Has Anyone Ever SUED DirecTV?

[rbinck]

MrTwix, please let us know how this turns out. I like others feel like you won't prevail, but if you do it would be a valuable precedence.

[MrTwix]

Again gryphon75 the consumer has to depend/defer to the EXPERTISE and TRAINING of the installer.

I am 38 years old and I have never sued anyone in my entire life. I've never even come close. People sue me and the city I work for all day long over sooo much less.

I will have to deal with the judge's decision if he tells me, as you did, that "Sorry, you cut them down... they didn't." At least, however, I tried to make a statement that professionals should represent their companies responsibly, ethically, and truthfully. In the end, nothing may change and DTV may keep allowing untrained installers to convince people to cut trees down unnecessarily..

I may not win. This is true. Yet, at least I tried. It still reflects very badly (in my opinion) on DirecTV that they have representatives out there telling customers (who know no better) to do erroneous things.

I also believe the statement of "If they told you to jump off your house so you could fly" is a bit unrealistic. Any sane person understands that A) this statement will probably never be made by any installer and B) they understand the result from doing such a thing could result in serious injury or death and C) jumping off your house has nothing to do with installing a satellite dish.

Again, customers are often at the mercy and direction of the TRAINED installer.

MrTwix

[Munkey]

Originally Posted by gryphon75

Seriously, Why would directv or the installation company be "liable" for the trees that you cut down. Irregardless of wether they told you to cut them down or not you still decided to cut them down.

+1

I don't think any court would find them liable for YOUR descision and YOUR action of cutting down YOUR own trees.

Suck it up as YOUR own mistake and plant some more tress to eventually grow to take their place.

[VegasFlyby]

www.bbb.org

It's a good place to start. File a complaint and see what happens. You can also see what other complaints that install company may have against it.

[jpcamaro70]

You took the trees down, you didn't have to. No judge in his/her right mind will award you the claim. It is your responsibility to double check his info and make a choice as to remove trees.

and:

"• A friend of mine had arrived at this point and helped me cut both trees down. It took a total of two to three (2-3) minutes to fell both trees. Once down, my friend started to clear the branches from the closest tree to the house where the installer would be working. Even with the branches intact, the closest branch was approximately 10’ from the installers work area."


Let me get this straight, it took you 2-3 minutes to cut down two 35 ft trees? Quite a task. Even so, you can't expect anyone to work on your property with two felled 35 foot trees laying around with all of their branches. Although i can appreciate your problems, i do think you are asking and expecting a little much.

[jdc2003]

I'm an attorney and while this may not be my specialty area, the facts alleged (meaning if a judge thinks they're true) is per se negligent misrepresentation.

To satisfy that, you merely need to prove that you detrimentally relied upon a misrepresentation made by the installer. It doesn't matter if he MEANT to decieve you, it only matters that a) a reasonably trained technician NEVER would've made such ridiculous representations and b) a reasonably prudent satellite tv subscriber would have relied upon the representations made. That's why the "what if he told you to jump off your roof" analogies are immaterial. The bottom line is, the typical reasonable consumer would believe someone who purports to be an agent for DirecTV who says that the only way an individual could receive satellite transmission would be if he cut down 2 trees.

Likewise, it is immaterial that the installer wasn't the one who cut down the trees (that might be pertinent for a cause of action like trespass but it does not matter in the case at hand).

So bottom line...sue the bastards. I'm a corporate defense lawyer but if I was advising the installer, I would encourage them to settle for (hopefully) less than what the plaintiff seeks.

And for those who believe that you "can't collect", that's not true. Try having the judgment filed with the court and ruining someone's credit, or (hopefully) if they're a homeowner, you can have a lis pendens attached to their home so that they effectively can never sell until they pay off a judgment with the court.

[gryphon75]

Originally Posted by jdc2003

I'm an attorney...

So bottom line...sue the bastards. I'm a corporate defense lawyer

No coment Necessary

Originally Posted by MrTwix

I am 38 years old and I have never sued anyone in my entire life. I've never even come close. People sue me and the city I work for all day long over sooo much less.

MrTwix

And I would be willing to bet that it drives you absolutely crazy when you see the lawsuits that are frivilous.

Originally Posted by mystic7

This is 2007, not 1965. Today's reality is that most companies treat you like crap and get away with it, and they don't really care.

I question if we are treated like crap because maybe we started treating them like crap with the belief that they are a "big company" they can afford it.

[MrTwix]

Thanks jdc2003!

I may not be a lawyer but I figured that the installer misrepresented the facts on where the dish should be installed and in what direction the dish should be pointed.

I hope what you have written is correct as I will use it in my argument when I go to court on 26 October.

MrTwix

[roscoe93]

Sue the bums. If enough people complain about shoddy installations possibly affecting their bottom line D* may take notice and stop treating their customers like cattle.
Maybe they will evaluate their installation subcontractors and weed out the troublesome ones.
I've had three installations with D* the first was from Circuit city and some fly by night outfit who wanted me to do all the work.After a year on my anniversary I e-mailed them and told them all the nice things E* would do for a new customer.
D* responded with a new install on the spot ( roof ) the sub for Circuit city said was impossible. I think He had a hot date.
That install and the last one I got to upgrade to HD went flawless. The two installers working for Halstead Communications of Balston Spa, NY were real pro's.
They should all be that way. Of course the only joy or compensation I will receive is the day the lying rats at Circuit City go bankrupt.
Too bad for them as instead of buying my Panny or Olevia from them I pushed a few keystrokes and got both cheaper and delivered in 4 days.
D* is a great service and they need to make it easier getting it installed right the first time.

[rserkes]

Originally Posted by Synergi

His suit is actually against the installers company, not directv. Good luck!

It all depends on how the contract is worded. These guys are either independents or subs. If they're subs then you go after the general (DirecTV). If they're independents you go after them directly.

In either case it's a mess.

[gryphon75]

Originally Posted by MrTwix

• Full reimbursement and replanting cost for two (at least) 20-year-old pin oak trees (estimate attached) - $3,227.00
• Payment to landscaper for removal of two tree stumps (estimate attached) - $100.00
• Payment for three (3) men to cut and haul three (3) full pickup loads of (erroneously cut) tree debris off my property to waste disposal site - $150 ($50 each man/pickup load)
• $202.00 Payment for one (1) day taken off of work waiting on the second DirecTV installer who did not show up until 7:20pm on 16 August, 2007 (NOTE – first installer said he would be at my home at 8:00 a.m. that morning – No calls to tell me otherwise – The $202.00 is based upon a 40-hour week at my gross annual salary)

Not trying to bust balls anymore on this but... In regards to the damages..

#1 Replacement of trees.. I am sure that this did not completely destroy your landscape. If so, then I question the logic of jumping at the opportunity to cut them down in the first place. Regardless pick up some saplings, dig a hole and by retirement you will have beautiful trees.

#2 The tree stumps should be cut flush to the ground and then left to deterioate. The insuing rot provides affordable housing for many creatures as well as ensuring routine lawn mower blade replacement.

#3 Everyone knows that any friend that volunteers to help with a project is not to be paid in cash nor expects such. Payment is to be in beer, and not in a low quality beer.

#4 Asking for reimbursement for taking a day off work, when you are paid regardless of the workday, and you are a government employee, is much like ..... Suing someone because you cut down a tree. Seriously instead of asking a judge for this, you may wish to address the taxpayers.

I do feel bad that you were mislead. However in the whole great scheme of things what did you lose? Two trees that hopefully now are at least being reused as mulch.

[polomala]

Well, Neg Per Se there needs to be a statute on the "books' that is intended to protect this class of plantiff from this type of injury/damage.
I, however do not give legal advice and would not unless I was licensed in that particular jurisdiction.
Contact a lawyer in your state !

[Steelerfan]

Originally Posted by jdc2003

I'm an attorney and while this may not be my specialty area, the facts alleged (meaning if a judge thinks they're true) is per se negligent misrepresentation.

To satisfy that, you merely need to prove that you detrimentally relied upon a misrepresentation made by the installer. It doesn't matter if he MEANT to decieve you, it only matters that a) a reasonably trained technician NEVER would've made such ridiculous representations and b) a reasonably prudent satellite tv subscriber would have relied upon the representations made. That's why the "what if he told you to jump off your roof" analogies are immaterial. The bottom line is, the typical reasonable consumer would believe someone who purports to be an agent for DirecTV who says that the only way an individual could receive satellite transmission would be if he cut down 2 trees.

Likewise, it is immaterial that the installer wasn't the one who cut down the trees (that might be pertinent for a cause of action like trespass but it does not matter in the case at hand).

So bottom line...sue the bastards. I'm a corporate defense lawyer but if I was advising the installer, I would encourage them to settle for (hopefully) less than what the plaintiff seeks.

And for those who believe that you "can't collect", that's not true. Try having the judgment filed with the court and ruining someone's credit, or (hopefully) if they're a homeowner, you can have a lis pendens attached to their home so that they effectively can never sell until they pay off a judgment with the court.

Why wouldn't a lawyer want to sue????

[Lawsman]

Mr Twix,

I had a similar experience as you, but with a better outcome.

My installer came out and told me that he had to mount the dish to the roof as well. He said it was "company policy". I was reluctant becasue I did not want any holes drilled through my new roof because I was afraid it would leak sooner or later. I told him I wanted it installed where my old Dish TV LNB was installed. The old dish from Dish was mounted on a vertical surface on the fireplace stack. Looked great, good signal and never leaked!

The installer insisted that the new Direct HD dish was much heavier than the old Dish dish and would not advise me to put it on the chimney. To make a long story short, I eneded up offering the installer $40.00 to install it on the chimney and remove the old Dish dish. Guess what? He said okay and mounted it on the chimney and is attached solidly to my chimney. Great signal, no leaks..

When he was on the ladder I started to ask him some questions on how he was paid. He said they are paid a fixed cost for "full" install. If you think about it, why would an installer want to mess with a job that will take a bunch of time? It benefits him to take the easier installations and pass or make excuses on the ones he thinks he will not make money on. He'd rather do 4 full easy installs in one day Vs. 1 or two more difficult time consuming installs if you could get away with it or have the customer offer some extra $ to get the job done. Sounds like your install took a bunch of time even with the trees removed? Your second installer did not make much $ on your install if you look at it from $/hr. basis.

I concluded that the experienced dishonest installers routinely use this approach to make more money. It's the fault of the "system" and the installation contracting companies who allow this to go on. In Utopia, each installition should be evaluated and bid prior to install. Each job is going to be different. Some jobs will just take more time than others. But, imagine what a logistical and financial nightmare it would be for Direct TV to manage or sell their product if they had to bid each job?

Good luck on your claim. I offer this to you as an effort to help your case and to let people know what is going on out there.

[MrTwix]

Lawsman... Thanks for the information.

Makes perfect sense.. Lucky for DirecTV that there are some great installers out there who would rather create a happy customer than worry about getting the easy jobs..

I, apparently, got this type of installer the second time around..

MrTwix