Has Anyone Ever SUED DirecTV?

jdc2003 · 09-28-2007, 03:31 PM

I love to see people shooting the messenger. I'm just telling you what the common law IS. There are a great many laws and holdings on the books that the majority probably considers stupid. That doesn't change the fact that they are still the law.

I especially love those who mention why people hate lawyers. Yeah everyone does...until they NEED one. In my life, I've never sued anyone. The only time I came close was when my previous apartment landlord not only refused to give my deposit (only $500) but then had the audacity to send me a BILL for $1500.

However, I managed to avoid having the courts intervene by promising to not disclose the City Department that the elevators in the building hadn't been serviced within the last 12 months as required by the municipal code and that they were illegally trying to raise rent by over 10% while giving less than 3 months notice (also required by muni code).

In the end, they shut up and I decided I could live without the $500 and move on. I'm not a litigous person (neither are the people I defend, remember, I DEFEND people who are sued). But I that point seems to be lost amongst many of you.

Anyway, if you guys are so against what you consider frivolous suits, write your Congressman and demand serious tort reform. But no one ever does and hence the cycle continues.

hitdog042 · 09-28-2007, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpcamaro70

IMHO, this is a ridiculous lawsuit. kind of like the lady and mcdonalds coffee. I will not sue anyone over a tree, as beautiful as they are, unless it was a very expensive exotic tree. you made the choice, based on one persons knowledge. Our "resident attorney" says you have basis in regards to the law, OK fine, i understand. But really think about it, this is so stupid, like the moronic BS you see on Judge Judy, People's Court, and the like. None of which are in HD. Damn, i would have loved to see Judy treat you like a petty jerk in HD.

By no means was I saying he'd win. My point was that if he did win he should have no problem collecting.

Odds are, you are right, he would not win based on the fact that nobody made him cut down the trees. A judge would simply say all you had to do was say no and call the company.

Plus you have the he said she said thing going on. Theres no proof unfortunately that it went down the way he said.

And Im not discrediting what he described, Im just saying how a court would probably view it.

gryphon75 · 09-28-2007, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mystic7

I've never treated even the dumbest sales clerk like crap. But that's beside the point. It is we, the customer, who are the ones spending the money. True, a lot of a-holes have abused "the customer is always right" but the kind of service we get today would have put any company out of business 20-30 years ago.

Sorry, I wasn't singling you out.

In general the belief among consumers is that the companies owe them something. Just look at the number of posts where people are bragging how they got free stuff by complaining and threatening to leave. Those items and services are not free, somebody, somewhere pays for them and in the end it is all consumers. Eventually companies are going to get to the point where they say "You want to leave and take your business elsewhere then do it." 20-30 years ago if you went into a local shop you were treated with respect because you treated them with respect. If you would have demanded something from them, they would have run you off and told you to go elsewhere. I know this is

but it is just my opinion.

rserkes · 09-28-2007, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc2003

I love to see people shooting the messenger. I'm just telling you what the common law IS. There are a great many laws and holdings on the books that the majority probably considers stupid. That doesn't change the fact that they are still the law.

I especially love those who mention why people hate lawyers. Yeah everyone does...until they NEED one. In my life, I've never sued anyone. The only time I came close was when my previous apartment landlord not only refused to give my deposit (only $500) but then had the audacity to send me a BILL for $1500.

However, I managed to avoid having the courts intervene by promising to not disclose the City Department that the elevators in the building hadn't been serviced within the last 12 months as required by the municipal code and that they were illegally trying to raise rent by over 10% while giving less than 3 months notice (also required by muni code).

In the end, they shut up and I decided I could live without the $500 and move on. I'm not a litigous person (neither are the people I defend, remember, I DEFEND people who are sued). But I that point seems to be lost amongst many of you.

Anyway, if you guys are so against what you consider frivolous suits, write your Congressman and demand serious tort reform. But no one ever does and hence the cycle continues.

Amen!

CheechMarin · 09-28-2007, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrTwix

That may be the case for you rserkes, but my HD dish is facing 180 degrees in the opposite direction of any trees on my property.

In fact, the closest tree that we were told to cut down is exactly 20' BEHIND the HD Dish. The second tree is 14' to the west of the first tree and 30' North-West of the new HD Dish..

Again, both trees are BEHIND the new HD Dish. There are NO trees within a 180 degree span (from Southeast to Southwest) of the dish. The new HD Dish is pointing somewhat Southwest as was the case with the previous two round dishes that are mounted to my eave..

Total incompetence...!

MrTwix

Did your friend witness this W.B. installer telling you you had to cut the trees down? It would more than likely strengthen your case if he did hear it. Either that or get him to testify that he did hear it even if he didn't. If the installer lied then you should too to make things fair.

Also, I would not mention that the installer suggested mounting the dish on the center of your roof as opposed to cutting the trees down either. Otherwise it will make it look like YOU insisted on cutting the trees down because you didn't want the dish on the roof rather than cutting them down because he gave you no other choice.

And finally, DENY IT if the installer brings up his suggestion to you about mounting the dish on the center of the roof. Your best chance at victory is to make it seem like the installer gave you no other choice but to cut the trees down.

EDIT: Oops, was I reading an actual letter that you have already sent to the DTV reps? If that is the case then good luck but don't be too discouraged if you lose.

jpcamaro70 · 09-28-2007, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdc2003

I love to see people shooting the messenger. I'm just telling you what the common law IS. There are a great many laws and holdings on the books that the majority probably considers stupid. That doesn't change the fact that they are still the law.

I especially love those who mention why people hate lawyers. Yeah everyone does...until they NEED one. In my life, I've never sued anyone. The only time I came close was when my previous apartment landlord not only refused to give my deposit (only $500) but then had the audacity to send me a BILL for $1500.

However, I managed to avoid having the courts intervene by promising to not disclose the City Department that the elevators in the building hadn't been serviced within the last 12 months as required by the municipal code and that they were illegally trying to raise rent by over 10% while giving less than 3 months notice (also required by muni code).

In the end, they shut up and I decided I could live without the $500 and move on. I'm not a litigous person (neither are the people I defend, remember, I DEFEND people who are sued). But I that point seems to be lost amongst many of you.

Anyway, if you guys are so against what you consider frivolous suits, write your Congressman and demand serious tort reform. But no one ever does and hence the cycle continues.

By no means do i hate lawyers. As a BMW salesmen i need lawyers to be the butt of jokes intead of myself. I happen to appreciate lawyers and the service they provide. My post has absolutely nothing to do with you, i fully understand you are stating law. I blame the law, not you.

That would be like blaming me for your car breaking down.

Action4242 · 09-28-2007, 11:57 PM

In the state of Missouri you can have an attorney represent you in small claims. I suggest that if you do proceed pay an attorney to show up on your behalf. Attorneys and judges are in the "Club" aka bar association. If you show up without an attorney and they show up with an attorney there is no way you will win. The judge won't rule against another attorney when you represent yourself. It's called "Professional Courtesy" and is an unwritten allegence. Those in the "Club" take care of each other.

It seems to me your claim should be against the installation company sub contractor not DTV. Go into court prepared. Have the MO statues in hand that were violated. Don't expect the judge to help you in any way. Prove the violations to the statues and over document your damage claims. Good luck and don't expect to win even if you are right. That's just the way our injustice system works here in Missouri and in this country.

mystic7 · 09-29-2007, 07:38 AM

They say that he who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client, which in my case worked out great because that was my defense

jpcamaro70 · 09-29-2007, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mystic7

They say that he who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client, which in my case worked out great because that was my defense

lol

TomLewandowski · 09-29-2007, 11:01 AM

Quote:

They say that he who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client, which in my case worked out great because that was my defense

dukefreak12 · 10-14-2007, 01:35 AM

Direct tv installs always suck, for me anyways. The dudes are always late, and never really know whats happening. While ive never had a bad expierence like this, ive heard of many. Bottom line though, people will still get direct because of the HD and NFL Sunday Ticket, and nothing like this will ever stop them, plus after the install is over, you got it made!

bearzilla333 · 10-14-2007, 02:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dukefreak12

Direct tv installs always suck, for me anyways. The dudes are always late, and never really know whats happening. While ive never had a bad expierence like this, ive heard of many. Bottom line though, people will still get direct because of the HD and NFL Sunday Ticket, and nothing like this will ever stop them, plus after the install is over, you got it made!

good point at not to mention,the guy sueing will not get the BEST to program provider out there!hands down! just get past the install, it can be a pain in the ass,and if its really bad they give you 100$ credit anyway,but to wine like a little baby and sue is lame,I hope karma comes around and bites this guy in the ass 10 fold

pvt_awol · 10-14-2007, 10:08 AM

just to throw this out, to the guy that brought up the lady with the hot coffee from McDonalds, didn't she WIN? I mean a bunch of money too? Seems to me that the guy thinks he has a case, and the lawyer (who I'm inclined to believe is in fact a lawyer, because no one talks like that) thinks he has a case as well. Sue 'em. What's the worst that could happen? Your trees are already cut down. Can't change that. You'd have to pay court fees if you lose. But if you win, you get some trees back. Why not do it? Isn't that the reason why small claims court is made available to us in the first place?

Fl_Gulfer · 10-14-2007, 10:41 AM

I saw a list of the stupidest law suits and the one that took the cake was The lady that bought a new motor home and was driving on the freeway and set the cruse control and got up and went to make a cup of coffee. She sued and won.
I just love paying more in Insurance so everyone keep doing these stupid suits.

mystic7 · 10-14-2007, 11:10 AM

That's a good one, but I think the stupidest is the woman who went into a department store with her kid. The kid got underfoot and she tripped, then sued the store for not keeping her kid under control. She won.

Wait, I take it back. That was the most aggravating, to me, but yours is definitely the stupidest. And people wonder why there are such ridiculous disclaimers on everything today, like the dancing monitor in the Apple commercial with the disclaimer "Monitor does not actually dance".

09-28-2007, 03:31 PM	#46
jdc2003 What is HD? Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 3	Predictable lawyer bashing... I love to see people shooting the messenger. I'm just telling you what the common law IS. There are a great many laws and holdings on the books that the majority probably considers stupid. That doesn't change the fact that they are still the law. I especially love those who mention why people hate lawyers. Yeah everyone does...until they NEED one. In my life, I've never sued anyone. The only time I came close was when my previous apartment landlord not only refused to give my deposit (only $500) but then had the audacity to send me a BILL for $1500. However, I managed to avoid having the courts intervene by promising to not disclose the City Department that the elevators in the building hadn't been serviced within the last 12 months as required by the municipal code and that they were illegally trying to raise rent by over 10% while giving less than 3 months notice (also required by muni code). In the end, they shut up and I decided I could live without the $500 and move on. I'm not a litigous person (neither are the people I defend, remember, I DEFEND people who are sued). But I that point seems to be lost amongst many of you. Anyway, if you guys are so against what you consider frivolous suits, write your Congressman and demand serious tort reform. But no one ever does and hence the cycle continues.

09-28-2007, 11:57 PM	#52
Action4242 I prefer High Carb Beer! Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Midwest, USA Posts: 55	In the state of Missouri you can have an attorney represent you in small claims. I suggest that if you do proceed pay an attorney to show up on your behalf. Attorneys and judges are in the "Club" aka bar association. If you show up without an attorney and they show up with an attorney there is no way you will win. The judge won't rule against another attorney when you represent yourself. It's called "Professional Courtesy" and is an unwritten allegence. Those in the "Club" take care of each other. It seems to me your claim should be against the installation company sub contractor not DTV. Go into court prepared. Have the MO statues in hand that were violated. Don't expect the judge to help you in any way. Prove the violations to the statues and over document your damage claims. Good luck and don't expect to win even if you are right. That's just the way our injustice system works here in Missouri and in this country. __________________

Similar Threads to Has Anyone Ever SUED DirecTV?
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
D* Going Lease Only 3/1/06	Fl_Gulfer	DirecTV Forum	24	04-09-2008 10:22 AM
Terrible Customer Service at DirecTV	Ct HD Boy	DirecTV Forum	68	09-19-2007 01:01 PM
DTV HD Receiver Email To DirecTV	1953	DirecTV Forum	0	06-29-2005 02:17 PM
Diectv President and CEO - Mitch Stern leaving Directv!	Smthkd	DirecTV Forum	0	03-07-2005 11:54 AM
D* Announces Interactive TV	hdtv4me2	DirecTV Forum	0	01-06-2005 12:21 PM

09-29-2007, 07:38 AM	#53
mystic7 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,431	They say that he who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for a client, which in my case worked out great because that was my defense

10-14-2007, 01:35 AM	#56
dukefreak12 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 61	Direct tv installs always suck, for me anyways. The dudes are always late, and never really know whats happening. While ive never had a bad expierence like this, ive heard of many. Bottom line though, people will still get direct because of the HD and NFL Sunday Ticket, and nothing like this will ever stop them, plus after the install is over, you got it made!

10-14-2007, 10:08 AM	#58
pvt_awol High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 43	just to throw this out, to the guy that brought up the lady with the hot coffee from McDonalds, didn't she WIN? I mean a bunch of money too? Seems to me that the guy thinks he has a case, and the lawyer (who I'm inclined to believe is in fact a lawyer, because no one talks like that) thinks he has a case as well. Sue 'em. What's the worst that could happen? Your trees are already cut down. Can't change that. You'd have to pay court fees if you lose. But if you win, you get some trees back. Why not do it? Isn't that the reason why small claims court is made available to us in the first place?

10-14-2007, 10:41 AM	#59
Fl_Gulfer High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Gulf Beach Age: 56 Posts: 187	I saw a list of the stupidest law suits and the one that took the cake was The lady that bought a new motor home and was driving on the freeway and set the cruse control and got up and went to make a cup of coffee. She sued and won. I just love paying more in Insurance so everyone keep doing these stupid suits.

10-14-2007, 11:10 AM	#60
mystic7 High Definition is the definition of life. Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,431	That's a good one, but I think the stupidest is the woman who went into a department store with her kid. The kid got underfoot and she tripped, then sued the store for not keeping her kid under control. She won. Wait, I take it back. That was the most aggravating, to me, but yours is definitely the stupidest. And people wonder why there are such ridiculous disclaimers on everything today, like the dancing monitor in the Apple commercial with the disclaimer "Monitor does not actually dance".