawian Friday Pigout.

      Please find enclosed a duplicate copy of your bill and the contract stating your everlasting obesience to WIRED (TM). This proves your debt and we expect payme

  • Is this illegal? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by The Ancients ( 626689 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:46PM (#13018833) Homepage
    We already know it's plain stoopid - but isn't 'inertia' selling illegal in the US? If not - why not? (ok, I don't really expect a straight answer to that second question).
  • So when... (Score:4, Funny)

    by ericdano ( 113424 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:47PM (#13018836) Homepage
    So when is Slashdot going to do that with their subscriptions?
  • Read the article! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:47PM (#13018838)
    The people who got the letters agreed to a recurring subscription. They had to notify wired to get the subscription canceled.

    always read the fine print!
  • Stupidity. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Vermifax ( 3687 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:50PM (#13018851)
    It is your responsibility to read your subscription agreement.

    If you agree to a renewing subscription and do not pay it, you have only yourself to blame.

    If you ignore any request for payment from any company even if its fraudulent you again have only yourself to blame if you do not challenge it.
    • big fucking deal. did they actually recieve another issue of wired? no? then they can fuck off with the threatening letters. businesses in the usa seem to be under the impression they get to do anything in order to make money. maybe they should try enticing these ex-customers back with some kind of special offer and improving their content.
      • They weren't ex-customers. They had subscribed to a rewnewing subscription. They were current subscribers who had become delinquent in their payments.

        Try reading the article next time.
        • Here's a bulletproof plan for Wired: if someone hasn't paid for their subscription, don't send any issues! How fucking difficult is that? It's not like Wired is loaning people money or something. There is absolutely NO need for ANY magazine to use a collection agency EVER. Besides, a magazine subscription card is not a binding debt contract anyway. Wired should have their asses sued big for this scam.
    • Re:Stupidity. (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bstadil ( 7110 )
      If you ignore any request for payment from any company even if its fraudulent you again have only yourself to blame if you do not challenge it.

      Not at all You can not be held responsible through inaction, if no prior engagement.

      • Remember that next time you go to get a car/house loan and are rejected or offered unfavorable terms because of delinquencies on your credit report that could have been prevented by you challenging the charges.
    • The big picture (Score:4, Interesting)

      by robogun ( 466062 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:43PM (#13019114)
      Certainly you are right, however the Nazi at Wired who decided to do this must ahve graduated from the SCO School of Customer Service cum laude.

      If you look over the other posts on this board, even you must come to the conclusion that Wired is losing a lot of money and subscribers together with its good will. In fact their level of stupidity on this move is stunning.
    • Re:Stupidity. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Doctor_Jest ( 688315 ) * on Saturday July 09, 2005 @01:06AM (#13019359)
      That's why you write a big "CANCEL" on the renewal bill and you're done.

      They have to honor that.

      Problem solved.

    • Re:Stupidity. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by OldManAndTheC++ ( 723450 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @04:48AM (#13019745)
      Stupidity? No. Inattention, perhaps. I'm certain that many intelligent people fail to read the entire contract for minor items like a magazine subscription.

      I'd say if the subscriber is guilty of anything, it is having an excess of trust. There was a time (not too long ago) when in dealing with a large, well established company one could be reasonably secure in the knowledge that they would NOT take advantage of "fine print" clauses like this one, which are obviously designed to squeeze out a few dollars from people who didn't read the contract. Now it appears that taking advantage of the customer has become a common practice, so that we do have to read the several pages of fine print in every commercial transaction. That's a pretty sad state of affairs, wouldn't you agree?

      So no, we do not have "only ourselves to blame". The short sighted greed of unethical people is also part of the problem.

    • Not that simple (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Mr. Underbridge ( 666784 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @08:53AM (#13020279)
      It is your responsibility to read your subscription agreement.

      PC Gamer does this too, and it happened to me. I subscribed specifically for a few years, with no running renewal agreement. I let it expire, I got a collections letter like this guy. So it's not a "didn't read the agreement" issue. The letter specifically referred to the situation as a "debt," which is untrue. If I ever get up off my ass, I've been planning on referring this to the AG's office, but since they're based in CA, I used to live in CA, and now I live in VA, I'm not sure which one.


      If you ignore any request for payment from any company even if its fraudulent you again have only yourself to blame if you do not challenge it.

      To an extent, but since claiming that someone owes you money when you know they don't is fraud, you can certainly blame them too. A lot of people might think it's easier to pay $12 than risk their credit.

      I called PC Gamer, asked them what the hell this was about and why they're claiming I owe them money when I don't, and they just cancelled my subscription.

  • RTFA ok? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Lawrence_Bird ( 67278 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:51PM (#13018854) Homepage
    He was on automatic renewal and didn't know it. Moral: read the fine print before sending the subscription card in.

    Poster - could you make Wired sound any more evil? Or did you
    not read their explanation either.
    • Re:RTFA ok? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:19PM (#13019004)
      Slipping in an autorenewal is sleazy and I won't consider subscribing after reading the story. I'm already fighting to cancel several autodeductions now. It's a game companies have come up with to make it as hard as possible to cancel. A percentage will give up or not notice and keep paying. I've beenb steadily cutting back on subscription or membership services for this very reason. They may overall come out ahead with these tactics but they are loosing customers as well. You can blame the customer but it's like saying the Nigerian scammers aren't at fault their victums are to blame. They may have been guilible but it doesn't make the behavior less criminal. It may not be a crime but it is underhanded.
      • You can blame the customer but it's like saying the Nigerian scammers aren't at fault their victums are to blame.

        Um, no, it's completely not like that.

        With the Nigerian scams, the scammer is saying "if you give me your bank account number, you'll get $$$."

        With autorenewal subscriptions, the vendor is saying "if you want to cancel you have to tell us, otherwise we're going to bill you."

        The first is a lie; the second isn't.

        Just because it may be hidden doesn't mean it's not there. Deception is a differe
    • Re:RTFA ok? (Score:5, Informative)

      by mertzman ( 87638 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @03:09AM (#13019591)
      Hey, I read the fine print, and Wired signed me up for automatic renewal anyways, without ever consulting me or sending me any addendum to the subscriber agreement (there was nothing about it in the original materials I received when I first started subscribing, and nothing new thereafter).

      Needless to say, I was quite pissed off when I started receiving notices telling me my credit card was about to be automatically charged "for my convenience" to renew my subscription. I have a feeling this guy probably was a victim of the same tactics. I probably should report Wired to my state consumer protection authority... this seems like some pretty shady behavior.

      Notably, I never had any problems with Wired until they were acquired by Conde Nast... from there the quality of both customer service and the magazine itself went downhill fast.

      Being fed up with the rapidly declining quality of their publication and their strongarm tactics, rather than renew, I called their surprisingly hassle-free customer service line and canceled my subscription. I used to love Wired, but lately they just suck.
  • Looks like a scare tactic into making you pay for another subscription. The "debt" is what you owe if you wish your subscription to continue, not what you have past due. Doesn't say anything about reporting the debt to a collection agency. Also makes a statement about "not wanting you to miss another issue" which sounds like the mouth of a marketing person, and not a person trying to collect a debt.
  • by driftingwalrus ( 203255 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:51PM (#13018858) Homepage
    I've seen this tactic before. The 'collection agency' in question barely even exists, and certainly has no teeth. It's simply a very shady tactic, used by several magazines, to trick people into subscribing - sometimes they'll even send these notices to people who have never subscribed. Just garbage the letter and you'll be fine.
    • by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:23AM (#13019245) Homepage
      "I've seen this tactic before. The 'collection agency' in question barely even exists, and certainly has no teeth. It's simply a very shady tactic, used by several magazines, to trick people into subscribing - sometimes they'll even send these notices to people who have never subscribed. Just garbage the letter and you'll be fine."

      Ah yes....Slashdot: News for Nerds. People who Should NEVER Give Legal Advice.

      Don't throw out the letter, file it away in case this ever amounts to anything. While I too believe it probably has no teeth, would you take advice from a guy on the street named "Driftingwalrus" who told you to ignore something like this? No offense meant to parent, but I just think you should avoid taking legal advice from someone who is quite obviously not a lawyer.

    • by BrianH ( 13460 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @04:22AM (#13019706)
      NSA isn't a real collections agency. About four years ago I was a member of the Scientific American Book Club when I received a bill for three books I never received. I called them up and disputed the bill, but they claimed that it was valid and refused to drop it. I even offered to pay the bill if they'd reship the books (they were good physics texts), but couldn't get them to budge. Since I was already well past my required minimum buy, I just told them to cancel my account.

      Almost immediately I started receiving nasty collections letters from the precursor to the North Shore Agency. When I demanded that they stop contacting me, they REFUSED. It turns out that these guys aren't actually a collections agency...they're a billing clearinghouse used by several of the big publishing outfits. They ARE NOT legally a CRA, they CAN NOT place negative information on your credit report, and because they don't actually assume the debt, they can't even sue you for the bill.

      Four years later, these idiots still send me nasty letters threatening undefined impending dire consequences every three months or so, but absolutely nothing has happened. I have no negative hits on my credit report, I have never recived a collections call, and no legal action has been attempted by anybody. These guys can bark a lot, but they are completely toothless when it comes time to back up their threats. Considering that my alleged $121 bill is far larger than those being levied against Wired subscribers, I'd guess that they'd go after me long before they go after them.

      I quit caring about NSA collection letters a long time ago. My opinion nowadays is that if they want to waste the postage sending me a few letters a year, I'm perfectly content to throw them away with the rest of my junkmail.
      • Dude, it might be THE freakin' NSA [nsa.gov], that's why you can't find the North Shore Agency on the net. Hell, they probably posted the GP post just to trick people into thinking it was safe to fuck with them. It's all some sick game to destroy some hapless geek. I read about this sort of thing on that timecube website.

        Pay the money, unplug the phone, burn any magnetic media you have and put on a tinfoil hat when you sleep. Then you might just get away with it.
  • by EnronHaliburton2004 ( 815366 ) * on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:53PM (#13018868) Homepage Journal
    What's new here? The fact that Wired (or rather, an agent of Wired) does this? People have received letters like this from other magazines for decades. I wouldn't be suprised if Wired has been sending these out for the last 10 years.

    In all honesty, Wired probably doesn't manage their subscription service. They hire some 3rd party to do it for them.

    I remember when PC Gamer, Next Generation, Boot, etc used to send these out all the friggen time--- TO CHILDREN!

    I don't like it either. It's one reason I only have 2 magazine subscriptions. The other companies have pissed me off...
  • wired is scammish (Score:2, Interesting)

    by v1 ( 525388 )
    I tried a subscription, sent in my cheque. Months go by, cheque not cashed, no mags. I try to call them... has anybody found their phone number? So I email them. They say they never got the cheque. So I send another. Poof, instantly both cheques are cashed, ON THE SAME DAY. Pissed, I email them. Every email I send goes absolutely ignored by Wired, including an attempt to cancel my subscription. So I suffered through two years of Wired. Can't say as I found anything worthwhile in there the whole ti
  • Easy to prevent this (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DustyShadow ( 691635 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:55PM (#13018883) Homepage
    It's pretty easy to never have a problem from magazine companies...just sign up for magazines under a different name than your own...I did it all the time at college. If they don't know your real name, then they can't fraudulently bill you.
    • by almostmanda ( 774265 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:21PM (#13019013)
      This is a great idea. Another side benefit is, you get to see which magazines are selling your info to junk mail lists or signing you up for random catalog. And then you won't feel bad not paying your bill, because you'll know that Wired already made a killing selling your name and address to the highest bidders.
  • Ok, I can imagine someone being really busy. School, or a full time job, family with kids or just spending alot of time with the wife. But how can you not spend like 5 minutes reading a magazine?

    I wouldn't even ask, but if you read the article, after it was all said and done, when it was settled he turned down a free subscription still siting "no time to read it".

    Seriously, does this guy like, not ever use the bathroom? I know reading in the can isn't for everyone, but damn. He could easily spend five

    • He didn't mention that he also gets National Geographic and three magazines/tradejournals related to his job. He reads those during the free times you mention. Hence, no time for Wired.
  • Media Works (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dolohov ( 114209 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:57PM (#13018901)
    Let's not forget that Wired would probably have been perfectly happy to continue this tactic, until the SF Chronicle started researching this article.

    It's easy to get into the habit of thinking that the media is toothless, but in many ways, the light of publicity can still bring about change for the best.
  • by YukiKotetsu ( 765119 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:57PM (#13018905)

    They don't have your SSN, which means no matter what they say, they cannot do jack to your credit report.

    If you are not sure of this or don't believe, simply go ask for a free copy of your credit report at Experian, Transunion, or whatever the third one was. Just say you're credit was used fraudulently, which they'll put your credit on alert (a good damned thing if you ask me) and send you a free report.

    Don't sweat it, they just sound tough but can't do a single thing. If they do have your credit card number or bank number and then charge without your permission, you can get it back, just go to whatever got charged and dispute it.

    Really, they can't do a thing, people just give in because it sounds all scary.

  • Time to pound them (Score:5, Informative)

    by krray ( 605395 ) * on Friday July 08, 2005 @10:59PM (#13018917)
    See: http://www.wired.com/news/feedback/ [wired.com]

    For new Wired magazine subscriptions e-mail subscriptions@wiredmag.com or call 800-SOWIRED (800-769-4733) inside the U.S. and Canada or 303-678-0354 from all other countries. Hey, it's a free call on their dime!

    Public Relations, for a good time contact:
    Kathy O'Reilly, Kathy.O'Reilly@lycos-inc.com,
    Direct#: 781-370-3454

    Snail Mail Wired News
    660 3rd Street, 1st Floor
    San Francisco, CA 94107

    For the VoIP users:
    Phone: 415-276-8400
    Fax: 415-276-8500
  • I told them to cancel my subscription by letter, and also to go fuck themselves. I might have said a few other things related to less comfortable activities. I don't remember, it was a while ago.

    Being a programmer, I was somewhat annoyed that Wired decided to spit in my eye by posting a huge front-page photo of an Indian woman with henna tattoos covering her hand. The headline said, more or less, "we're taking your jobs and there's nothing you can do about it, so ha ha".

    My point of view was that since thi
  • by Austerity Empowers ( 669817 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:00PM (#13018929)
    Blockbuster once called a collections agency on me for a $8.00 late fee. I have a policy of paying late fees only if/when I actually go back and rent another movie. In reality that's exactly what they want, another trip to the store. However calling a collection agency guaranteed that I'd be getting all my future DVDs from Netflix or PirateBay. I don't feel like I owe late fees, unless I wish to check out another DVD. Probably if I read the fine print, I'd realize Blockbuster views late fees differently. However, Blockbuster is on my shitlist forever none-the-less. They could have made more money from me, if they didn't get greedy.

    Sending debt collections companies, or the appearance of them should be the last resort for seriously delinquent customers who are basically trying to steal (or are bankrupt). I'm not sure when it started that collections agencies became the guaranteed repeat business tool.
    • by ironwill96 ( 736883 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:20PM (#13019009) Homepage Journal
      Must be why they got class-action sued over their late-fees policies and they lost!

      The funny thing about their current system is that a "2-day rental" is due back the third day by noon. However, there are no "late" fees now. 7 days past the due date they will just charge you an additional $12-$15 and you own the movie. Within 30 days of that charge you can reverse the purchase for a $1.25 "restocking fee". I read their fine print and didn't see anything about that 7-day period between when the rental is due and when they charge me for buying the movie. So, long story short all of my blockbuster rentals are now 9-day rentals for $4.
    • Entitlement (Score:3, Insightful)

      by EventHorizon ( 41772 )
      You should have been told when you rented that there are penalties for returning late. Blockbuster is not being "greedy" by expecting you to conform to contract terms.

      If you returned the movie on time, their charge is fraudulent (like Wired's). If you were late, suck it up and pay, or let them tarnish your credit.

      You are not legally entitled to screw corporations just because they want to screw you.
      • Re:Entitlement (Score:5, Interesting)

        by neurojab ( 15737 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:41AM (#13019295)
        You should have been told when you rented that there are penalties for returning late. Blockbuster is not being "greedy" by expecting you to conform to contract terms.

        If you returned the movie on time, their charge is fraudulent (like Wired's). If you were late, suck it up and pay, or let them tarnish your credit.

        You are not legally entitled to screw corporations just because they want to screw you.


        There was a long standing precedent in the business that established that late fees for movies that had been returned were not collected until the next rental. This precedent had been in place for years, all over the country. Blockbuster decided to deviate from this practice without calling special attention to it, just so they could get a few more cents here and there in "time value of money". This may not be against the law, but I would call it unethical, or at the least, extremely poor customer service.

        They lost my business over this issue too. Yes I know they changed this policy eventually, but I'm still not giving them my business again.

        I may not be legally entitled to screw corporations that have poor customer service, but I don't have to patronize them either, and I am certainly within my rights to suggest that others shouldn't patronize them either.

        • Re:Entitlement (Score:5, Interesting)

          by Sancho ( 17056 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @01:07AM (#13019368) Homepage
          What did the rental agreements say prior to the precedent change? That you owed the money or that you owed it before you could rent again? If it's the former, I don't think they were outside their rights in the least to demand it, and I don't think it was particularly unethical. That was money you owed. Probably they started sending collection agencies after people because those who are willing to let a late fee go on that long are either a) not going to rent from them anymore anyway, and thus they don't risk any loss of customer for it or b) were intentionally not renting because they'd have to pay the additional fee. In the case of a, they've lost a customer already, so why not get what's owed by the terms of the contract? In the case of b, they get what's owed and moreover, since the person now has paid their late fee, they may rent again, thus generating revenue.

          Two anecdotes:
          One friend of mine had a dollar late fee somewhere (I /think/ Blockbuster, but it's been a long time) and they sent out their goons. He gladly paid, since he figured the collection agency cost them far more than the dollar they were getting back, and he liked the irony of it.

          Another time, he had over $50 in late fees to a store called Hastings. He obviously stopped renting there, since he wasn't about to drop $50+rental fee to rent a movie (he actually just BOUGHT movies for the longest time since it was cheaper--yes yes, overall it wouldn't have been but whatever). After over a year had passed, Hastings sent out a clemency note--come in and bring this coupon, and they'll forgive the late fees. This is clearly the way to go, as it gets people back into the store (always a good thing) and moreover, gets rid of their late fees so they'll start renting again. It also generates a bit of goodwill. This is the same store that will amortize your late fee so that you can continue renting without paying a large fee. Generally when I get a late fee, they offer to let me pay $1 per future rental until it's covered. I never bother, preferring to just pay the whole thing, but it's a good business practice, I think.
    • by nunchux ( 869574 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:43AM (#13019297)
      I have a policy of paying late fees only if/when I actually go back and rent another movie.

      Well, see, there's the problem. Blockbuster doesn't have to respect your policies, but if you rent a movie from them you have to respect theirs.
  • it used to be an okay magazine, and i loved some of their little boxes, like 'expired, tired, wired.' stuff like, 'cassette, CD, iPod' or 'html, xslt, xhtml.' the ones that were especially funny were ones repeated, like, 'battlestar galactica, star trek, battlestar galactica,' because they were so true. other than that, it was just the writers blabbering about how much they thought they knew about technology 5 years from now, and of course it was all just bullshit that sounded really cool to 12 year-old b
  • by mrsam ( 12205 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:05PM (#13018949) Homepage
    I don't see what's the big deal. Dealing with collection agencies is very easy. Just write a simple letter giving the "account number" from the agency's dunning letter, and stating that you dispute the debt, that you request proof of the debt, and that you don't want to be contacted by telephone in writing.

    Then, pay three bucks to send the letter by certified mail with return receipt. Unless you owe a lot of money, and the collection agency has some real paperwork to prove that, this is the last time you'll hear from them. The certified mail receipt makes sure that you can burn their ass off if they ever try to bother you again for no reason.

    Although some might baulk at the three bucks, just keep in mind that it costs the collection agency more than that to send the letter off and process your response (someone has to go in, look up your account number in their system, and mark it off).

    If everyone did that, the collection agencies will quickly go out of business.
    • If everyone did that, the collection agencies will quickly go out of business.

      On the other hand, you could also just pay your bills in the first place. If you disagree with an amount owing, it's downright stupid to just drop it in the trash. Call them up and contest the charge. And if you can't make the monthly payment, *call* the creditor and explain. Credit card companies and banks don't like sending accounts to collections, because it represents writing off the amount owing.

      See, accounts are sent to
      • Yes, that's the way it should work. But like any successful system, credit-and-collections has attacted parasites. And that's actually what is being discussed here - abusive practices. There are a lot of them. Trying to play in good faith with the worst of them is not optimal - the business plan takes that into account, and attempts to make it cheaper, at least emotionally, to pay rather than put up with the abuse. With those sorts, the only correct response is as the grandparent poster said - raise the cos
  • by Temporal ( 96070 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:22PM (#13019015) Journal
    If you register domain names or purchase other services through GoDaddy.com, you might find yourself in a similar situation. They don't, to my knowledge, sick a collection agency on you, but they do automatically renew stuff without warning.

    More specifically, deep in the fine print of GoDaddy's terms of service, they mention that they will assume that you want to auto-renew a service when it expires. However, nowhere else do they mention this. In fact, 90 days, 60 days, and 30 days before the service expires, they will send you e-mails saying "This service is going to expire! Renew now so it won't happen!". Naturally, if you're like me, you would assume that such a message is implying that the service will simply end if you do nothing. Not so! Instead, on the day of expiration, you will get a notice from GoDaddy that they have billed your credit card for renewal, like it or not.

    Now, for me, the service in question was not a domain name. I immediately contacted them an asked them to cancel the service and refund me, and they did. However, domain names (their primary business) can NOT be refunded, presumably since ICANN or whoever does not allow this. So, if this happens to you with a domain name, you're screwed.

    Interestingly, GoDaddy also provides a feature that lets you "synchronize" your renewals, making all your services expire on the same date. Since you can renew any service at any time anyway (long before expiration), I see no reason for this feature to exist, other than to trick people into letting GoDaddy auto-renew all of their services at once.

    Moral: Always explicitly cancel renewable services.

    (Side note: Other than the above shady stuff, I find GoDaddy to be a very nice, high-quality service. I don't feel this is reason for a boycott, but you may make your own decision. I certainly would trust GoDaddy over Verisign, but that's not saying much.)
  • by Another AC ( 151302 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:26PM (#13019034)
    The letter is dated July 11th, 2002!

    What's next on slashdot?

    Wired Magazine lists the 19 digital projection theaters in the country where Attack of the Clones can be viewed as Lucas intended?

    I guess I'll just have to switch back to my Doctor's waiting room for all my cutting-edge tech news.
  • Try and stop using Vonage. They wont let you go no matter what. I Called them five times to "quit" and every single time they say "ok" but they keep billing me and warning me my account is delinquent.

    So is this the new business model for the 21st century? "Customers cant quit us, we OWN them"!

    Don Corleone would be so proud.

  • by The Hobo ( 783784 ) on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:38PM (#13019088)
    The "Drop Dead Letter": clicky [clarkhoward.com]

    Fine Print: IANAL, IANAA (I am not an American)
    • by megabeck42 ( 45659 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:37AM (#13019285)
      before anyone assumes this is bullshit, refer to the legislation referred:

      (from http://www.ftc.gov/os/statutes/fdcpa/fdcpact.htm [ftc.gov]
      )

      (c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --

      (1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;

      (2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or

      (3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.

      If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt.

  • I dunno - but thats really scary. "NSA isn't autorized to take legal action" - thats bull#$@$ to hire a group to come in and just "scare" people. Along with that automated reneal bit.

    I think everyone should write them and complain. In fact their magazine subscripion email is: subscriptions@wiredmag.com [mailto]
    Flood them.

  • by LogicX ( 8327 ) * <slashdot@logi c x .us> on Friday July 08, 2005 @11:44PM (#13019119) Homepage Journal
    My little brother got one of those offers to try PC Gamer magazine; getting an issue or two, he signed up, being told that he would get a bill and could cancel after such time. He never actually received a single issue, but he did get the invoice from them. Since he had yet to get the issue, he ignored the invoice, awaiting his issue so he could decide if he wanted to subscribe or not.

    At this point, some more time passed, and he then began getting collection notices on this bill for a magazine he never even got the trial issues.

    We had written 'CANCEL' on numerous of the PC gamer invoices, and returned them, but heard nothing back, and the collection notices continued.

    We then contacted the collection company who tried to tell us to notify PC Gamer, which I explained that we've tried numerous times, but no action has been taken -- and they reluctantly removed us from their collection system, and apparently also removed our PC Gamer subscription, clearing everything up.

    Seems like a lot of effort to try to go for, for a $20/yr magazine subscription.

    This all occured over nearly a one-year period, so there was more than sufficient time in between each action to account for snail mail.
  • by That's Unpossible! ( 722232 ) * on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:08AM (#13019201)
    About 1-2 years ago this happened to me.

    As the claims were ludicrous, I immediately sent the collection agency Clark Howard's drop dead letter [clarkhoward.com], by certified mail.

    After that, they cannot ever contact you again about that debt, and no, it will not effect your credit one way or another. (WIRED basically lost that right when they agreed to let a collection agency try to get the money for them... oversimplifying it.)

    They really shot themselves in the foot, because up until that time, I would buy the magazine off the newsstand even when I let my subscription lapse. Since I got that letter, I've never bought a copy of WIRED again.
  • by GameMaster ( 148118 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:09AM (#13019206)
    I've seen a few people here claim something to the extent of "it's his own fault, he should have read the fine print" and personally I have to say that's garbage. We live in a society that is absolutely inundated with "fine print". You almost can't avoid it no matter where you go. Much of it is confusing and hard to understand. To make matter worse, a good portion is repetitive info reworded slightly from "fine print" to "fine print" thus worsening the signal to noise ratio drastically.

    Since the vast majority of people aren't lawyers (and probably lack the reading comprehension skills needed to read at that level); we can't expect people to thoroughly read through every single EULA, magazine subscription "fine print", etc. in order to know if any of the many convoluted, "lawyer speak", terms will screw you over in the end. This leaves average people to do exactly what most people do right now which is to "gloss over" "fine print" and hope for the best. In this particular case, Wired magazine took what would otherwise be generic "fine print" and slipped in a term radically different from what is the generally accepted method for handling magazine subscriptions. I feel that this should be looked upon as, at least, unethical and should, quite possibly, be considered fraudulent behavior.

    What it boils down to is that we need to decide what kind of society we want to live in. Do we want to live in a society where the only way you can avoid being fleeced by big business is to be a lawyer who devotes a large portion of his/her free time to religiously reading the "fine print" to every single product or service he/she buys or signs up for no matter how small or trivial that product or service happens to be? The burden here should fall on the businesses providing the product/service in question.

    Individuals have, for the most part, very limited resources (time, money, intellect, etc.) with which to comprehend threats posed by "fine print". If the burden were on the individual then that person would have to expend that effort for every example of "fine print" he/she is exposed to. In comparison, businesses usually have more resources with which to develop "fine print" that doesn't include clauses that aren't generally known and accepted by the community the product/service is being sold in. They only have to expend the overhead once for every product/service they release. Any significantly unusual terms should be listed in a manner that draws attention to it so that potential customers will notice it.

    Unfortunately, at the present time, we seem to live in a society that allows large companies (like the ones in the software industry) to create complex licenses like software EULAs that contain clauses hidden away in the middle requiring you to hand over you first born son or all your worldly possessions in exchange for using their newest Operating System. We need to push our government to enact consumer protection laws that stop this kind of abuse.

    -GameMater
    • We need to push our government to enact consumer protection laws that stop this kind of abuse.

      I disagree with this part. We need to stop buying from 'fine print' vendors. We need to support ethical, fair businesses. We need to generate awareness of the problem.

      Letting the government do anything besides protect us from our enemies is asking for ineptitude and inefficiency. You're likely to see the amount of fine print quintuple if the government gets involved. You're asking beauracrats to prune their
  • by pentalive ( 449155 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:17AM (#13019230) Journal
    Yhey send out letters that look like "You Owe Us Money" and that lead you to belive that you had already re-subscribed and now you needed to pay. Bogus.

  • Happened to me too! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gouldtj ( 21635 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:24AM (#13019251) Homepage Journal
    Actually, this same thing happened to me. I, somehow, got put on the auto-renew list -- which means that they'll hire a collection agency to get their $12. Absolutely rediculous. Anyway, I've cancelled, Wired has said they'd talk to the collection agency, they haven't. I'm still trying to get them off my back (4 months). I would never subscribe to Wired again.
  • by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) * on Saturday July 09, 2005 @01:25AM (#13019396)
    I seem to recall quite a few magazines doing this to me over the years. Are they REALLY going to put a $12 debit on your credit report and risk retaliatory legal action? Hell no. They just send out letters hoping to make you afraid enough to cough up money, and that's it.

    I can vouch, having ignored many of these "payment due" notices from magazines. They have not once shown on a credit report from any agency, which I check every year.

    Doesn't it cost them some money anyway just to file a complaint with a credit agency? it seems like it would cost them a lot more than they would gain if they actually filed reports on people.
  • BYTE magazine (Score:3, Insightful)

    by stwrtpj ( 518864 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @01:31AM (#13019409) Journal
    I had an experience with debt collection concerning the old BYTE magazine. I used to receive a subscription to this magazine but decided to cancel it when I felt the quality went downhill. I decided to cancel by simply not renewing, though I explicitly send back a renewal notice and wrote CANCEL on it.

    At first, things are cool. Magazines stop coming after the subscription expires, nothing happens for three months. Then I get the letter from a collection agency. I owe BYTE magazine $1.36 for "underpaying my subscription". Pay up or else.

    I shit you not. $1.38. They went to a collection agency for a fucking $1.38.

    This letter came at a particularly stressful point in my life, and I was in no mood for this shit. At the time, I did not really understand how collection agencies and the law worked, so I simply bypassed the collection agency, called up BYTE magazine directly, and majorly unloaded on their customer support. The poor girl that happened to answer my call must have been new, for by the end of it I swore she was almost in tears, telling me to forget all about it, sorry for the inconvenience, blah blah blah, have a nice day.

    I never received anything more from them or had anything bad pop up on my credit report.

  • by Proudrooster ( 580120 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @09:08AM (#13020338) Homepage
    Apparently, Wired has gone to a "autorenew" subscription model. I decided to let my subscription lapse due to a move. I reasoned that once I got to the new address I would re-subscribe with the new address and not have to deal with mail forwarding. That's when the letter from NSA showed up. They appear to be a fake collections agency that send out mildly threatening letters in an attempt to annoy you into renewing. However, being a subscriber since the beginning the letter seriously cheesed me off and I contacted Wired subscriber services via email. They sent me this response:
    Customer_Service@cdsfulfillment.com

    As you requested, your credit order has been cancelled. Please disregard any further billing you may receive.

    Please accept any issues you have received with our compliments.

    If you need further assistance, please use the reply with history feature to include all previous correspondence because we have several customer service representatives answering messages.
    Wired
    Jenn
    About a week later, a subscription renewal for $8/year showed up and I sent that in after ignoring Wired and NSA letters for about 4 months. However, even though the subscription has been renewed I still get letters from the NSA (North Shore Agency). This is all just a poorly thought-out scam to get people to renew on time (or else). Some executive probably came up with this after going to a seminar on the "culture of fear" [wikipedia.org] in which we supposedly now live. What he/she didn't realize is that the technofolks don't have time for mass media and aren't part of the "culture of fear" thus, can't be herded like sheep. The old adage, "Know your audience" comes to mind. Those in charge at Wired's subscription services do not appear to know their audience and really screwed up. I hope it doesn't kill off the magazine. I wonder if they will issue an apology anytime soon.
  • I had a Wired subscription as well, and recently cancelled, however I can NOT believe how many freakin times I have recived a "bill" in the mail for another $40.00 CDN to continue my subscription. So I decided to call them up, and verbally cancelled and ensured that verbally it was cancelled. So it goes. Then I get another bill/invoice for $40.00 CDN, I phone them back and state, "I don't care whatever buttons you gotta punch to make it end up like this but, I dont want anything else, period, no offers, remove me from any lists I'm on, put your Privacy Flag on my account, and make sure my status is CANCELLED. Thank you."

    I received one more card from them later on, stating everything was finally cancelled and have heard nothing since then. With this much hassle in cancelling your subscription I am *NEVER* ever re-subscribing to them again, besides, you can go to wired.com [wired.com] anyways, and just read everything thats in the magazine in full (yes - I've sat and compared the online version and the magazine version) - the only difference is the 70% of ads they plow into it and all their NEXFest promotional stuff.

    I subscribed because the articles are very well written and researched, and thought I might support them a bit, but never again.
  • Magazine for free? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by GeekDork ( 194851 ) on Saturday July 09, 2005 @12:29PM (#13021428)

    So, instead of just terminating the subscription as they said they would in the first letter, they got a collection agency to pay USD 12 up front? That's great. My answer would be something like:

    Hello, thank you for paying my subscription, but my original intention was to terminate the subscription by default, as your customer "Wired Magazine" suggested in a letter (copy attached). I didn't intend to refresh my subscription and I still don't, so try to get your money back from your customer. Regards, Me.

    Otherwise, it's just the same fraudulent scare tactic that seems to have become quite popular. Just don't give in as long as you have any proof that you're right (correspondence, conditions at the time of latest subscription renewal, etc.). Show the CA that they're being used in a criminal scheme and they'll get quite angry with their original customer.

A triangle which has an angle of 135 degrees is called an obscene triangle.

Working...