Talk:Cramming (fraud)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Crime (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Telecommunications (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Reference to Verizon[edit]

Sounds like an ad for Verizon.

It is not an ad. Verizon is just mentioned as an example. It is acceptable to mention companies where appropriate in Wikipedia articles. Hellno2 (talk) 22:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I disagree, the article does read like an ad for Verizon. It's un-encyclopedic language; it would sound better if it were written something like this: "Some phone companies can put a cram block on the customer's account." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.110.43 (talk) 17:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The statement "Phone companies like Verizon respond by removing cramming charges from a consumer's bill upon request" is false in my experience of two cramming incidents on a Verizon bill. Verizon refused to remove any charges, only referring me to the third party crammer (ILD Teleservices). Nor did Verizon volunteer the information that a block could be placed on cramming charges. This article is fishy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.104.37.18 (talk) 15:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

My experience has been similar. Verizon doesn't actually do the things mentioned in this article. The smell is pretty bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.164.92.221 (talk) 07:12, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth, there are two companies that are both referred to as "Verizon" -- one is Verizon Communications (a "baby bell" that only operates in certain parts of the country), and the other is Verizon Wireless (which operates in all 50 states). As of 2014 (I think, but it could have been late 2013) Verizon Communications fully owns Verizon Wireless, but they are still separate corporations. I'm only mentioning this because it is not clear which Verizon the original author is stating offers cramming protection. Verizon Wireless does allow blocking of all premium texting charges, but only if a customer specifically requests the block, and then only for the lines the customer specifically asks to have blocked. I'm not updating the article because this info is WP:OR but it may help other editors understand why there are differences of opinion on this issue. Etamni (talk) 04:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Overtime Claim Padding[edit]

Does the practice of adding or extending work overtime claims come under the banner of Cramming? The practice involves submitted time sheets or claim sheets for overtime worked where the work never occurred or where the work was less than the overtime being claimed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.13.3.89 (talk) 01:19, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Claim of cramming by AT&T Mobility[edit]

According to this page's own definition, AT&T is committing fraud. This would be a major legal problem.

The act of adding a smartphone data plan when one is not on the account when a SIM is inserted into a smartphone is described in AT&T's wireless terms and conditions found here, specifically, this point. I feel this should be removed. DennisM83 (talk) 06:25, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

I was under the impression that the contract laws of the several states and federal laws regulating interstate commerce required certain terms to be made conspicuous. Are those terms made conspicuous enough when the user signs up for service through an AT&T representative? And if it's not cramming, what's the legal term for practices of the sort described under "this point"? --Damian Yerrick (talk) 05:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Cramming (fraud). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:40, 29 January 2016 (UTC)