(1) no service for a few days.
(2) service resumed with a temporary number in $10 essential plan.
(3) service expired and hear welcome to redpocket.
(4) service resumed with original number in nuvo paygo plan.
(5) service expired and cellnuvo refused to pay for further service. heard welcome to redpocket... at this point phone was still in redpocket system.
(6) heard your account cannot be validated. at this point phone was kicked out by redpocket.
(7) dialed ##72786# and heard the number or code you have dialed is incorrect... checked phone information under setting and found that the phone has a ooo-000-**** number. obviously phone has been released from red pocket.
if i take my phone to tello or boost, how would cellnuvo know? unless it runs a check on my imei. when cellnuvo is back to normal, which is almost impossible, i can just take the phone back and reactivate it cellnuvo, what is the difference from locking the phone in a drawer? in addition, if cellnuvos new business model work, i can just tell it to pay for my tello or boost plan, so what is wrong? why would the phone has anything to do with my golds? my cellnuvo app is not even installed in my phone.
of course i dont think cellnuvo can come back to life. if tom signed us up in tello rather than redpocket, that would be different.
I have not had a cell service with CN since the outage back in Aug. I never had a temp number assigned. I recently recovered my original number by "porting out" directly to Sprint and have retained my gold and can still accumulate it. I have even swapped which device the app is on and have been able to successfully still earn gold even though I do not have a phone number with CN/Redpocket. Tom has indicated to me that my gold is safe...if it is ever worth anything.
I both agree and disagree. A lot of folks, me included, signed up for a Red Pocket account to get 'some' visibility. I agree that it's not smart to assume that it's terribly reliable information.
What is apparent to me is that even if the information that appears is not 100% accurate, it should be 100% repeatable & consistent. The same plan should be indicated on the 2 display pages for the same account. They are not.
The designated path for navigating from one page to the other page should take you to the other page. It does not.
The credentials that allow logging in to one page should allow one to log in to pages linked from that page. They do not.
Whether or not it's the best source for accurate information, it seems obvious to me that Red Pocket has problems integrating information across their site. Given that assumption, it does not lead me to believe that Red Pocket is likely to do a good job of integrating information received from outside of their site. (from CN.)
Considering that cellnuvo is no more than a middle man between us and redpocket I don't see why the redpocket info shouldn't be accurate. We do have accounts with redpocket. One could pay redpocket to top up lines directly if one chooses and bypass cellnuvo completely. Support should go through cellnuvo because of the unique relationship, plans and payment.
If the plan comes up as 30 day cellnuvo infinite plan then redpocket have it incorrect in their system. Cellnuvo should be noticing this and making sure redpocket fix it. But redpocket should have it right in the first place.
Minutes, texts, data balances should be accurate. That is all down to redpocket. I don't think they have very good tracking systems.
Funnily there are a number of threads elsewhere with tales of issues with plan renewals at redpocket (not cellnuvo accounts). That leads me to think that redpocket have holes in their plan renewal system already before we bring cellnuvo into the equation.
Then the top ups ... cellnuvo should have fixed that a long time ago ...hopefully cellnuvo have partnered with someone else to deliver the payments to providers for cellnuvo 3.0 else we are in for more of the same.
As far as support is concerned I very much believe any technical issues are passed directly from cellnuvo to redpocket without any real input from cellnuvo. Therein lies the problem with support and another reason why this partnership has gone nowhere but south. But this is instantly fixed with cellnuvo 3.0 assuming the payment method works.
I don't think it is so difficult to make two databases communicate correctly with each other. There is just not enough economic incentive for redpocket to do it. Cellnuvo members have their phones in rp system already. If they quit cellnuvo, they have tendency to join redpocket directly. Redpocket has already won unless it has to return the payment to cellnuvo for breaching a contract, assuming such a contract existed between redpocket and cellnuvo. In this business deal, cellnuvo lost big, and we suffer.
I fail to understand why any CN subscriber feels justified in placing blame for this convoluted debacle on RP. Any/all CN subscriber grievances should be directed at CN and CN only. RP has absolutely no direct fiduciary responsibility for CN's customers' satisfaction. That duty is held by CN.
I cannot imagine that law is limited to direct relationship only. If you ride a cruise and are hit by an oil tank, a pirate ship, or a destroyer, your cruise ship is sinking and you think oh God nobody else owes me anything, even morally?
I hear what you're saying, but humor me for a minute. Consider this scenario:
John Doe's house needs a new roof. He hires Joe Blow Roofing to perform the repairs (to provide a service). The parties (Doe and Blow) reach an agreement whereby Blow will perform the repairs for an agreed upon form and/or amount of consideration from Doe. The work commences. Repairs are being completed satisfactorily and according to schedule until an unexpected event occurs. Blow, now finds himself in a position where he has to outsource portions of the work to one or more third parties. Blow enters an agreement with Tom, Dick and Harry ("T, D & H") whereby they'll perform repairs X, Y and Z for consideration. Doe is, in no way, a party to this agreement.
The repairs done by T, D & H are sub-par, materials used are inferior and water leaks into Doe's home.
Now, from whom does Doe seek redress?
Going back to your example, I'm having a hard time seeing the similarity to CN and RP. In your example, I'm going to assume it's the oil tank, pirate ship or destroyer that causes any loss incurred by you and the cruise ship. As such, absent negligence and/or intentional causation on the cruise ship's part, both the cruise ship owner(s) and you, should seek redress from whomever is responsible for the actions of the oil tank, pirate ship or destroyer.
This section of comments isn't talking about legal liability-- that is a different issue, and not one that I care to pursue or discuss.
We're talking about why things don't work as anticipated. It's fine to say it's CN's responsibility to deliver a working system to the subscriber, and that's true.
In a discussion of 'why' CN isn't delivering a working system, it's reasonable to look beyond the first layer.
bingo it is redpocket who fails to deliver the service under the paygo agreement. if there is no such paygo agreement it is cellnuvo who fails to deliver money.
you are not going to deter me with your legalnese. redpocket's breaching the contract is the proximate cause of our damage. we have a subrogation claim against redpocket. i am sorry that you cannot see the similarity of my analogue.
You sue Joe Blow but you can still say that T,D,H did shoddy work.
No one is saying that cellnuvo aren't the ultimate ones to blame. We can say that the reason things are not working out is partly because redpocket did some shoddy work. I doubt anyone will chase redpocket for redress. It is just a free cellphone line anyway and going into legalese isn't the point.
Plus in this case it is a little more involved than a typical sub contractor relationship. We have to interact directly with redpocket for certain things such as seeing balances. It feels more like a partnership with the majority ownership with cellnuvo.
I think you may be misinterpreting the intent of my post. I'm not trying to argue with or sway anyone. I'm simply offering an alternative view of the relationships, or lack thereof, between the parties involved. It was, in no way, an attempt to inject doctrine, legal or otherwise. Out of curiosity, what is the agreement you think RP breached and who was the agreement with?
of course we have a cause of action against redpocket. we do not pursue it because the damage is small. if you lose billions of dollars you will see it better, especially when cellnuvo is dissolved.
Exactly. Seems we are in agreement, but I never meant for the example to be viewed as a legal matter. I used that scenario to illustrate the relationship of the parties. i agree with you, Doe would be correct to expect Blow to fix the repairs properly. Blow would then expect T, D & H to fulfill the agreement they had.
all of my discussion is based on such an assumption and if you challenge this assumption we are not on the same page. this is like jerry's father said he never made it when jerry's mother asked how old a cousin would be if he were alive.