AllDeaf.com
Mobile - Perks - Advertise - Spy - Who Quoted Me  
Go Back   AllDeaf.com > Deaf Interests > Deaf Products & Technologies > Relay Services
LIKE AllDeaf on Facebook FOLLOW AllDeaf on Twitter
Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
Unread 11-23-2011, 04:29 PM   #1
Chevy57
Sherlock Hound
 
Chevy57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: O..HI..O!
Posts: 10,981
Sorenson vs ZVRS

Customers who tried other videophones are coming back to Sorenson. Watch this video to see why…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=VqMUw4WJEKk
Chevy57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Alt Today
All Deaf

Beitrag Sponsored Links

__________________
This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members.
Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com
   
Unread 11-23-2011, 05:13 PM   #2
webexplorer
Registered User
 
webexplorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 5,475
Send a message via AIM to webexplorer
The problem is that Sorenson refused to provide a new telephone number for anyone who wants to get a Sorenson's new videophone device because once the customers received a videophone from a different service. That should not be a problem.

By the way, this YouTube's comment is locked out because it doesn't want you to know something that you didn't know - like the alternative number.

I really do believe that ANY VRS service companies (i.e. Sorenson, ZVRS, Purple, etc.) really do not own your telephone number because the number is a third party company. That's why it tricked you about porting your number back to its service. Once you got, your number and you own it no matter what. Of course, FCC pays the relay services millions of dollars every year. It is ridiculous that the company wants to get your number back. I am just simply shocked about it.

I forgot to add one more thing: Some of you have different devices like a mobile, a computer, and a videophone, and the customers have three different telephone numbers in one service. That is part of selling the different numbers for extra profit from a third party service.
webexplorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-23-2011, 05:17 PM   #3
posts from hell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,430
Wow, if this isnt a slander by Sorenson.... I dont know what it is.
posts from hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-23-2011, 05:42 PM   #4
SneakerNet
My IQ: 12
 
SneakerNet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: 26°53'41.95" N 41°40'50.62" W
Posts: 2,251
Most of the Sorenson YouTube's comments are locked out. Doesn't make any differences anyway.

Secondly, many of deaf people have no clear understanding about porting, what will happen when ported, the before and after affect and such, and understand what it mean to "get a free VP" like ZVRS, when showing how much it cost to buy one, customer will look at it..and say "wow.. expensive!' and convince that customer that he/she can get it free by porting number from other VRS provider. You know, they are showing how much it cost to buy one... to deaf people... but for Sorenson VPs (any VPs) always free, no matter what...for ZVRS, if you want different number, it cost money to buy one. It's no brainer, get a free one... Sorenson!

Now I don't know anything about Sorenson refused to provide a new number, I don't know if that mean because the customer ported a number from Sorenson to other provider? Maybe there's a reason for it. If customer have a numbers originally from other provider and customer want new number for new VP... and Sorenson refused? That will be a different story.
__________________
No trees were harmed in the sending of this email; however, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
SneakerNet is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-23-2011, 06:09 PM   #5
webexplorer
Registered User
 
webexplorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 5,475
Send a message via AIM to webexplorer
Quote:
Originally Posted by SneakerNet View Post
Most of the Sorenson YouTube's comments are locked out. Doesn't make any differences anyway.

Secondly, many of deaf people have no clear understanding about porting, what will happen when ported, the before and after affect and such, and understand what it mean to "get a free VP" like ZVRS, when showing how much it cost to buy one, customer will look at it..and say "wow.. expensive!' and convince that customer that he/she can get it free by porting number from other VRS provider. You know, they are showing how much it cost to buy one... to deaf people... but for Sorenson VPs (any VPs) always free, no matter what...for ZVRS, if you want different number, it cost money to buy one. It's no brainer, get a free one... Sorenson!

Now I don't know anything about Sorenson refused to provide a new number, I don't know if that mean because the customer ported a number from Sorenson to other provider? Maybe there's a reason for it. If customer have a numbers originally from other provider and customer want new number for new VP... and Sorenson refused? That will be a different story.
Actually, I asked the agent to give me a new number and I also asked how much it cost for me to buy the new number. The agent said no any of these questions that I asked. What a ridiculous! It makes no sense at all.
webexplorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-23-2011, 09:21 PM   #6
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Needless to say, no ZVRS employee is happy with Sorenson's allegations claimed in this video.

Expect to hear a response.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-23-2011, 09:56 PM   #7
posts from hell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by VRSEngineer View Post
Needless to say, no ZVRS employee is happy with Sorenson's allegations claimed in this video.

Expect to hear a response.
Good.
posts from hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 06:12 AM   #8
zerodog
Registered User
 
zerodog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oh Thanks Heaven!
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by webexplorer View Post
Actually, I asked the agent to give me a new number and I also asked how much it cost for me to buy the new number. The agent said no any of these questions that I asked. What a ridiculous! It makes no sense at all.
that one you have the agent number? that where you can file the FCC if you wish..

The facts that Sorenson does charge us new number that cost $150.00 even on agreement right there. They will charge if want VP200 get work but for nTouch VP that 400 dollar and something...

Agent need being honest! Just keep that mind, it not agent fault its a management. You gotta remember they love us, really.. they love to work with us but not the management.
__________________
Life is giving to us, we earn it by giving it. Let the dead have the immortality of fame, but the living the immortality of love - mean next child earn the life from me, because I love my child that mean lot to me will give to next little person earn the immortality of love from families.
zerodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 06:14 AM   #9
zerodog
Registered User
 
zerodog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oh Thanks Heaven!
Posts: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chevy57 View Post
Customers who tried other videophones are coming back to Sorenson. Watch this video to see why…

Customers port back to Sorenson - YouTube
I am not try insulting...

here example..
Sean Berdy and Z4 Mobile - YouTube

that other example of misleading... FCC clearly that VRS is for DEAF and Hard of Hearing (hearing impaired). ZVRS let him set an example... that lame and now I lost respect because I am sure that do with get paid. Possible work part time as interpreter...
__________________
Life is giving to us, we earn it by giving it. Let the dead have the immortality of fame, but the living the immortality of love - mean next child earn the life from me, because I love my child that mean lot to me will give to next little person earn the immortality of love from families.
zerodog is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 01:15 PM   #10
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by zerodog View Post
I am not try insulting...

here example..
Sean Berdy and Z4 Mobile - YouTube

that other example of misleading... FCC clearly that VRS is for DEAF and Hard of Hearing (hearing impaired). ZVRS let him set an example... that lame and now I lost respect because I am sure that do with get paid. Possible work part time as interpreter...
zerodog: I've answered this fallacy before. Please see this alldeaf post:

http://www.alldeaf.com/1711540-post4.html

Summary:

So long as the hearing person _pays_ for a service account on a reoccurring basis with a VRS provider, and pays full price for a videophone device (unsubsidized), and their phone number is NOT put into the iTRS database, it is perfectly acceptable for hearies to place deaf videophone calls using a videophone serviced by a VRS provider.

Check this out:
Monthly Business Service Plan

This means that your friends/family with Z phones would be able to call you, but since the phone number isn't in iTRS, anyone with a non-Z phone would not.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 06:38 PM   #11
Chevy57
Sherlock Hound
 
Chevy57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: O..HI..O!
Posts: 10,981
Amy Cohen Efron s blog against Sorenson. She is happy about ZVRS. I am no longer a client of Sorenson Communications. See this blog.

Deaf World as Eye See It » Blog Archive » Sorenson, the 10-digit number is MINE! Goodbye!
Chevy57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 09:03 PM   #12
Oddball
Premium Member
 
Oddball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Toxic State
Posts: 4,811
I understand Amy's perspective about Sorenson.

However, I spoke with someone about ZVRS's illegal practice. A customer is interested in getting a Z20 phone and did fill out the application to receive a Z20 phone, but he or she was demanded to put his or her VP 200 phone number to port into Z20 phone. That customer felt that Z representative pushing him or her to jot down the number for porting purposes.

The purple representative backed off and respected customer's choice of VRS provider, but Z representative did not.

Are you being aware that Z representative removed a VP 200 and took it with him or her and left a customer a Z phone??? Is it all right? No. Z representative has no rights to take away VP 200 or other VRS provider device. If customer is not satisfied with other VRS provider device, then s/he can return the devices themselves.. Simple as that. Taking away a device from them?? No No.

Why not porting numbers from other VRS provider such as Purple, Convorelay, Viable, etc? Why does ZVRS focus on getting a port number from Sorenson only? Is it legal??? That bothers me.

I did get a porting number from Purple which I don't use to ZOJO (which I did not want). To the realization, I don't need ZOJO product and porting that number to Sorenson ntouch mobile and returned ZOJO product plus flasher back to Z because I never use ZOJO.

From what I find out more about ZVRS's actions, I lost respect for them. I use Convorelay and Sorenson products..that's it.
Oddball is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 09:07 PM   #13
posts from hell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
I understand Amy's perspective about Sorenson.

However, I spoke with someone about ZVRS's illegal practice. A customer is interested in getting a Z20 phone and did fill out the application to receive a Z20 phone, but he or she was demanded to put his or her VP 200 phone number to port into Z20 phone. That customer felt that Z representative pushing him or her to jot down the number for porting purposes.

The purple representative backed off and respected customer's choice of VRS provider, but Z representative did not.

Are you being aware that Z representative removed a VP 200 and took it with him or her and left a customer a Z phone??? Is it all right? No. Z representative has no rights to take away VP 200 or other VRS provider device. If customer is not satisfied with other VRS provider device, then s/he can return the devices themselves.. Simple as that. Taking away a device from them?? No No.

Why not porting numbers from other VRS provider such as Purple, Convorelay, Viable, etc? Why does ZVRS focus on getting a port number from Sorenson only? Is it legal??? That bothers me.

I did get a porting number from Purple which I don't use to ZOJO (which I did not want). To the realization, I don't need ZOJO product and porting that number to Sorenson ntouch mobile and returned ZOJO product plus flasher back to Z because I never use ZOJO.

From what I find out more about ZVRS's actions, I lost respect for them. I use Convorelay and Sorenson products..that's it.
Look at sorensons history... I am disgusted by it. I only use Convo.
posts from hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 10:38 PM   #14
webexplorer
Registered User
 
webexplorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 5,475
Send a message via AIM to webexplorer
I think that it is a big mess now with some companies. It seems that they are stealing the ideas each other for the new policies. I expect that the FCC will catch one of them or both and charge them a big fine.
webexplorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 10:52 PM   #15
wri7913
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
I understand Amy's perspective about Sorenson.

However, I spoke with someone about ZVRS's illegal practice. A customer is interested in getting a Z20 phone and did fill out the application to receive a Z20 phone, but he or she was demanded to put his or her VP 200 phone number to port into Z20 phone. That customer felt that Z representative pushing him or her to jot down the number for porting purposes.

The purple representative backed off and respected customer's choice of VRS provider, but Z representative did not.

Are you being aware that Z representative removed a VP 200 and took it with him or her and left a customer a Z phone??? Is it all right? No. Z representative has no rights to take away VP 200 or other VRS provider device. If customer is not satisfied with other VRS provider device, then s/he can return the devices themselves.. Simple as that. Taking away a device from them?? No No.

Why not porting numbers from other VRS provider such as Purple, Convorelay, Viable, etc? Why does ZVRS focus on getting a port number from Sorenson only? Is it legal??? That bothers me.

I did get a porting number from Purple which I don't use to ZOJO (which I did not want). To the realization, I don't need ZOJO product and porting that number to Sorenson ntouch mobile and returned ZOJO product plus flasher back to Z because I never use ZOJO.

From what I find out more about ZVRS's actions, I lost respect for them. I use Convorelay and Sorenson products..that's it.

If ZVRS's "practice was illegal" the FCC would fine them. Fact is they have not done so.

Facts are this. When a customer is interested in a Z20, they agree to port their Sorenson number in order to obtain a Z20. The customer signs an LOA agreeing to port the number and they also sign a Release Agreement that allows the Z installer to act as the authorized agent to ship the VP-200 back to Sorenson. It cannot get much simpler than that.

You do have a choice. If you wish to keep your VP-200. DON'T GET A Z20!! Otherwise you can pay $900+ to get the phone with a new LN.

Anytime the customer ports to a different VRS provider using their Sorenson number, there really is no reason to keep the VP-200. The only reason Sorenson wants you to keep it is to trick customers into porting back. I've heard many horror stories of someone in the family hooking the old VP-200 back up and clicking the porting agreement that pops up on the screen without realizing it. The customer is then ported back and their current VP no longer works. That is Sorenson's trickery and they are playing a dirty game.

When the lady speaking in the video said that they wanted customer to keep their VP-200 in the house, I LOL'd. I know of several friends who did port from VP-200 to the Z20. As soon as Sorenson found out they were porting to ZVRS, their installer showed up to grab the VP-200. So much for their concerns about customers having / keeping the VP-200. Again, this is more of Sorenson's BS.

Notice there is only one provider they mentioned by name in the video. I'm guessing they are feeling the heat of competition. This is all good stuff for the customer as long as they understand their rights and what they are agreeing to. The end result for everyone is healthy competition and innovation. Just watch as things are just getting warmed up!

Check out the difference between the two ZVRS vs Sorenson
wri7913 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-24-2011, 11:42 PM   #16
GuySmoke420
Registered User
 
GuySmoke420's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: homeless
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
I understand Amy's perspective about Sorenson.

However, I spoke with someone about ZVRS's illegal practice. A customer is interested in getting a Z20 phone and did fill out the application to receive a Z20 phone, but he or she was demanded to put his or her VP 200 phone number to port into Z20 phone. That customer felt that Z representative pushing him or her to jot down the number for porting purposes.

The purple representative backed off and respected customer's choice of VRS provider, but Z representative did not.

Are you being aware that Z representative removed a VP 200 and took it with him or her and left a customer a Z phone??? Is it all right? No. Z representative has no rights to take away VP 200 or other VRS provider device. If customer is not satisfied with other VRS provider device, then s/he can return the devices themselves.. Simple as that. Taking away a device from them?? No No.

Why not porting numbers from other VRS provider such as Purple, Convorelay, Viable, etc? Why does ZVRS focus on getting a port number from Sorenson only? Is it legal??? That bothers me.

I did get a porting number from Purple which I don't use to ZOJO (which I did not want). To the realization, I don't need ZOJO product and porting that number to Sorenson ntouch mobile and returned ZOJO product plus flasher back to Z because I never use ZOJO.

From what I find out more about ZVRS's actions, I lost respect for them. I use Convorelay and Sorenson products..that's it.

I guess ZVRS is jealousy at Sorenson.
__________________
GuySmoke420 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 09:07 AM   #17
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
I understand Amy's perspective about Sorenson.

However, I spoke with someone about ZVRS's illegal practice. A customer is interested in getting a Z20 phone and did fill out the application to receive a Z20 phone, but he or she was demanded to put his or her VP 200 phone number to port into Z20 phone. That customer felt that Z representative pushing him or her to jot down the number for porting purposes.

The purple representative backed off and respected customer's choice of VRS provider, but Z representative did not.

Are you being aware that Z representative removed a VP 200 and took it with him or her and left a customer a Z phone??? Is it all right? No. Z representative has no rights to take away VP 200 or other VRS provider device. If customer is not satisfied with other VRS provider device, then s/he can return the devices themselves.. Simple as that. Taking away a device from them?? No No.
There is no illegal practice here.

Before taking possession of the VP200, ZVRS presents the customer with a form that gives us the ability to ship the VP200 back for them.

If the customer wants the price of the Z20 fully subsidized so that it is free for them, they must sign that form.

If the customer doesn't wish to sign that form, ZVRS is perfectly willing to have the Sorenson customer pay the same price for the Z20 as any other VRS provider customer would that is porting their phone number to ZVRS.

The business decision here is that Sorenson, who holds 80% of the VRS market, is the best opportunity toward growing market share. To do that, ZVRS is giving Sorenson customers a reason to port to ZVRS to get a fully subsidized videophone.

Nothing is being taken away from anyone without their written consent.

This ZVRS business practice is legal.

If you have a specific example of what you consider an actual abusive or illegal practice, you can contact customer support and escalate to a manager.

If you somehow feel frightened by contacting ZVRS customer support, you may send me an email directly at vrsengineer@gmail.com, and I promise you it will be relayed to appropriate management.

On the other hand, if you have no specifics to back up your claim, please stop throwing around vague assertions without something to back them up, as it really makes those of us working at ZVRS who try hard to Do The Right Thing very unhappy with you.

Facts please. Specifics.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
Why not porting numbers from other VRS provider such as Purple, Convorelay, Viable, etc? Why does ZVRS focus on getting a port number from Sorenson only? Is it legal??? That bothers me.
Sorenson is 80% of the market. They are the largest target.

ZVRS will gladly port phones from other providers, but the business decision that has been made is simply to not fully subsidize the price of Z20 phones to such customers as to make the price effectively "free".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
I did get a porting number from Purple which I don't use to ZOJO (which I did not want). To the realization, I don't need ZOJO product and porting that number to Sorenson ntouch mobile and returned ZOJO product plus flasher back to Z because I never use ZOJO.
Sounds like you made an educated consumer decision and found a product and service offering that works for you. Congratulations!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oddball View Post
From what I find out more about ZVRS's actions, I lost respect for them. I use Convorelay and Sorenson products..that's it.
As someone who is deeply concerned with public opinion regarding his employer, I would love to know what caused this loss of respect. Is the loss of respect do you your misunderstanding of what is "legal" here, or simply with the business practice of not fully subsidizing other provider's video phones when ported to ZVRS, or the practice of convincing the customer to allow us to ship their VP200 back for them to prevent dirty Sorenson tactics of getting customers to immediately port back by tricking them with an email?

Last edited by VRSEngineer; 11-25-2011 at 10:21 AM.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 09:30 AM   #18
posts from hell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,430
I am going to write a letter to the FCC regarding this. A lot of stupid bullshit on both sides.

One thing I won't bother writing to the FCC about is how Z patronizes the Deaf community.
posts from hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 09:52 AM   #19
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by posts from hell View Post
I am going to write a letter to the FCC regarding this. A lot of stupid bullshit on both sides.

One thing I won't bother writing to the FCC about is how Z patronizes the Deaf community.
I'm curious: which part of what I've said is patronizing?
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 10:15 AM   #20
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
If you have a specific complaint and you really want to make a difference in the TRS industry, I suggest filling out form 2000C with the FCC:

https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/f...orm_type=2000C

When you file this form, whomever you file it against will get a letter from the FCC sent to their legal department. That company then has 30 days to reply to the FCC about the allegations raised by the customer.

Unlike normal complaints that you file directly through your VRS provider, which are reported yearly to the FCC, form 2000C will illicit an immediate response.

Put simply: this is the best way to file a complaint with the FCC if you have a problem that is not solved to your satisfaction by your provider.

This goes for all TRS providers.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 01:16 PM   #21
vwbug19
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 222
yep the zvrs is really in violation of fcc vrs rules and zvrs cant seize the sorenson vp because it is not their property it belong to sorenson and the cant force you to use their equipment or their vrs it is outlined in fcc website under name "what consumers should know" section at Video Relay Services | FCC.gov

so... zvrs did mess up my friend's vp200 number and illegally set up the router to blocks all sorenson calls
vwbug19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 01:37 PM   #22
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwbug19 View Post
yep the zvrs is really in violation of fcc vrs rules and zvrs cant seize the sorenson vp because it is not their property it belong to sorenson and the cant force you to use their equipment or their vrs it is outlined in fcc website under name "what consumers should know" section at Video Relay Services | FCC.gov

so... zvrs did mess up my friend's vp200 number and illegally set up the router to blocks all sorenson calls
As an engineer, I can tell you that ZVRS does not set up routers to block Sorenson calls.

Sorenson's SR200 router actually prevents any other Z videophone from working correctly. If you happen to have one of these routers, ZVRS will give you a list of suggested routers that are known to work with the Z phone that is being installed. Specific firmware versions and configurations are often required for this, as most consumer grade routers tend to went to "help" the signalling with an Application Layer Gateway (ALG) that interferes with _all_ H.323 or SIP phone calls.

Technically, it is a very difficult proposition to block only Sorenson calls on the router, as that would require the router to be a signalling level gateway and would need to do different things for different H.225 vendor IDs inside the protocol stream. I have never seen a router from a vendor that is capable of doing this.

More likely this was a number porting issue.

If the phone number was a port from Sorenson, then it was likely still pointing at the IP address that Sorenson puts in the iTRS database, and not at the ZVRS ZConnect IP address.

Once the phone number finishes porting on the FOC date, the ALT-SPID is changed in the NPAC database, changing the ownership of the iTRS database entry so that the new provider can change the iTRS database entry for that number.

The old provider must also "forget" about that phone number if they have their own dialplan that overrides the iTRS database entries. By not "forgetting" the number, the old provider can effectively prevent the rest of their customers from dialing a phone number even if it is assigned to another VRS provider in the iTRS database.

Just the facts.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 01:42 PM   #23
webexplorer
Registered User
 
webexplorer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: New England
Posts: 5,475
Send a message via AIM to webexplorer
I have been thinking about the telephone number which is a difficult situation.

I guess that porting a number is illegal. I am surprised that ZVRS did it on purpose. Actually, Sorenson was wrong for letting it go, but it is not our fault. It's because many regular telephone companies have their own telephone numbers for their customers.

I am saying that I don't appreciate that the company says that it is a free videophone with a porting number because the company controls you to make a choice which is very wrong. In fact, each company must give you a new telephone number no matter what. In fact, ZVRS is doing the wrong thing to do.
webexplorer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 02:13 PM   #24
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by webexplorer View Post
I have been thinking about the telephone number which is a difficult situation.

I guess that porting a number is illegal. I am surprised that ZVRS did it on purpose. Actually, Sorenson was wrong for letting it go, but it is not our fault. It's because many regular telephone companies have their own telephone numbers for their customers.

I am saying that I don't appreciate that the company says that it is a free videophone with a porting number because the company controls you to make a choice which is very wrong. In fact, each company must give you a new telephone number no matter what. In fact, ZVRS is doing the wrong thing to do.
Porting a number is perfectly legal. YOU own the number. Not your VRS provider. If you wish to change VRS providers, you get the new VRS provider to port the number to them so they can offer you service.

No VRS provider can stop you from porting a number away from them, even if they wanted to. It isn't their number. It is yours.

Videophones are not free. All providers amortize the cost of that asset across the duration of your service contract with them.

If you get a nTouch VP from Sorenson, or a Z20 from ZVRS, and you then port the number away from either provider, both will require you to ship the phone back to them or pay an Early Termination Fee (ETF) depending on how long you've been their customer. This is because the subsidization cost of that videophone costs money if the phone isn't used by the customer for VRS calls.

What really needs to happen is some form of voucher system by the FCC for the cost of the videophone to remove all of the subsiding by the providers from the revenue produced by that customer. Until that happens, this scheme isn't going away.

Personally, I'm all for giving customers choices, rather than preventing them from making their own. Competition permits that. However, that does mean that a customer needs to be savvy in their own decisions.

In the end, the phone number is yours, not your providers. That is an important distinction that is true for everyone, hearing and deaf alike.

The hearing world has these concerns as well. This _is_ functional equivalency.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 03:13 PM   #25
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Amy has blogged again:

Deaf World as Eye See It » Blog Archive » Sorenson is Desperate!
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 03:26 PM   #26
Banjo
Expelled
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 11,649
Quote:
Originally Posted by VRSEngineer View Post
Porting a number is perfectly legal. YOU own the number. Not your VRS provider. If you wish to change VRS providers, you get the new VRS provider to port the number to them so they can offer you service.
I don't see why customers cannot port their phone numbers. People do it with their cell phones and landline phones whenever they switch providers.
Banjo is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 03:30 PM   #27
TechBill
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,194
You are right .... Porting number is 100% legal and number belong to customer not VRS.


But every other VRS want only Sorenson number ..

Reason is that becasue Sorenson been around for a long time now and is a very popular VRS since they been giving their product and 10 digit number away for free for years.

So for last 7+ years all incoming and outgoing hearing calls been made on that numbers Sorenson given out is a big dollars sign $$$$ in to other VRS who want that number ported over to them instead of giving their product or number away because they know thier product will probably just sit in some corner somewhere collecting dust and spider webs when customer are comfortable using a product they been using for long time.

And any other VRS beside Sorenson is worthless to them too since Sorenson is the only company worth chasing after and other VRS companies is a waste of their resource or time.

Again they going after the big dollars sign $$$$$ who happen to be in VRS busniess for a long time and is very popular which is of course Sorenson.

Now again I said porting number is legal but the practice use to lure customer over other VRS is what everyone here is pretty much angry about.

Here a few stories of shady practice of porting number to other VRS.

Most common one is telling Sorenson customer how much their "other VRS" product cost but it free if they sign a piece of paper without explaining the result what would happen if they sign that paper that their number get ported over to another VRS.

So customer would sign paper not realizing that they have signed the death of their VP200 then soon finding out their VP200 is not working so they would contact Sorenson thinking that their VP200 broke down and need it fixed.

Sorenson would explain to them no they signed a paper to port the number over to a different VRS and they would get upset because they never wanted it in the first place but of course Sorenson was happy to quickly restore their VP200 porting their number back to VP200.

Customer are happy again and angry at the other VRS because the method they use to port the customer over


Here an another story ......

One other VRS called up a Sorenson customer and told him he WON a new product from them and that they are shipping the product to him, to recieve it all he need to do is sign a paper.

What the customer did not realized that he signed a paper giving them authorization to port the number over to thier new product he supposely to have won from them.

Why would other VRS tell him he won when he could had gotten it for free in the first place just by calling them and ask for it by offering to port his number to them.

I think you all know why .......

His wife wasn't happy when she find out that her VP200 cease to function after the port was completed. He got real upset at the other VRS provider for not clearly explaining that he was signing authorization to port his number to them.

But he said Sorenson was very helpful and was able quickly restore his VP200 and port the number back to VP200. His wife was happy too!




And lastly from what I learn why other VRS are taking VP200 away ...

In the past when Sorenson customer port away the VP200 still work but only call they can make is to Sorenson Customer Service since it no longer have 10 digit number to it.

So customer after trying other VRS product for a few days to few weeks would call up Sorenson Customer Service on their VP200 and tell them they want to go back to VP200. Of course Sorenson is happy to serve and restore their VP200 back quickly.

But now other VRS is try to prevent customer returning back to Sorenson by taking VP200 away and making it harder for customer to return back to Sorenson after customer find that other VRS product is not something they want and VP200 is something they are comfortable using for after so many years.


Again there nothing wrong to port a number to a VRS to your choosing and it 100% legal .....

It the practice that VRS are using to try to port the number over to them so that money can start flowing in their direction

It all about $$$$$





.
TechBill is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 05:25 PM   #28
VRSEngineer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Tarpon Springs, FL
Posts: 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by TechBill View Post
Now again I said porting number is legal but the practice use to lure customer over other VRS is what everyone here is pretty much angry about.

Here a few stories of shady practice of porting number to other VRS.

Most common one is telling Sorenson customer how much their "other VRS" product cost but it free if they sign a piece of paper without explaining the result what would happen if they sign that paper that their number get ported over to another VRS.

So customer would sign paper not realizing that they have signed the death of their VP200 then soon finding out their VP200 is not working so they would contact Sorenson thinking that their VP200 broke down and need it fixed.

Sorenson would explain to them no they signed a paper to port the number over to a different VRS and they would get upset because they never wanted it in the first place but of course Sorenson was happy to quickly restore their VP200 porting their number back to VP200.

Customer are happy again and angry at the other VRS because the method they use to port the customer over
Not fully explaining the implications would be against the ZVRS employee code of ethics. Any example of this would be swiftly dealt with, if reported.

As you haven't mentioned what VRS provider has used this tactic. I can't look up tickets in my employer's system without some keyword or identifying information to search for.

Simply put, I would love to refute any claims that my employer has ever had a customer reporting such a tactic, or detail you what was done about such reports, but I need more to go on.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TechBill View Post
Here an another story ......

One other VRS called up a Sorenson customer and told him he WON a new product from them and that they are shipping the product to him, to recieve it all he need to do is sign a paper.

What the customer did not realized that he signed a paper giving them authorization to port the number over to thier new product he supposely to have won from them.

Why would other VRS tell him he won when he could had gotten it for free in the first place just by calling them and ask for it by offering to port his number to them.

I think you all know why .......

His wife wasn't happy when she find out that her VP200 cease to function after the port was completed. He got real upset at the other VRS provider for not clearly explaining that he was signing authorization to port his number to them.

But he said Sorenson was very helpful and was able quickly restore his VP200 and port the number back to VP200. His wife was happy too!
Whenever someone tells you you've "won" something, you're probably being scammed.

I just did a quick search of the ZVRS ticketing system, and there is no history of "won", "win", "contest", or "winning" in any ticket that I can find there.

This means that nobody has reported a customer reporting those words.

Without more to go on, I'm going to have to go out on a limb and suggest that either ZVRS was not involved in this scam (which would go against our strong code of ethics), or the customer you are referring to never reported it for further action against whatever individual was misrepresenting things that way.

Again, anyone at ZVRS stumbling on such a tactic would ask for immediate termination of anyone attempting such a misrepresentation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TechBill View Post
And lastly from what I learn why other VRS are taking VP200 away ...

In the past when Sorenson customer port away the VP200 still work but only call they can make is to Sorenson Customer Service since it no longer have 10 digit number to it.

So customer after trying other VRS product for a few days to few weeks would call up Sorenson Customer Service on their VP200 and tell them they want to go back to VP200. Of course Sorenson is happy to serve and restore their VP200 back quickly.

But now other VRS is try to prevent customer returning back to Sorenson by taking VP200 away and making it harder for customer to return back to Sorenson after customer find that other VRS product is not something they want and VP200 is something they are comfortable using for after so many years.


Again there nothing wrong to port a number to a VRS to your choosing and it 100% legal .....

It the practice that VRS are using to try to port the number over to them so that money can start flowing in their direction

It all about $$$$$
I'm with you there. Nothing illegal. A good business tactic? Time will tell. Sometimes unfortunate? Definitely.

Shipping the VP200 back for the customer, even with their written consent, doesn't seem like a good idea to me. I'm not personally fond of it, and I've let management know my opinion. However, as an employee, I can only make the company's policies public, and have the community vote with continued patronage.

In the end, however, you are correct, no VRS provider is in the business of losing money.

The best thing for a consumer to do is report any misrepresentations to both the VRS provider _and_ to the FCC using form 2000C. This is the surest way to dissuade VRS providers from continuing unwanted practices in the future:

https://esupport.fcc.gov/ccmsforms/f...orm_type=2000C

Please tell your friends. FCC form 2000C. It's easy to remember, and it gets results.

Just, please, do me a favor: dont' spread rumor. If you know of specific instances, have them file a form 2000C. Don't post something to a public forum with no factual information to back it up, as it frustrates people like me who want to Make Things Right, but are constantly responding to posts like "my friend said their grandmother had her number stolen by XXXX" - and nothing gets fixed.

Thanks.

Last edited by VRSEngineer; 11-25-2011 at 06:55 PM.
VRSEngineer is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-25-2011, 08:13 PM   #29
posts from hell
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 9,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by VRSEngineer View Post
I'm curious: which part of what I've said is patronizing?
Never said you were patronizing the deaf community. You have been helpful, in fact.
posts from hell is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 11-26-2011, 01:16 PM   #30
deafaussie
Registered User
 
deafaussie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 339
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwbug19 View Post
yep the zvrs is really in violation of fcc vrs rules and zvrs cant seize the sorenson vp because it is not their property it belong to sorenson and the cant force you to use their equipment or their vrs it is outlined in fcc website under name "what consumers should know" section at Video Relay Services | FCC.gov
How do you mean ZVRS had violated FCC rules and seize VP200? Obviously, you had no idea what ZVRS business practice, legally and ethics. Let me explain to you how it works.

ZVRS consultant explains to customer clearly that if customer wants Z20 then VP200 is being sent back to Sorenson at ZVRS expense.

ZVRS becomes an authorized, yes AUTHORIZED agent after a customer signs the release agreement AWARE and ACCEPTS that the VP200 is being sent back to Sorenson.

Sorenson filed complaint to FCC about this practice and ZVRS responded by showing all the paperwork as its being shown to customers, and their ZVRS consul (company lawyers) explained how ZVRS is being followed legally in eyes of law, FCC rules and regulations.

Know what? FCC agrees with everything what ZVRS had done so far legally, documented & signed paperwork

Sorenson got silenced . . . .
deafaussie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:15 PM.


Join AllDeaf on Facebook!    Follow us on Twitter!

AllDeaf proudly supports St. Jude Children's Research Hospital

Copyright © 2002-2014, AllDeaf.com. All Rights Reserved.