Tuesday, April 27, 2010

You've got to be kidding me Sprint.

So, today - I went in to my local Sprint brick and mortar store to pay my bill. I've been doing this the whole time with Sprint. Close to 9 months. When the rep asked how I wanted to pay, I told him - in cash. Oh, he says. Last week they changed the computer software and now you have to pay a fee of 5 dollars to pay with cash.

I couldn't believe my ears. With cash? I confirmed. Yep. He says. They want you to use your debit card. Which signals to me that they get some fee for making people use a debit card.

Even more irritating is - that is almost a full 3% of my bill. When did companies start charging for accepting cash? Because, I'm not going to pay any of their fees. I'll just plug it into my online banking and they can bite me.

If I was close enough to the end of my contract, that would be enough to make me switch.

Perhaps Sprint should take a clue from Verizon.

The Associated Press
"NEW YORK - Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE: VZ), the largest wireless carrier in the country, is finding there's an end to the number of people who will sign two-year contracts for cell phone service."

You know what will make people sign contracts? A one year contract, and the first cell company that starts doing that will get a flood of people like me who understand that technology is moving too fast to sit in a two year contract.

And, be charged 3% for the pleasure of paying cash.


  1. Feel free to correct a Pannonian for mistaking US mores, but doesn't it say on those ugly green pieces of paper, "This note is legal tender for all debts public and private"? Again, this may be a misconception, but the reason Benny B. can buy all that stuff from the banks is that he can print lots of notes like that and people *are obligate to take them*. And that means that you can't add a surcharge for the privilege, because in that case, it ain't legal tender. No?

    And FWIW the word verification for this comment was "kooki." Is Blogger getting all judgmental now?

  2. I don't know how it is legal. I've never heard of being told something costs X - but paying in cash costs you X plus 5 bucks.

    Oddly, it seems like the cell phone providers new way to say "our reps are too busy to handle your cash transaction". Legal tender or not - apparently.

    If they only concentrated as much on how slow their crappy computer system is. It shouldn't take 3 minutes for a rep to pull up my account. Then I wouldn't take up so much of their effing reps time.

    They should thank their lucky stars to get anyone into their brick stores. They might buy something. So far what I've seen from Sprint is a bunch of despondent employees sitting on their asses surfing their phones.

    You can read about AT&T doing it also. here.

    As for blogger? Brighter than your average Sprint employee I guess.

  3. I work for a small non-profit corp and used to cash some of my paychecks. At the issuing bank (a smaller Central Valley bank, not nationwide), no less. Until last year when I was told that starting May 1, 2009 there would be a $5.00 (!!!) fee for cashing a "personal" check. I pointed out that this was my paycheck -- it had the company's name on it, and two signatures from company officers. But because our 100-year-old treasurer doesn't use a computer but hand writes all the checks, it was considered "personal." That aside, it's my effing money -- how dare they want to charge me five bucks for getting it?!!

  4. I hate when places give you excuses that don't quit make sense. The company name has to be printed on the check. Or else they wouldn't give them a business account. So, it should be obvious that it is a company and not personal.

    The banks are starting to be sandpaper on a nerve. A lot of the charges suck, but you can understand the reasons. That is just gouging. They need to send a night courier no matter what the check is.