Thread by @soychicka

Let me get this straight.

A company I never heard of has my credit scores, income, and other personal information that I never gave them access to, determine how long I have to have to wait in queue to try to cancel my cable service?

wsj.com/articles/every…

Seriously.

Does that mean that people with poor credit scores get bumped up to the head of the queue?

Nope, it means they're likely to get pushed down, because it suggests they're more lax about their finances...

and less likely to fight delay-linked charges.

So, you get someone who had an extended illness that negatively impacted their credit score, and they find themselves having to go through hours of hold time for every bank, utility, credit card they have to sort out...

You get a single mother who has finally been able to escape domestic violence, but their credit score has taken a hit because they keep moving to avoid a stalker ex, and bills don't always find their way to new locations...

but it's okay to push them down the hold queue...

in favor of someone who, even though they have the same cable service, falls into the $250k+ income bucket gets pushed directly to the top of the executive queue.

And you get a victim of identity theft who earns $50k a year, who has to contact 37 different entities at least 5 times each, each time their credit score pushing them down the queue...

at 30 min hold time per call, that's almost 100 hours holding alone.

And, of course, the hold time isn't the biggest issue:

those who have to be put on hold often end up hanging up, be it because a child bumps their head, or another call comes in, or they have to go to work...

So that person gets hit with compounding fees and other costs, that - to remediate - they have to call in again to address.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

You have someone who just lost their job, or is being forced to move for work, who needs to cancel their cable service, and you keep them on hold for 1h 45min...

without ever connecting them to a representative.

Especially if it's towards the end of the billing cycle... then you can squeeze another $150 out of them.

So, in the end, for those individuals whose demographic profiles and credit scores suggest they're more willing to tolerate this treatment without pushing back, the charges rack up...

a tidy source of additional revenue for companies only focused on shareholders and bonuses.

This is how you keep people from recovering from misfortune and illness:

You have the least, you pay the most.

You make it hardest for the people who have the least to keep their head above water.

So, obviously, while this should be illegal... it's not.

And all subscription-based and utility companies should be required to provide the option to discontinue service or unsubscribe via a simple internet form, rather than manipulating you into wasting time and $ on services you don't want, need, or can't afford,

they aren't.

TBH, crap like this is making me consider running for Congress myself.

I'd much rather be on the back end, but it seems the only way you can get your hands into crafting policy is to be a corporate lobbyist or an elected representative.

But this type of manipulation is NOT okay