Cellular Plus

The original paperwork ( see attached ) given to the customer prior to the begining of job explains the posiibility of storm water entering the basement after an excavation job. It also explains the process & time frame of cement repairs. Weather and the holidays were a part of the delay. Our...

crew cleaned up all of the water & mud that entered the basement. We offered $700.00 for the throw carpets that we removed as well as the damaged laminate floor to try to resolve the situation & keep the customer satisfied. Our offer still stands. We have been in contact with this customer the whole time, especially the Operations Manager and the Office Manager. Any questions please direct them directly to them so we can handle this quickly and efficiently.Thank you.

[To assist us in bringing this matter to a close, you must give us a reason why you are rejecting the response. If no reason is received your complaint will be closed Administratively Resolved]
 Complaint: [redacted]
I am rejecting this response because: the last pictures that were sent from this business proves my point that nothing was wrong with the sidewalk before they started their job and the sidewalk sunk in after they were finished.  The sidewalk showed no signs of being uneven, no gaps or anything of that nature.  Pictures don't lie, my neighbor had no reason to lie and the workers at [redacted] had no reason to lie or deal with the sidewalk.  
Regards,.  
[redacted]

The repair that we made to the drainline that feeds the sink wouldnt have caused damage especially the crack. Our technician on site said UN DOUBTEDLY  that we did not crack the sink, HOWEVER WE ARE WILLING TO MEET HER HALF WAY TO RESOLVE THE SITUATION AS NOW OUR NAME IS INVOLVED. IF SHE...

PURCHASES A NEW SINK WE WILL INSTALL IT FOR FREE. WE FEEL THIS IS MORE THAN FAIR CONSIDERING  WE DID NOT DAMAGE THE SINK IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Please find attached Ms. [redacted]'s appraisals which are being mailed via USPS Signature Requested. Please feel free to contact us in writing if any further information or questions are requested. Please note it is our policy to respond within thirty days. 
Best...

Regards, 
 
Bow River

Review: I purchased a MiFi ($99) from a Verizon store in Camas, WA from a customer service rep wearing a Verizon Wireless shirt. When I walk in the store they say "welcome to Verizon Wireless". (Come to find out this is really a Cellular Plus but was never noted anywhere). After they looked at the coverage map, I was guaranteed it would work in my residence in Washougal, WA. It didn't work- at all! Three months later after endless conversations with Verizon Wireless customer service and having 3 technicians visit my house needing to "confirm" it did not work, they cancelled the contract and confirmed there was nothing more needed from me. Over a year later I am looking at my credit report and notice a ding from Cellular Plus. I thought this was credit fraud because I have never heard of a Cellular Plus and thought someone opened up an account under my name. I called to get this resolved. Come to find out Cellular Plus is a third party and even after my endless ordeal with Verizon Wireless, I ALSO owe them money for canceling my contract (which I was never notified of). Today I spoke to Monica at consumer collections to get this resolved. I thought immediately they would apologize for this huge inconvenience of having to have a customer deal with this, and they did not. My suggestion to whoever Cellular Plus is to not mask yourself as a Verizon Wireless store. Also, when you ask your customers to "sign here" notify them that they are additionally signing for a contract with Cellular Plus.Desired Settlement: My $200 balance to be cleared and the 3 Credit Beaureus to be notified so it will be taken off my record.

Review: I stopped in the Base exchange and noticed the Verizon Store (this is how its marketed! It's actually a cellular plus store but that is not displayed anywhere)My son wanted to upgrade his phone so wanted to ask about that. We had an unlimited data plan and upgrading the phone would eliminate that. The manager said we have only used a max of 4.8g of data during the life of our plan and that 6g would be sufficient. He also pushed an item called a Jet Pack which allows internet access anywhere. I agreed to change my plan so my son could upgrade his phone. I also paid for the jet pack($50). I was told that I had 14 days to return the jet pack if I decided not to keep it. Never once was I told that a $50 restocking fee would be charged. The manager showed me a form that he reviewed with me and said it's on there. I did sign a new contract for the new phone. I had the jet Pack for 2 days and used it maybe 1 hour. In that time it used 3g of data. I had recieved a text that said I was at 50% data usage. I couldn't understand how when just a daya go I had unlimited data. It turns out that the manager back dated my new plan to the start of the billing cycle. He did not explain this to me either. I have complained to the territory manager and he said Oh, Well! This business is sneaky and not a Verison Corp Store as they would like yo to think. yo would think that by being on an AFB they would have to have some standards t oabide by. Not this company. They will fast talk you and never look back.

Product_Or_Service: jet Pack

Order_Number: CHAFBIN209Desired Settlement: DesiredSettlementID: Refund

Please refund the $50 restocking fee.

Business

Response:

In response to the complaint by [redacted] regarding his service at our Cheyenne Air Force Base location.

Our store located at F.E. Warren Air Force Base does has signage indicating that it is a Cellular Pius store, both on the sign that is above the store entrance, and also displayed on the wall in the retail area of the store.

Regarding the $50 restock, fee, this fee has been refunded to the customer as of 5/6/13. This was refunded as a courtesy to the customer since he claims that he was not told about the fee and that his data usage was much higher than expected after just 2 days of service.

Thanks

[redacted] District Manager Cellular Plus/Verizon Wireless ###-###-#### cell

l

Review: This complaint is related to a dispute I have with Cellular Plus, Verizon Wireless Premium Retailer. I am disputing an early termination fee of $500 charged to my account on July 16, 2014 and in respect to a phone purchased by my daughter at the university Cellular Plus store in Missoula MT. I called Cellular Plus to dispute the charge on two occasions in August 18 and 19, 2014 and left messages, which calls were not returned. I called again to take exception to the proposed charge on Sept. 2, 2014, again left a message and once again received no response. I also wrote Cellular Plus on September 2, 2014 and transmitted the letter (excerpts below) via email to provide details supporting my dispute in respect to the proposed charge. The next day, September 3rd, I received an email response from Cellular Plus in which the writer began with an apology for having not responded sooner. The writer further indicated that she would be contacting her Verizon rep “to have her look further into the notes on this account and see what she can find.” She concluded her email response to me with “There is no guarantee that this will eliminate the debt. Your daughter purchased the phone at a discounted price $9.99 and our cost far exceeds that. But I will wait to see what the rep has to say since the line is still currently active.”

Aside from the early termination fee, there are a number of concerns about the Cellular Plus letter of July 16, 2014 and the previous related business dealings with Cellular Plus as our daughter first purchased the phone (October 18, 2013) and then subsequently tried to recover from the loss of the cell phone (in Feb. 2014). The information provided to Cellular Plus on September 2, 2014 is provided below.

See below for excerpts from the 9/2/14 letter emailed to [redacted] (aka [redacted], [redacted], and on behalf of Cellplus Collections):

" There are a number of concerns about your letter and related circumstances which need to be addressed.

1. In your letter, you refer to an electronic agreement and you attach a copy of an agreement which has an electronic signature of [daughter's name], my daughter. This agreement is not dated. In the agreement, none of the special provisions have been initialed. These would certainly require initialing by a customer such as [daughter's name] (or any other unsuspecting university student). This indicates, and my daughter has confirmed, that none of the special provisions including your referenced ‘185 day provision’, were explained at the time of purchase. This type of sales practice does not seem to meet a ‘fair-play’ standard and would not be protective of normal consumers’ rights, in particular university student consumers.

2. At the time of purchase in October 2013, my daughter indicated to the sales staff at your university store that she carried Verizon-provided insurance coverage and no one in Cellular Plus indicated to her that such insurance would not cover (in the event of loss) this phone which was offered by and purchased from Cellular Plus, a Verizon Premium Retailer. Again this seems like an unreasonable and unfair approach to conducting business.

3. Furthermore, it was also not obvious to our daughter at the time of purchase that she was not dealing with Verizon itself (i.e. the corporate entity) further magnifying the significance of no one in Cellular Plus, Verizon Wireless Premium Retailer, explaining the importance of additional insurance, above and beyond the Verizon-provided coverage mentioned above, if in fact such additional insurance was what was needed.

4. On 2/11/14, after the loss of the Motorola RAZR phone, the university Cellular Plus store staff did inform [daughter's name] that she could not get her phone replaced with the Verizon-provided insurance because she did not have a phone to ‘return’, notwithstanding the fact that her Verizon-provided insurance would in fact have covered such lost phone. When she then asked to reactivate her old I-phone, once again the staff in the university Cellular Plus store conveniently did not indicate that so doing would trigger a previously unexplained obligation in the form of an early termination charge for not using the RAZR for a long enough time period (i.e. the 185 day provision).

5. All throughout these relevant months, we have continued to make all payments associated with Verizon Wireless master account [complainant's acct. no.] and there have been no changes to the [daughter's line #] line level of service nor has there been any associated change in charge amounts for account [daughter's line #/acct] from Verizon Wireless. Please explain how Verizon Wireless would have any basis for failing to pay Cellular Plus, Verizon Wireless Premium Retailer, the bonus to which your letter refers (i.e. Cellular Plus's letter of 7/16/14 discussing the early termination fee.)

6. There have been no changes to the account in the relevant time period and we certainly did not discontinue service on account [daughter's line #/acct] with Verizon Wireless, for whom Cellular Plus is a Verizon Premium Retailer."Desired Settlement: A. Drop the demand for an early termination fee of $500 and unwind the process of collection which has recently been initiated by an Arizona firm on behalf of [redacted]. Said collection process nowhere bears the Cellular Plus name and it appears they have sold the collection to an unrelated party. This action further distances Cellular Plus from their responsibility to deal with our complaint and is further evidence of their poor business practice.

B. Cellular Plus should change its business practices to reflect a commitment to dealing with unsuspecting university students (and any consumers for that matter) so that key contract provisions are highlighted, explained, initialed on any contracts and so on.

C. Properly train Cellular Plus employees so that they will: 1. provide accurate information regarding Verizon account-provided insurance rather than trying to sell their own insurance. 2. Know enough about standard cell phone insurance policies to provide correct information that a 'lost' phone IS/May Be covered by such insurance rather than saying flat out that it does not cover loss. 3. Provide clear warning to consumers at the time a phone is to be canceled if that cancellation will trigger Cellular Plus's early termination fee. Such warning should include a signed acknowledgement by customer stating that they will pay the early termination charge.

D. Cellular Plus, Verizon Wireless Premium Retailer, should make it clear and obvious to consumers that they are not Verizon.

E. Cellular Plus should make clear to consumers who may carry existing cell phone insurance through Verizon whether or not such insurance is useable for Cellular Plus products and if not then why not.

Review: In March, my son took his phone into the store to have a button fixed on his I Phone(the one that turns the screen on/off)I purchased a protection plan for the phone, however, the employee working ([redacted], who no longer works there)decided not to use the protection plan because it was still covered under warranty. [redacted] called Verizon and had them give my son instructions on how to get the phone replaced. In April, the account was charged $300 for a new phone. Verizon stated the Apple Warehouse found corrosion in the charging port and determined it had water/humidity damage, therefore, it canceled out the warranty. After a month of several phone calls to several people at the Cellular Plus store in Helena and Billings, [redacted] called me today and told me there is nothing they can do about the charge. I complained about the poor customer service and he did apologize for that and stated he is doing training with his employees on how to better handle and follow up on these type of situations. As for the charge for the phone, they are not responsible. He said his employees are not trained, do not, and are not required to check for water damage or corrosion. I feel they should check before having it sent off to warranty. I bought a $200 protection plan from Cellular Plus to be used and honored. Not to pay $300 for a new phone. I explained to him if the employee is the one who decides not to give my son the option to leave his phone at Cellular Plus to be fixed under the protection plan and has him send if off to the warehouse, then that employee should be responsible for checking the phone for water damage/corrosion. My son had no idea the phone had corrosion in the charging port. The phone was charging fine, working fine and has never been dropped in water. He took the phone into Cellular Plus to have the button fixed and ended up paying $300 for a new phone that had nothing to do with the broken button. Again, [redacted] stated he was sorry and there was nothing he could do.Desired Settlement: I feel Cellular Plus owes my son $300. My son should not have had to pay for a new phone. I bought the protection plan, it should have been covered and repaired under Cellular Plus.

Consumer

Response:

I would like to start with an apology for my delayed response. My response to the letter from Cellular Plus is: I am an authorized user on the account. My brother added me so I would be able to further resolve this issue. When [redacted], my son, went into the store, he brought a copy of his protection plan (which he left in Montana and he is here in Arizona for the summer) with intentions to have only his phone button fixed. When the store rep looked up his account and saw it was still under warranty by Apple he was NOT given the option to send it back or use the protection plan. The store rep only proceeded to make a phone call and hand him the phone. [redacted] did answer no to water or liquid damage. His phone never had water damage or been dropped in any liquid. However when the Apple warehouse received his phone, they claim the charging part had visible signs of corrosion which they consider water/liquid damage. [redacted] was never asked to inspect his charging port for corrosion. [redacted] never noticed this corrosion when plugging or unplugging his phone charger. The store clerk at Cellular Plus would not need to remove the battery pack to see this corrosion. If the corrosion in the charging port is considered water/liquid physical damage, I feel the store clerk should have checked. Cellular plus is the expert on cellular phones, my son is not. [redacted] should have not been expected to know to check for corrosion before he answered no to water/physical damage. If the store clerk would have checked for this as physical damage, the phone would not have been sent to the warehouse. I would have much rather paid the protection plan fee than the $300 replacement fee. I have attached the pictures Apple sent Verizon of the corrosion in the charging port. Thank you, [redacted]

Business

Response:

In regards to this complaint, we will be responding as follows. We will not be providing any contract or documents for the account as the person who is making this complaint is not on the account, authorized to make changes or have any legal rights to the account or numbers contained in the account.

In the event that a customer enters our store or calls us about a phone that is defective, we immediately check to see if it is still under the manufacture's warranty, which will provide the customer a free replacement, as long as there is no physical or liquid damage. The reason the warranty department is our first step, is because there is no cost to the customer, as long as the phone does not arrive at the warranty warehouse with physical or liquid damage. In order to verify that there is no liquid or physical damage, we call the warranty department for the customer and then after explaining what the phone's issue is, we put the customer on the phone. We do not perform a physical or liquid damage test on the phone. (If the customer brings in a phone that has obvious signs of damage like a broken screen or the phone is in two pieces we would save the customer the time and direct them to their insurance or protection plan) The warranty department will ask the customer a number of questions, including if there is any physical damage, cracked screen, smashed charging port, ect. They will also ask the customer if the phone has any liquid damage. If the customer says no to both questions, the warranty will explain that they will send out a replacement and then the customer is required to send the defective phone back. With phones, such as iphones that do not have a removable battery or back, it is impossible for any visible damage to be accessed. This is why the warranty facility asks an extensive amount of questions. Once the phone arrives at the warehouse, it is checked for both physical and liquid damage, it is found to have either, the customer is charged for the damaged device. This procedure is explained over the phone and the customer has to agree to the terms over the phone. If the customer says that there is physical or liquid damage to the phone, the warranty department will advise them that the manufacture's warranty will not cover either of those things. At that point the customer would be directed to use their insurance through Verizon, if purchased, or the ProtectCell which is a protection plan that Cellular Plus offers. The customer then would pay a deductible, if insurance, or an admin/replacement fee for the ProtectCell. Depending on the phone, the price the customer would pay to get a replacement can range from $100-$200 and then the phone would be mailed to the customer within 1-2 days. The customer is always given both of those options.

When [redacted]'s son came into the store and said that his button wasn’t working and his phone wasn't obviously physically damaged, the rep working put him on the phone with the warranty department as is procedure. Her son stated that there was no liquid or physical damage and agreed to the terms and conditions and sent the phone back. [redacted] determined there was liquid damage and therefore charged the account for the damaged phone. At that time the warranty department accessed the fees, not Cellular Plus.

Review: Assistant Manager basically swindled us. Misrepresented the amount of our monthly bill (i.e., told it would cost MUCH less than it actually does); told us he would throw in free accessories, which we later discovered he charged us for; told us [redacted] would waive our activation fees ($120), which they could not, and sold us two phones on the premise that we would receive a rebate that was not valid.Desired Settlement: We have contacted [redacted] and are supposed to hear back from them, though have not yet. I don't expect we'll receive anything back, but wanted to make sure Revdex.com is aware this store is bad news.

Business

Response:

RE: Complaint number [redacted]

To whom it may concern:

Regarding the complaint from [redacted] regarding charges at the Cellular Plus location in Missoula, MT. [redacted] and her Husband [redacted] came into the store on Reserve late on November 25th to discuss options of adding her Husband on to the account. The customers were walked them through the price options, helping them both to understand the way Share everything is set up and how it was the best option given that they both had smartphones. The option to get two Jetpacks was also discussed but they decided they wouldn't be separated too often in the near future. After discussing several options for phones they did not want to venture far from [redacted] products because they had several other [redacted] devices that would be perfect for compatibility. After explaining the differences between the 5S and the 5C, they decided on the 5C for the both of them. Throughout the process of activating all three of these devices in EROES, [redacted] helped [redacted] and [redacted] find cases they might like for their phones, before activating the phones I discussed with both [redacted] and [redacted] that the first bill would be noticeably higher because any new equipment activated on [redacted] Wireless costs $35 on the first bill and $30 on the first bill to renew service (upgrade). After activation through Eroes I went through the sale in RQ4 and discussed the option for a protection plan with [redacted] and she was under the impression that their phones were covered under their home insurance, I recommended protect cell questioning the assurance that their phones were covered under their policy and they were heavily considering it, but still had to be absolutely sure that it wasn't. After collecting accessories and discounting because they both got 4,1 rang out the sale splitting the amount between both [redacted] and [redacted]’s cards. We went over paper work after the sale was complete and initialed and signed both the customer agreement and the Cellular Plus agreement confirming that they understood the Plan, the first month fees, the return policy, the rebate, and the 2 year agreement to [redacted], etc. [redacted] called the store a few days later to ask to pay for Protect Cell on both phones over the phone because it was in fact not covered by their home policy, [redacted] advised [redacted] to come in to the store to pay for it because our policy states we cant take credit card information over the phone. [redacted] then told [redacted] he would be in later that day to purchase it. We did not hear back from [redacted] or [redacted] until You had contacted me to advise me to reach out to the customer because they were having issues. I contacted the first number on the invoice and reached [redacted], he said he didn’t know much about the situation but that t should try and contact [redacted] to see if their was anything I could help out with. [redacted] did not answer her phone but a voice mail was left with a contact number to get back to me so that I could help them with any questions they might have. The customer agreement and Sales invoice is attached, if you have any more questions please call me or shoot me an email back. If I can get this resolved with [redacted] I would be happy to try and rectify the situation, but the store was never contacted with questions regarding charges or concerns, if you have any more questions please call me or shoot me an email back.

The complaint to your bureau is the first we have heard of any issues at all. We have tried to reach out to the customer to recitfy this but they have not returned any of our attempts.

Thank you

District Sales Manager