TAP Wireless

CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
When Cricket Wireless decided to hike its rates (again), and Sprint offered me a corporate discount, I decided to make the switch to Sprint and finally get the coveted iPhone. Cricket’s service was abominable, coverage was poor, and too many things kept going wrong with my service. I’m in business, and reliability is paramount.
BUT I had a little dilemma when it came time to make the change. It was over the holiday, and I was visiting family in an area where Cricket (of course) did not have coverage. I used someone else’s AT&T cellular phone to pay my bill because it was due. If I didn’t pay the bill, I risked Cricket cutting off my service and assigning the number to someone else. Being that this is the number with which my clients are most familiar to reach me when out of the office, I couldn’t risk it.
So, I called Cricket BEFOREHAND to verify that if I paid the bill that day, I could get a pro-​rated refund for my cellular and broadband service when I ported over to Sprint. The Cricket rep assured me that I could obtain the refund – «no worries». He even provided me with a direct number to the cancelation department, specifically dedicated to refunds.
So, I ported over to Sprint. when I got back home. And when my leverage evaporated, guess what? So did my partial refund! Cricket wouldn’t stand by their rep’s affirmation (on a recorded line by the way), citing their written policy that states there are emphatically no refunds of any kind once you submit payment. This obviously «frosted my cookies», to say the least.
I decided to post a message to Cricket on Facebook, letting them know how disappointed I was. Upon seeing the post, TAP Wireless decided it was necessary to reply, berating me for having the audacity to expect Cricket to honor its promises. According to TAP, I should be expected to have memorized Cricket’s written policy from a contract summary handed to me when I signed on with Cricket TWO YEARS AGO. Conversely, the Cricket rep should not be held accountable for incorrect information given out by their own reps. If they don’t know their own policy, I can’t understand why they would hold me to a higher standard.
And that is why I’m posting this review for TAP. It is obvious to me from the back-​and-​forth posts, that TAP’s business model places written policy above integrity.
I don’t appreciate it when a business takes advantage of me. And what’s worse to me is when a vendor representing said company chooses to defend the company for shirking responsibility, and goes on a crusade to attack me. TAP’s claim to be «the friendliest Cricket store in the Spokane Valley» leaves me wondering if it is the ONLY Cricket store in the Spokane Valley.
UPDATE 01-​13-​2012 in response to (TAP) the owners comments: I openly admit I have not been to TAP Wireless. The owner feels that my offering a review without having visited the store is like judging a book by its cover alone, without reading the book (I’m paraphrasing). My review is based on my interaction with the company’s owner. I would say that if I read the Cliff Notes and found them offensive, I won’t bother cracking open the book.
Furthermore, I cannot seem to get my point across to TAP. I am not a petulant child who demanded a refund without premise. I based my expectation on what was promised to me by the company’s own rep, BEFORE I took the above mentioned action and switched carriers. TAP believes that, given Cricket’s written policy, «it is unlikely I was offered a refund.» I can assure you Cricket’s rep extended the offer, or I would not expect any remuneration from Cricket (I documented the reps ID, time of call, etc.). If you visit Cricket’s webpage and also google complaints against the company, I think you’ll begin to see a pattern emerge. Yes, sometimes customers get it wrong. But when so many people have credibility issues with Cricket, I think it offers some validity to my claim.
I am in no way saying that I feel TAP should not honor and abide by Cricket’s no refund policy when dealing with a customer (that would be irresponsible), UNLESS LIKE CRICKET, HE PROMISED OTHERWISE. And that is the key here, as I have stated so very many times. It seems TAP asserts implicitly that somehow I have a feeling of «entitlement» and that written policies should be disregarded whenever policies do not suit me. That is NOT the case here. But when a rep, and by extension the company (Cricket in this case) makes an error, it is a best practice to set aside policy and make good on a promise. I don’t think that it would be obscene to expect Cricket to make good on a $ 90 error. I doubt it would bring down the company – unless these errors are frequent, and in that case maybe not so inadvertent.
Forums like Unilocal are necessary to let companies know that it’s NOT OKAY to scrap ethics when they know the customer is without leverage. If you agree, CLICK USEFUL, and let this business know that you don’t approve either.