Does Ubc/True Understand People'S Plight?

[Ulysses G.]

And nobody is asking for special treatment.

Yes they are. The OP of the thread felt that he should not have to pay his cable TV bill, because he did not use the service during the floods. That is special treatment in my book as he signed a contract saying that he was reponsible for payment.

Or did those UBC bosses really think that i sat their in 1 metre of dirty water with no water or sanitation for one month happily watching discovery channel? It is just annoying because i am painting my house now and this 1,600 baht would have gone a long way to helping me with the cost of restoration.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[gregb]

And nobody is asking for special treatment.

Yes they are. The OP of the thread felt that he should not have to pay his cable TV bill, because he did not use the service during the floods. That is special treatment in my book as he signed a contract saying that he was reponsible for payment.

But it isn't really special treatment by any objective measure. You are applying these rules of logic which you think are fair because that is what you have been trained to think. You are a prisoner of your own assumptions.

The objective reality is that everyone, even the company, is aware the OP did not use that service. He is simply asking that the company retroactively make the suspension. The company has the power to do this, and in a truly moral society they would. The time of the call is a mere technicality. If they can establish that the service was not used, and in this case it is quite obvious it was not, then they should not bill for it. It isn't rocket science to understand that.

No need to throw contracts around and scream about who was responsible. That is not the point. What is the point is whether a society will tolerate this behavior against victims by large, faceless corporations, or whether large, faceless corporations have a responsibility to act in their customer's best interest as well as their own.

I am saying the entire system is immoral, including the one that says the OP is responsible simply because he signed a contract that said he was. Doesn't mean I actually think it can be changed by me or anyone else, only that society is suboptimal because nobody is doing anything about this larger problem. I truly don't expect the existing cultural norms that many are arguing for here to survive beyond the next generation or two. Long term, the kind of evil, corrupt society we have today is doomed to catabolic collapse.

[Soutpeel]

And nobody is asking for special treatment.

Yes they are. The OP of the thread felt that he should not have to pay his cable TV bill, because he did not use the service during the floods. That is special treatment in my book as he signed a contract saying that he was reponsible for payment.

But it isn't really special treatment by any objective measure. You are applying these rules of logic which you think are fair because that is what you have been trained to think. You are a prisoner of your own assumptions.

The objective reality is that everyone, even the company, is aware the OP did not use that service. He is simply asking that the company retroactively make the suspension. The company has the power to do this, and in a truly moral society they would. The time of the call is a mere technicality. If they can establish that the service was not used, and in this case it is quite obvious it was not, then they should not bill for it. It isn't rocket science to understand that.

No need to throw contracts around and scream about who was responsible. That is not the point. What is the point is whether a society will tolerate this behavior against victims by large, faceless corporations, or whether large, faceless corporations have a responsibility to act in their customer's best interest as well as their own.

I am saying the entire system is immoral, including the one that says the OP is responsible simply because he signed a contract that said he was. Doesn't mean I actually think it can be changed by me or anyone else, only that society is suboptimal because nobody is doing anything about this larger problem. I truly don't expect the existing cultural norms that many are arguing for here to survive beyond the next generation or two. Long term, the kind of evil, corrupt society we have today is doomed to catabolic collapse.

time to get my tin foil hat out me thinks...

[CanInBKK]

If they can establish that the service was not used, and in this case it is quite obvious it was not, then they should not bill for it. It isn't rocket science to understand that.

And therein lies the problem!! How is it "obvious" and how can the company prove it? Should all companies just "take my word for it"? What a ridiculous way to run a business!!

(note: I'm not questioning the veracity of the OP and his statement, I'm just saying no business can survive if it is run on goodwill alone)

[Ulysses G.]

But it isn't really special treatment by any objective measure. You are applying these rules of logic which you think are fair because that is what you have been trained to think. You are a prisoner of your own assumptions.

Life is not fair. You can blame God if you believe in him, but not the cable TV company.

[Heng]

But it isn't really special treatment by any objective measure. You are applying these rules of logic which you think are fair because that is what you have been trained to think. You are a prisoner of your own assumptions.

Sure it is. It's subsidizing irresponsibility (remaining in the path of a several week to several month buildup of high water conditions, and not 'putting one's house' in order in the time allotted). And yes, these are my opinions, that's some deductive reasoning there. I apply them equally to myself. We have quite a damage bill to pay as well that we probably could have better prepared for. We're certainly not asking anyone else to pay for it.

The objective reality is that everyone, even the company, is aware the OP did not use that service. He is simply asking that the company retroactively make the suspension. The company has the power to do this, and in a truly moral society they would. The time of the call is a mere technicality. If they can establish that the service was not used, and in this case it is quite obvious it was not, then they should not bill for it. It isn't rocket science to understand that.

How would they know if anyone used the service or not. And again, having a service available to you and you not using it is no excuse to cancel it retroactively. "I'm not going to pay you for the cost of the hotel room last night, because in the end, I crashed somewhere else. I didn't even turn down the bed. I came in, brushed my teeth and headed out and hit some clubs... I met this hottie, and well, anyway... I hear you're not even fully occupied so no loss to you right?"

No need to throw contracts around and scream about who was responsible. That is not the point.

What is the point is whether a society will tolerate this behavior against victims by large, faceless corporations, or whether large, faceless corporations have a responsibility to act in their customer's best interest as well as their own.

Sure it is, that is exactly my point. And companies have a first and foremost responsibility to the people who have a direct stake in the company... and again, it's not just the fat cats, but everyone on down to the janitors and technicians. The free pass that you are suggesting effects them as well, if not more so because of their precariously low income in the big picture. I do agree that they should also have the best interest of their customers and society as a whole (which inherently may conflict with the best interests of a few customers now and again).

I am saying the entire system is immoral, including the one that says the OP is responsible simply because he signed a contract that said he was. Doesn't mean I actually think it can be changed by me or anyone else, only that society is suboptimal because nobody is doing anything about this larger problem. I truly don't expect the existing cultural norms that many are arguing for here to survive beyond the next generation or two. Long term, the kind of evil, corrupt society we have today is doomed to catabolic collapse.

Personally I'm all for more screening and control. It's clear that the OP wasn't up to having a cable subscription. I'd say a good percentage of people in general probably aren't up for buying a home (judging by the number of folks who can't make their house payments all over the world and get foreclosed on), getting loaned tuition for school (look at the huge Titanic wreck of unpaid student loan debt all over the place), having children, etc. Feel free to address my points or just say something vague again like 'there's no point in talking to immoral people!' if you are otherwise unable.

Edited November 25, 2011 by Heng

[GarryP]

If I am unable to pay a bill because it is not issued on time or delivered late, I will refuse to pay any late payment surcharge and will continue to argue on this point with the suppliers.

I pay for a service (whether or not I actually use it)and part of that service includes billing me on time. I should not be penalized for the failings of the service provider to get the bill to me. On the other hand, for a number of services no bill is required in order to make payment. In those cases, there is no excuse. You should know when payments are due, how much you owe and and make those payments accordingly. Perhaps direct debit is the way forward.

In the case of TOT, my bill was delivered after the due date. I was responsible for going to the local TOT office to pay the bill as counter service at the bank and 7-11 was not possible. It was inconvenient, but I had ordered the service so it was my duty to pay. However, there was no late payment charge.

As to the OP, you signed on for the service so you should pay for it, flooding or no flooding, use or no use. It is not the supplier's fault that you did not cancel the service and the excuse that you had too much on your mind just does not hold water.