Time Warner Charges Flood Victims $300 for Each Damaged Cable Box

FoxNews ^ | Wed., July 31, 2002

[Jemian]

SAN ANTONIO

[Jemian]

Or, they could do like I do, not watch TV as a regular habit anyway. I save money all the around, no cable fee, no satellite dish and better family relations.

[Area51]

That is what NORMAL folks consider when they buy insurance! Ever heard of Acts of Nature? Ever asked questions of your Insurance agent?

Try reading a Homeowners policy once.

[cake_crumb]

"If they have insurance then it is no big deal. IF not they should have."

Whether or not I have insurance on my house, it doesn't cover seperate contract items like cable boxes. Even if I DID have insurance that covered the cost...I'd get ticked enough to buy a satellite dish, or a generic converter over the Internet, just because of the outrageous price. Then again, I never liked AOL, and I don't like Time Warner...since they merged, I dislike their un-prosecuted-under-Anti-Trust-law-as-Microsoft-was-monopoly twice as much.

[DJ88]

First of all, if these people have flood insurance (and they would more than likely have to if they live in a flood plain area and own a house), I don't see why the flood insurance shouldn't cover it. It's not "welching" on anything.

Insurance companies are notorious for screwing their customers. You pay homeowner's insurance; yet, they fail to tell you that for a little bit more a month, you can get a better policy that would cover any items lost in a fire, burglary, etc. at the price it would cost you to replace the item NOW, not when you bought it 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. How many people know that? How many people know that if you have a stereo system in your car and it's not bolted down with nuts and bolts they will not give you the face-value of that item?

It should be mandatory that an insurance company is required to go over each and every option available to you so that you KNOW what to expect. And if they don't, then people should ASK.

As for your attacks on Jemian, they're juvenile and immature. AOL/Time Warner is making tons of money and there is no reason why they can't replace the boxes at no charge to the customer. Fine print or not, it would be the correct thing to do in this case, but unfortunately, because they have a monopoly on the market, they feel free to do whatever they please. These people probably not only lost their stupid boxes, but other valuables as well, and you act as if the cable company is going to go bankrupt if they pay for the cost of replacing the boxes.

Do us all a favor, and never become a PR person.

[VOA]

That is what is called being responsible. If they have insurance then it is no big deal.
IF not they should have.

I think the problem is with the size of the gear.
People who've ever leased/rented a car know they are responsible and must have
insurance of some sort to cover them.

I (until this news report) didn't even consider that a cable box, when rented,
needs to be insured by the person paying the rental bills.

But I can see this now and will be smarter about the insurance angle when renting/leasing.

However, I'd love to know how many letters AOL-Time-Warner get in the coming months
with a $300 check, a request to terminate services, and a Polaroid of the customer's
new satellite dish.
(Of course, I won't be suprised if AOL-TW haven't hedged their bets by investing
in this alternate delivery system.)

[HairOfTheDog]

I agree with you... this is a quite legal policy to have, but a loser of an idea.

[DJ88]

And probably one that they do DO NOT advertise very well.

[cake_crumb]

"Insurance companies are notorious for screwing their customers"

Perhaps Time Warner is about to become notorious for screwing the insurance companies.

[spokanite]

Dittos for DirecTV. All cable companies has something that we customers don't like, but I believe DirecTV out paces all others with the options and sports packages.

[Neets]

Kudos to YOU once again counselor....AGAIN providing the sensible voice of reason to a very unfortunate situation.

[Chemist_Geek]

The fact that people are being held responsible?

Held responsible for WHAT? Having the temerity to allow flood waters into their home? Not being manly enough to stand like King Canute and fend off the tide? Jeez...

[Area51]

I don't disagree with the thought that TW could cut them some slack.

My problem with this is that no-one seems to acknowledge the leasee is in fact responsible for the equipment they leased.

I also don't buy the fact that lack of planning on ones part constitutes a requirement for someone to bail them out. Learn from your mistakes.

I got bit from the Insurance bug when My home was broken into. It cost me a whole bunch of money. I had thousands in coins and guns that I wasn't reimbursed for by my Homeowners insurance., because I didn't have a specific rider for each.

And when I read the fine print, it was clearly laid out. I didn't go whining for my neighbors to cover the lose. I now read the Policy, and ask questions. And buy the riders I need to cover replacement cost on my "things". I take pictures, inventory and store on a CD and put in a Safety deposit box.

[Guillermo]

No, they should have had flood insurance. If you don't have insurance, is that reason to not have to be responsible?

You tell me why TW should eat the cost. Tell me how they should be reimbursed.

[DJ88]

I believe you are correct. Not only was this a hair brained idea, but to think that people who have lost everything now have to pay for a cable box because they weren't able to stop the rain or part the flooding rivers to avoid these "precious" cable boxes is outrageous.

Ted Turner may no longer be in charge, but this is proof positive of what he thinks of people in general, and I would fully expect to see his ghost roaming the halls at the headquarters of AOL/TIME WARNER.

[Guillermo]

A homeowners policy insures the contents of the house as well.

Assuming it doesn't cover the cable box, does that absolve you of all responsibility??

If not having insurance absolved someone of responsibility, why would anyone have insurance in the first place?

[from occupied ga]

now you want these people to have insured a cable converter

It's called homeowner's insurance. It should cover the contents to as little an extent as the insurance company can get away with paying.

[vikingchick]

I wonder if you get any credit towards the $300 if you hand over your waterlogged cable box found in the tangled ruins near your house.

[DJ88]

Thank you for showing just how humane and caring you two really are...calling people who have been ravaged by flood waters "stupid" because they didn't have flood insurance; telling us that they should have read the "fine print" when they leased the box from AOL/Time Warner; telling us how smart you two are. It's really raised my spirits to see such an outpouring of care and concern on your part towards your own fellow Americans.

I'm outta here. Eat my dirt.

[Blackdakota]

I agree with you. Although I relish any chance I get to bash a company like Time Warner Cable, it seems people need to have their home insurance cover the costs of the flooding including the cable box. If their insurance doesn't cover it then I guess thats just too bad. On another note, Dish Network kicks Time Warner Cable's butt. I've yet to have my dish go out during a storm as they claimed would happen.

[DJ88]

Yes, I would think you should. If you have a gas leak in your house and you don't know it, then when you turn on the light switch and blow your house to kingdom come should the insurance company just say, "Sorry?" Or will the Gas company say, "You should have read the fine print."

This was a particularly poor move on AOL/Time Warner's part.