Verizon Wireless sent an $83.00 bill to a collection agency when they never informed me I owed them any money.
This bill resulted from combining my son's and daughter's accounts several years ago.
They claim they have been sending a bill to an old address. But we never received a bill from them. They keep[ accusing me of lying about this.
I pay this bill every month without fail and have never owed them a cent. Yet now they are treating me like a delinquent.
A customer service agent (named Armen) today offered to allow me to pay the $83 and get the collection agency to stop hounding me. Then after consulting with someone else he came back and told me I would still have to pay the collection agency's fee.
Does Verizon wireless have no common sense?
Unbelievably frustrated at the way they are handing this.
I am willing to pay but I am not willing to deal with a rude collection agency or pay their fees.
Is there no one who can help me?
I can feel for your situation, but it boils down to just a few things:
First, I have never seen a representative call a customer a liar. If this happened, report it. Second, if it went to a collector, then you have owed this balance past 120 days. Third, if the account is written off, you will have to pay the associated fees. Last, but not least, it has nothing to do with common sense on behalf of the company. They only know that an account is grotesquely past due and that is what the agencies are for. If there is an issue with payments not getting reflected, you need to prove beyond hearsay.
But they never informed us that we owed this money. How can I prove a negative: that we never received a bill from them?
Good question. Logically speaking, you can prove a negative if the object, what's existence is being denied, in relation to the container of said object is not said to be too small or too few in existence to be observed adequately. For instance, if you say there are no baby elephants in your refridgerator, you can prove it quite easily because the object's relationship with respect to the size of the container allows adequate observation, whereas if you say that there is no bacteria in your refridgerator, the ability to observe absolutely in light of our current technological capabilities would not allow such a conclusion - that is, if reason is what is truly valued in the assessment. Why go through this? Because it serves my purpose, which is to say that the question, while logically valid, has no bearing on the matter.
The dispute contained within the original post stated that you have never owed Verizon Wireless a cent, but this is an assertion which demands evidence to be valid, otherwise we are left with hearsay. While it is technically possible to prove a negative, which I showed to some extent, the matter is about providing evidence to support a positive assertion, even if said positive assertion is pertaining to the negation of a particular claim (i.e. that you do, in fact, owe money). The negative in this, once asserted positively, demands evidence to support; this is true in every area of thought and business.
I know I talk or write, as it were, a lot, but I hope there was some value in my words. The notification of the due amount is not as relevant as the fact that the amount is certainly due; if, however, the amount is not due, you must show this to be true.
They clearly are lying when they say there is nothing they can do about this. I just called the collection agency and they told me I CAN"T pay the bill because Verizon took back the account. So who's lying to whom?
Every now and again, written off accounts will transfer to in-house from an OCA if the OCA cannot collect. In-house recovery will attempt and look for another OCA to help. The last agent should have transferred to their in-house recovery if this occurred.