Cell Phone Company Breach of Contract?

[emach1]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

Before I signed any contract, I made sure to ask about coverage in a specific area. They insisted coverage was good for the area. However, after trying the service, the coverage was not good. Every call was dropped. So, the cell phone company suspected damaged equipment. When we recieved new phone, again - dropped calls. By this time, it had been past the trial period from when the contract could be reversed.
At this point, it had become clear to me that coverage was not available for the area despite their insistance that it was. However, every call made lasted for a minute then would drop. It got to where we could not use it at all. Was I expected to continue paying for this phone that had no coverage?
Despite every attempt by this company to convince me there was coverage in this area, I continued to pay until I got disgusted with the fact that I was paying for something that did not provide me value. Now, they want close to 1000 dollars for the contract. It went to collection. I will not pay it. Why should I have to pay for something that doesn't work? At one point, a rogue employee admitted the coverage was not good for the area. I'm sure they still have it on tape and it will be part of my case if I have to sue them.
The bottom line question is: can companies lie about coverage and still collect on contracts? Isnt there some provision that says the company must provide reliable, working service?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[Antigone*]

Before I signed any contract, I made sure to ask about coverage in a specific area. They insisted coverage was good for the area. However, after trying the service, the coverage was not good. Every call was dropped. So, the cell phone company suspected damaged equipment. When we recieved new phone, again - dropped calls. By this time, it had been past the trial period from when the contract could be reversed.
At this point, it had become clear to me that coverage was not available for the area despite their insistance that it was. However, every call made lasted for a minute then would drop. It got to where we could not use it at all. Was I expected to continue paying for this phone that had no coverage?
Despite every attempt by this company to convince me there was coverage in this area, I continued to pay until I got disgusted with the fact that I was paying for something that did not provide me value.

Your credibility is that of a child when you speak in absolutes as you do.

Now, they want close to 1000 dollars for the contract. It went to collection. I will not pay it. Why should I have to pay for something that doesn't work? At one point, a rogue employee admitted the coverage was not good for the area. I'm sure they still have it on tape and it will be part of my case if I have to sue them.

Got to watch out for those rogue employees...they can really victimize you. Oh wait, so now it's not just circumstance that is vicitmizing you it's the cell phone company too

The bottom line question is: can companies lie about coverage and still collect on contracts? Isnt there some provision that says the company must provide reliable, working service?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

No the bottom line is that you didn't act within the period you were given to rectify the situation and now since you refuse to pay, you will continue to be a roach!