• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Misleading/Lucrative? $175 Vonage Rebate that "Tricks" you into 2 year contract

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

uninvisible

Junior Member
Misleading/Lucrative? $175 Vonage Rebate that "Tricks" you into 2 year contract

Pennsylvania!

A rebate posted at: http://www.circuitcity.com/IMAGE/help_and_services/rebates/2007/V0727_031807.pdf lists the following instructions for new customers "to qualify for the $175 rebate:

1. Purchase any Vonage Enabled Device at a www.CircuitCity.com between March 18, 2007 and April 7, 2007.
2. Activate your Vonage service within 15 days of purchase. Your service must remain active for at least 60 days.
3. Complete this form (incomplete forms will not be accepted)
4. Mail the following in one envelope:
• This completed rebate form
• Original or photocopy of your sales receipt/packing slip (circle the qualifying Vonage Enabled Device)
• Original, photocopy or handwritten MAC address label cut from the product’s package (see example)
5. Your submission must be postmarked within 30 days of Vonage service activation. Offer# VON-0727
P.O. Box 5955
Young America, MN 55558-5955

Those are the only requirements listed - wouldn't it be fair to assume this is all a consumer need do to obtain the rebate? This was my thought. However, the top corner lists:

"Must remain a paying Vonage customer for a full 2 years to be valid for this rebate."

What is the difference between being 'qualifying for' and 'being valid for' a rebate? If a customer refused to pay for service for the full two years based on the first clause, what likelihood would he have of winning in arbitration (mandated by Vonage's TOS)? Vonage's terms of service can be found here: http://www.vonage.com/features_terms_service.php

Any advice or places to start looking would be greatly appreciated!
 


uninvisible

Junior Member
Also note from the TOS

"2. SERVICE TERM.
2.1 (a) Service Term. Service is offered and paid for on a prescribed recurring basis for a term that begins on the date that Vonage activates your Service and ends on the day before the same date in the following period ("Service Term"). Subsequent terms of this Agreement automatically renew for the same Service Term unless you give us written notice of non-renewal at least ten (10) days before the end of the applicable Service Term. You are purchasing the Service for the full Service Term, meaning that if you attempt to disconnect Service prior to the end of the applicable Service Term, you will be responsible for all charges relating to the then-current Service Term, including unbilled charges, plus a disconnection fee, if applicable, all of which will immediately become due and payable. You will also be responsible for charges for the following Service Term in the event that you do not provide the requisite ten-day disconnect notice as described above.

2.1(b) Other Commitments. If you accept an equipment upgrade or other promotional or plan benefit, such as a free month of Service, free installation, a rebate or other incentive, there may be a commitment associated with the benefit you accepted ("Commitment"). To the extent there is a Commitment, it begins on the date you activate the new equipment or accept the promotion or benefit. The Commitment period will be disclosed as part of the promotion or plan. If you disconnect service prior to the end of the Commitment period, you agree to pay Vonage a recovery fee in an amount equal to the difference between the price you paid and the regular price of the good, service or other benefit you received at the time the Commitment period began. Recovery fees are cumulative and in addition to any other charges or fees you may owe Vonage, including any disconnection fees.
 

moburkes

Senior Member
I'm not sure how you were tricked, when the font for the 2 year requirement is larger than the font for the rest of the information.
 

uninvisible

Junior Member
I never did actually send in for the rebate, however, isn't Vonage in murky territory by listing separate requirements to "qualify for" and to "be valid for" the rebate? Generally, when you have "qualified for" something, doesn't that mean you've done everything you need to do to get it? Additionally, it is entirely possible to fill out this rebate form without agreeing to Vonage's TOS as an employee at CC "clicks through" the entire TOS.

The crux of my case is that the two different requirements listed for the rebate are contradictory, unless there is a clear legal distrinction between qualification and validation for consumers seeking rebates. Although I did agree to the TOS, it would seem to me I'd have a common sense case for cancelling the service after the required 60 days given the five listed instructions for the rebate
 
Last edited:

moburkes

Senior Member
I have no idea what they would do, if, after you've received and cashed your rebate check, you then cancelled your service. You can apply, OR, let it go.
 

uninvisible

Junior Member
Thank you for the answer.

Would the Uniform Commercial Code be the place to start looking if I wanted to find the laws governing consumer rebates? Additionally, I'm a university undergrad - do you think it would it be "impolite" or "out of place" for me to send a question like this via email or during office hours to one of my school's law profs in consumer law? I live quite close to the required place for arbitration.

One drawback is they have my credit card to charge if they wanted to recover the cost of their (in my opinion misleading) promotion.
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
If your case rests on the difference between "qualified for" and "valid for", I don't see it going anywhere - they are two, not mutually exclusive, concepts. Think of a mortgage. You can "qualify" for one, go to buy a property, and then find out that you don't meet some underwriting restriction and not get the mortgage. Is that fraud?

It would seem this rebate operates similarly.
 

uninvisible

Junior Member
The law professor responded:

I agree that there seems to be a contradiction between the two statemetns (although you
have to read them very carefully to make sure). Itàs an interpretation question
-- if you have two contradictory statements in a written K which governs. The
question depends on the intention of the parties. One interpretation guideline
which would be favorable to you is the contra pproferentem rule, which says that
you interpret ambiguous statements against (contrary to the preference of) the
party who drafted the statement -- in this case, your seller.

Is anyone here familiar with this contra proferentem rule?
 

You Are Guilty

Senior Member
Is anyone here familiar with this contra proferentem rule?
It's the law in every state I know of that ambiguous contracts are construed against the draftor. The problem is I don't see this as being ambiguous, nor even contradictory.

Given the practical reality of you litiging this issue will likely result in a good deal of lost time and expense, how much is fighting this worth to you?
 

uninvisible

Junior Member
Thanks for the post - it isn't something I intend at the moment to pursue. Still it is my opinion that there IS a contradition in saying you qualify to receive a rebate by doing a, b and c but that you are only valid to recieve it by doing d as well. If the language stated that you must fulfill a, b, c "as a precondition before filing" or as "a waiting period before submitting a rebate", well then, OK. This clearly wasn't the case. The mortgage example given above isn't valid because it confuses pre-qualification and qualification; wouldn't you consider it a contradiction if a mortgage contract was written stating:

"To qualify for a $1000 refund after your first year, you must make make your first 12 payments. To be valid for a refund, you must make your first 24 payments."?

This is I think a better analogy. In my understanding, if you qualify for something, you are entilted to it - it is the granting of a right. Note it is NOT qualification to submit for the rebate - it is qualification to have the money itself.

I'm still tempted to submit for the refund on principle, but I'm sure it'd be more trouble than it's worth in dollar terms.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top