# Has anyone ever "Suffered the Consequences" of opening a leased DVR?



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

Has anyone ever:

Opened their DVR (for what ever reason)
Later returned that DVR
And then ACTUALLY been "punished" by D* for opening the box

And please, first hand accounts only. No "friend of a friend" or "read it somewhere" stories.

Thank you.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

I replaced a drive in one and a cooling fan in another, but by that point they had become obsolete anyway, D* didn't ask for them back. I have never read where anyone had any trouble returning a unit that had been opened, I doubt they even check, as long as it still works.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

You don't need an option for viewing the results, since there's a big link underneath the poll (to the right), for just that option.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Neither of mine have any seals, and use regular torx screws. Some people reported receiving units with security torx screws in them.

Which is sort of silly. Sears sells security torx bits for a dollar each.

I've heard many others say their units have no seals on them either.

So I suppose if you return a "defective" unit that you broke while fiddling with the innards, they might tag you. Otherwise if you send back a working unit with all the parts in it, all where they're supposed to be, none busted off...I cant imagine a problem.

I doubt they have one of the CSI guys with an electron microscope checking the screws for tool marks.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

opened hr20-100 to reseat drive cable. seal was broken. returned to d* 2 months later due to tuner 2 and ota tuner completely dying.
no repercussions. this was 2 months ago or so that I returned it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> Neither of mine have any seals, and use regular torx screws. Some people reported receiving units with security torx screws in them.
> 
> Which is sort of silly. Sears sells security torx bits for a dollar each.
> 
> ...


I really doubt that anyone does any actual refurbishing. When you get an HR that the power cord keeps falling out of or one that will recognize no remote, how could they possibly be refurbished? I got one that wouldn't even boot up.

I know that D* sends them to a contractor to be "refurbished" and I think all they do is repackage them and off they go to some other poor guy.

Rich


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

Many people have reported receiving units with no seal on them, so just remove the seal entirely and clean off any adhesive residue with solvent. 
But, be advised: you're violating your "terms of service" agreement and I hear the mattress police are looking for other opportunities...:up_to_som


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

It has been reported here that some refurb HR20's have been received with the newer, larger hard drives, so I guess some are getting a little attention.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> You don't need an option for viewing the results, since there's a big link underneath the poll (to the right), for just that option.


Maybe so, but it's interesting to see just how many (a majority so far) just want to view the results...


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

Probably because the majority of viewers have not opened/returned their receivers.

I have not opened any of mine nor have I returned any.


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Only one I've ever opened is my owned HR21...


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

BattleScott said:


> But, be advised: you're *violating your "terms of service" agreement* and I hear the mattress police are looking for other opportunities...:up_to_som


That's actually the point of my question.

Violation or not, if there is no penalty then it doesn't matter.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Throckmorton said:


> That's actually the point of my question.
> 
> Violation or not, if there is no penalty then it doesn't matter.


The only consequences I can think of is tech support and costs associated with it.

If you have problems and need tech support you might not get it; possibly even be charged for the visit and replacement. Any installers here who might know what that would cost?

If you open the box you better be prepared to support it yourself.

Further, if you damage it how are you going to get it looked at?

The only way it works out is if you never need replacement or support.

I don't think it's clearly laid out what the consequences would be but&#8230;..:grin:

Mike


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

As with most things, I think the clause allows them to avoid lawsuits from morons that would lick the contacts to see if they had power. Also to void obvious misuse cases such as weld points inside from arcing screwdrivers or spilling a Pepsi and causing another 3 mile island.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> The only consequences I can think of is tech support and costs associated with it.
> 
> *If you have problems and need tech support you might not get it; possibly even be charged for the visit and replacement. Any installers here who might know what that would cost?*
> If you open the box you better be prepared to support it yourself.
> ...


Full retail cost.

You will be billed for the service call plus the cost of the receiver. For any HD reciever $299. For SD equipment $49. This is subject to change.

I find it amusing/disappointing at some of the ethics/morals of this thread.

Some say, "hey they will never know, have at it." No harm, no foul right? Just like driving 80 in a school zone. Nothing wrong with that, unless your caught, right?

It's funny how some here want to disregard the agreement you signed when it's convient for you to do so. But when the tables are turned, thread after thread on how DirecTv is an evil company, is screwing the customer, blah, blah, blah sprout up like dandelions. :nono2:

Unreal, bunch of damn hypocrits.

(note, comments not aimed at you Mike  )


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

As pointed out earlier, any receiver returned does not go to DirecTV. Just a contractor that has thousands of receivers to check. 

I think if you open the receiver and cause a problem you should be willing to accept responsibility for your own actions, but other than the hard drive there's little you can do. 

The only people worried about the security stickers are the self appointed DirecTV cops... mostly on this forum.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Folks .. Robert makes some good points here .. Opening your leased receiver is a violation of the terms of service with DIRECTV. If you do this, you do so at your own risk. This is NOT recommended by DBSTalk.com .. In fact, quite the contrary. DBSTalk.com recommends that you do NOT open your receiver regardless of whether it is owned or leased.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

RobertE said:


> Full retail cost.
> 
> You will be billed for the service call plus the cost of the receiver. For any HD reciever $299. For SD equipment $49. This is subject to change.


But this is merely your presumption. Not an actual fact. I am trying to find out _the reality_ of this. Not what a bunch of talking heads believe will happen.

Have _you personally_ returned a box to D* that _you_ had opened, and then been charged for having done so?



RobertE said:


> I find it amusing/disappointing at some of the ethics/morals of this thread.


That is neither here nor there and is not _at all_ what this thread or my poll was supposed to be about.

I just want to find out if the threats made by people here on this board and elsewhere are _actually what D* does_ or just what the _uninformed_ believe will happen.

I'm not trying to sound argumentative here but I am also not interested in peoples' opinions. Just what has or has not _actually happened_.

And I am _not_ suggesting anyone open their boxes based on what they read here.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

I wonder how many have bothered to read a car lease? Many don't allow you to use any aftermarket accessories, so when you plug your GPS or radar detector into the cigarette lighter you're violating the lease. When you use an MP3 player you're violating the lease.

I bet some of the DirecTV cops that are so quick to point these things out about a DirecTV receiver don't bother to have such high morals on their own car, or cell phone, or whatever else they actually lease. 

Funny how that works out isn't it?


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> But this is merely your presumption. Not an actual fact. I am trying to find out _the reality_ of this. Not what a bunch of talking heads believe will happen.
> 
> Have _you personally_ returned a box to D* that _you_ had opened, and then been charged for having done so?
> 
> ...


Presumption? No.

Fact? Yes.

I have the documents to prove it. Of course someone will ask for it to be posted. I can't disclose all the information in the document. I can and will provide a copy to a moderator at their request for verification if needed.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

RobertE said:


> Presumption? No.
> 
> Fact? Yes.
> 
> I have the documents to prove it. Of course someone will ask for it to be posted. I can't disclose all the information in the document. I can and will provide a copy to a moderator at their request for verification if needed.


Can you disclose the circumstances?


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> Can you disclose the circumstances?


The fact that the document is stamped with:



> The information contained on this page is confidential, proprietary DIRECTV business information and is intended for authorized users only. Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.


Is why I won't post the whole thing.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

I'm not asking you to post the whole thing.

I'm not even asking you to post any part of it.

I'm simply asking you to explain what you did to your receiver and under what circumstances D* charged you for doing it.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

RobertE said:


> I find it amusing/disappointing at some of the ethics/morals of this thread.
> 
> Some say, "hey they will never know, have at it." No harm, no foul right?
> 
> It's funny how some here want to disregard the agreement you signed when it's convenient for you to do so.


I find your POST AMUSING because you do not take into account that people might know that they are VIOLATING their Lease Agreement but they understand the consequences for their actions and can afford to pay for those indiscretions if they somehow were caught. It is not like a Felony!!! We are just trying to Watch TV and Record things so we can watch TV.

I think that 95% of the people who violate their lease agreement know that Directv enjoys their $100 + monthly payments or whatever and does not want to jeopardize that income resource and so they offer a Legal Disclaimer that comes right from their Legal Department as I have worked with many of them and waited for months for them to sign on to a project.

No Harm, No Foul!!!


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> I'm not asking you to post the whole thing.
> 
> I'm not even asking you to post any part of it.
> 
> I'm simply asking you to explain what you did to your receiver and under what circumstances D* charged you for doing it.


I did nothing to any of my recievers. They haven't charged me anything.

What I'm posting is the consequences of doing so. People asked for what can happen. I provided that information.

Is that clear now?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Throckmorton said:


> Can you disclose the circumstances?


From the DIRECTV Equipment Lease Addendum

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P500014



> You shall have no right to sell, give away, transfer, pledge, mortgage, remove, relocate, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time.
> 
> ...you agree to pay DIRECTV the sum of $55 per each DIRECTV standard receiver; $200 for each DIRECTV DVR Receiver; $240 for each DIRECTV HD Receiver; or $470 for each DIRECTV HD DVR Receiver


Pretty plain if you ask me.

Mike


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

RobertE said:


> I did nothing to any of my recievers. They haven't charged me anything.
> 
> What I'm posting is the consequences of doing so. People asked for what can happen. I provided that information.
> 
> Is that clear now?


Yes.

I didn't ask what *can* happen. We all know that.

This poll, and topic, are to find out what *does* happen.

Do you understand the difference?



MicroBeta said:


> Pretty plain if you ask me.
> 
> Mike


And yet again, this is not the point at all.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Throckmorton said:


> Yes.
> 
> I didn't ask what *can* happen. We all know that.
> 
> ...


I understand that you're looking for someone who actually been penalized.

It's only been a few years with the lease system. I doubt many who has the knowledge and comfort level to open and work on these DVRs has left DirecTV yet.

I think it's too early to get the info you're looking for. At least if you limit your search to just DBSTalk. Try Google or other forums.

I was just pointing out what the agreement says.

Please consider that you may be asking a question that some may be reluctant to answer as it might be in violation of DBSTalk user agreement&#8230;.I'm just sayin'

Mike


----------



## CCarncross (Jul 19, 2005)

What is the point of this poll anyway? What could this poll possibly accomplish?


----------



## mobandit (Sep 4, 2007)

csgo said:


> I wonder how many have bothered to read a car lease? Many don't allow you to use any aftermarket accessories, so when you plug your GPS or radar detector into the cigarette lighter you're violating the lease. When you use an MP3 player you're violating the lease.
> 
> I bet some of the DirecTV cops that are so quick to point these things out about a DirecTV receiver don't bother to have such high morals on their own car, or cell phone, or whatever else they actually lease.
> 
> Funny how that works out isn't it?


Your example of the auto lease agreement is not true. Aftermarket accessories are things that affect performance. In other words, you decide to put on under-drive pulleys, change to a non-OEM air filter or CAI...plugging an MP3 player into your vehicle does not violate your automobile lease agreement.


----------



## digger16309 (Sep 21, 2007)

I'm a little bit surprised by the postings from the morals police.

Of course it is unethical and downright wrong to open a box, screw it up to the point that it no longer works. Then, claiming it is broken, send it back for a working one, expecting not to be charged.

But if one opens a box to do a hard drive upgrade or something else, and the box works, what is the harm in that? That is not unethical. Is it a violation of the lease agreement? Sure, who cares? If DirecTV made a better product this board wouldn't have so many posts. 

DirecTV violates their agreement with me everytime their ridiculous boxes produce a black screen instead or a recording and an interminable 771 error for no reason that cannot be fixed. Screw them and their silly terms.

No I've never opened a box but I wouldn't feel one moment of guilt if I did.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

digger16309 said:


> I'm a little bit surprised by the postings from the morals police.
> 
> Of course it is unethical and downright wrong to open a box, screw it up to the point that it no longer works. Then, claiming it is broken, send it back for a working one, expecting not to be charged.
> 
> ...


This has to be THE BEST POST & OPINION I CAN REMEMBER EVER!!!

EXACTLY!!! Who is being Hurt??? You are just trying to improve upon the system!!!


----------



## armophob (Nov 13, 2006)

richierich said:


> This has to be THE BEST POST & OPINION I CAN REMEMBER EVER!!!
> 
> EXACTLY!!! Who is being Hurt??? You are just trying to improve upon the system!!!


No one is being hurt if it does not break. If it does they are just giving up the responsibilty to pay for repairs to those who want to modify the equipment. They are protecting themselves from those who are not as skilled as most posters on this site obviously are. If someone is here posting then it can be generally assumed they have the common sense skillset to open it and poke around. 
The best example I can compare it too ls the guy who puts mudders on his truck. The change of wear shifts to the wheels and drivetrain in different levels and it voids the warranty. No one said he can't do it. It just means the expense of repair due to his decision does not get watered into the repair and cost of vehicles for everyone else.

Personally, I think they should either give us the boxes for free as leased or let us pay for them and own them. The mixing of the two is what makes this such an emotional topic.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

digger16309 said:


> DirecTV violates their agreement with me everytime their ridiculous boxes produce a black screen instead or a recording and an interminable 771 error for no reason that cannot be fixed. Screw them and their silly terms.


Not taking any sides here, but if you read the agreement I think it says a whole bunch of stuff about directv not being responsible for reception issues, or failure to record shows.

Which I dont exactly agree with. I figure I'm paying to receive a signal and be able to record it. If the box cant do that with some reasonable consistency, then the service isnt functioning properly.

Okay, so whose the one guy who got knocked for the cost of a box? Did you break it?


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Y'all are right, go ahead and do what you want with the box and accept the responsibility for your actions. Personally I dont think DBSTalk should even allow this thread to continue since if no one reports being penalized it may lead you to the false assumption that Nobody has been penalized. 

And if you think D* has no way to tell if your box has been tampered with other than the silly sticker.. Yeah good luck with that. 

Remember D* is the company who went after people who owned smart card readers because of the potential for hacking their (then) access cards.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> How about Freedom of Speech and this is Not a "Directv" Forum but a Forum that deals with Directv, Dish, and other Satellite Companies but is not OWNED by DIRECTV and is a FORUM that promotes Free Speech about Issues concerning them.
> 
> rahlquist, you sound like you work for D*. People can do with their DVRs as they like as long as they accept the consequences for their actions and it is not up to you to tell them what they should or shouldn't do. You make your own decisions and we'll make ours.
> 
> Your statement "Personally I dont think DBSTalk should even allow this thread to continue since if no one reports being penalized it may lead you to the false assumption that Nobody has been penalized." would be OKAY if DIRECTV OWNED this FORUM and stated that to everyone here but the last time I checked they didn't OWN this Forum and we can Express our opinions and do whatever we want with our DVRs if we want to while accepting the possible legal consequences of doing it.


Realistically if you don't break the receiver you're probably going to get away with it. BTW, most computers today will alert you if it's been opened. Ever since IT opened my Dell at work, everytime it starts up it informs me that the "case has been opened". Don't have any idea if this applies to our receivers.

However careful someone is it's still a risk. The way the lease agreement reads, you are "tampering" with the receiver and that is a violation.

Speaking for myself, I would not open a leased receiver. If it's owned that's a different story. If you break it the worst that would happen is you pay the going rate for a replacement (say $199 for a HR2x) but that new receiver *will* be a lease. IMO, I have no problem with anyone putting a larger hard drive into an *owned* box. I'm considering doing that myself.

IMHO, the guys who run this place have a difficult job. They have to balance how much latitude they will give in a discussion against not only the forum rules but also the relationships this forum has with the companies we discuss. They have let discussions on hard drives go even when they veer into the realm of what may, technically, be considered hacking. This is a good example of the balancing act.

However, this is a discussion to determine if there are any teeth in the lease agreement; about what it is we think we can get away with.

It's probably academic anyway. IIRC, it's been less then three years since the lease system has been implemented and it's too early to find any discernable trends in DirecTV's response to "tampering".

What is the percentage of subs who will even attempt replacing a drive? It's probably pretty small so finding a trend will be very hard.

*Now, you can take the following with a grain of salt. It is my opinion and I do not speak for Moderators/Administrators of DBSTalk.*

This is a moderated forum. There are things that are not allowed for discussion.

For example:

Discussion of hacking is not allowed.
Personal attacks are not allowed.
Use of profane language is not allowed. 
Discussion of anything illegal is not allowed.
Discussion of unfounded rumors is not allowed.
Discussion of politics is not allowed.
Discussion of religion is not allowed.
Make not mistake about it, you *DO NOT* have the right to free speech in a moderated forum. You agreed to this when you became a member.

There are unmoderated forums where you can pretty much say anything you want. This isn't one of them.

My 2¢.

Mike

EDIT: I do appologize to the OP because I know this isn't how he wanted this thread to go.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

t_h said:


> Not taking any sides here, but if you read the agreement I think it says a whole bunch of stuff about directv not being responsible for reception issues, or failure to record shows.
> 
> Which I dont exactly agree with.


If you don't agree with it then you should not say that you do and become a customer.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> BTW, most computers today will alert you if it's been opened.


The DVD that came with my Ford truck specifically states that they can track if an aftermarket chip has ever been installed even if it has been removed. So I will wait until the warranty is over.

As for opening the case, while it is a violation, there is also a stated remedy for D*. So if I am willing to pay the remedy for any damage I cause, then I should be allowed to open the case. Or I could just buy the receiver and be done with it.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Herdfan said:


> The DVD that came with my Ford truck specifically states that they can track if an aftermarket chip has ever been installed even if it has been removed. So I will wait until the warranty is over.
> 
> As for opening the case, while it is a violation, there is also a stated remedy for D*. So if I am willing to pay the remedy for any damage I cause, then I should be allowed to open the case. Or I could just buy the receiver and be done with it.


I agree with you. If you're willing to accept the consequences then do what you want.

I have to wonder though. The lease agreement states that "You shall have no right to...alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time".

Does putting in a larger hard drive constitute altering or tampering? If so then merely installing a drive would violate the agreement and you could be charged the $470.

Of course that's assuming they find out. :grin:

Which brings up another question&#8230;.

What if someone needs tech support unrelated to installing a new drive?

The tech comes and runs his diagnostics, maybe using the BIST utilities and finds the larger hard drive. Then what? :scratchin

Only time will tell how this will play out. IMHO, if the receiver works with the larger drive, I suspect that DirecTV will do nothing. I have nothing to back it up but as long as there are no problems associated with work I think it makes sense.

Of course if they can't find the problem the tech came out for, then they could blame it on the "alteration" but that's another story. It's a can of worms no matter how you look at it. 

Mike


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Folks, I don't like the tenor of this thread.

To those who say, "I'm only trying to make it better," it is not yours to improve. What you are doing is akin to going over to your neighbor's house without his permission and rearranging his speakers. It may be harmless but it's his house and his speakers.

You do not have a right to tamper with something you do not own.

For those who say there should be an ownership option, I believe that there is, although it is not easy to do. Certainly you can buy an HR21Pro if that's your choice.

As regards free speech, that does not apply in a privately owned forum. If you have any questions about how your rights may or may not apply in a privately owned forum, please send me a PM on this subject. In the meantime, your privilege to post here is governed by forum rules, one of which is:



> You agree to not use the Service to: (...)
> (c) upload, post, email or otherwise transmit any Content that (...)
> (2) consists of instructional information on illegal activities, including, but not limited to, hacking, cracking, and phreaking
> (3) violates or infringes in any way upon the proprietary rights of others (...)


and that will be enforced.

One more thing and I do apologize to the original poster for breaking his rule... I do know it does happen. You can get dinged for the cost of a receiver. No it has not happened to me, but it does happen.

Gentlemen and ladies, you have aroused the curiosity of this moderator and I will be watching this thread, and its posters, carefully for any violation of forum rules. I will not hesitate to act; take that as your warning.

Thank you.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

I thought the only way to own a newer receiver was to buy it outright, or through the protection plan. I Own 2 R22s from my owned R15s dying and maybe the only reason I could think of for openining it up would be to install a larger HD since I do not want an external drive next to it (clutter). Since they are only SD I really do not have a need to. I also have an HR22, but I did not "PAY" for it ($500.00 or $700.00) so I would have to deal with the "clutter" for that unit, or call D* and "make them an offer" to buy it outright first.


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

richierich said:


> This has to be THE BEST POST & OPINION I CAN REMEMBER EVER!!!
> 
> EXACTLY!!! Who is being Hurt??? You are just trying to improve upon the system!!!





t_h said:


> Not taking any sides here, but if you read the agreement I think it says a whole bunch of stuff about directv not being responsible for reception issues, or failure to record shows.
> 
> Which I dont exactly agree with. I figure I'm paying to receive a signal and be able to record it. If the box cant do that with some reasonable consistency, then the service isnt functioning properly.
> 
> Okay, so whose the one guy who got knocked for the cost of a box? Did you break it?


First off, I have never opened a box and never will, as personally, I am not prepared to deal with the consequences. That being said, Directv's disclaimer about not being responsible for reception issues or failure to record shows is unacceptable. Isn't that exactly what I am paying good money for? What is is Directv's primary reason for existence, anyway?


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

johnp37 said:


> What is is Directv's primary reason for existence, anyway?


To make money.



MicroBeta said:


> most computers today will alert you if it's been opened


Very few computers today have a case open sensor in them. Businesses may purchase this as an option, and some business or security specific product lines and models are available from some manufacturers. But I'd WAG that less than 5% of computers in the public sector have these sensors.

The HR's dont, from the photo's I've seen.



paulman182 said:


> If you don't agree with it then you should not say that you do and become a customer.


Cant even avoid a potshot by saying I dont have a dog in this fight, can I? 

If I didnt become a customer of any product or service provider that had terms and conditions I didnt agree with, I'd be sitting in a dark, cold dripping cave alone, naked and without any possessions. Providing I didnt have to sign a disclaimer for squatting.

I just think its a little silly for a company to specifically disclaim that they arent responsible for failing to provide the primary service that they charge you money to provide.


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

t_h said:


> .....I just think its a little silly for a company to specifically disclaim that they arent responsible for failing to provide the primary service that they charge you money to provide.


That is a be all "covering their backsides" statement that all companies are forced to use because of lawsuits, Is my guess.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

mobandit said:


> Your example of the auto lease agreement is not true. Aftermarket accessories are things that affect performance. In other words, you decide to put on under-drive pulleys, change to a non-OEM air filter or CAI...plugging an MP3 player into your vehicle does not violate your automobile lease agreement.


I didn't ask what affects performance, I asked if you read the lease. Many strictly forbid the use of aftermarket accessories. It's not up to you to decide what affects performance since the terms of the lease are clear and absolute.

My point is that this forum seems to have more than it's share of self appointed DirecTV cops that want to impose strict interpretation of the Lease Agreement without any understanding or authority of the intent of the agreement.

Do I care if you use a MP3 player in your leased car? Of course not. Does the lessor care? I don't know, but as long as the lessee is willing to take responsibility for any actual damage then it's a private matter between the two.

The same applies to the DirecTV lease agreement. None of us here know what the intent of DirecTV is, and I doubt there's any one person at DirecTV that knows or has the authority to decide. It's a shame that so many get power thrills by trying to impose lease rules on others... thus what I consider self appointed DirecTV cops.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

t_h said:


> I just think its a little silly for a company to specifically disclaim that they arent responsible for failing to provide the primary service that they charge you money to provide.





HDTVsportsfan said:


> That is a be all "covering their backsides" statement that all companies are forced to use because of lawsuits, Is my guess.


Besides, if the company weren't providing that service .. folks would leave .. not sign up, whatever and the company would cease to exist.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

t_h said:


> If I didnt become a customer of any product or service provider that had terms and conditions I didnt agree with, I'd be sitting in a dark, cold dripping cave alone, naked and without any possessions. Providing I didnt have to sign a disclaimer for squatting.


I guess we will have to disagree about the meaning of "agree."

I take it to mean, when I sign the "agreement" I am agreeing, however reluctantly, to the terms.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

If this policy was something unique or extraordinary it would be one thing....but leasing means its NOT your equipment...so the idea of having a penalty for tampering is only to be expected.

I really don't know what the big deal is with understanding or accepting that concept.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

So, who is the one person (that answered the poll) that got "caught" and what was the penalty?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> <snip>
> I just think its a little silly for a company to specifically disclaim that they arent responsible for failing to provide the primary service that they charge you money to provide.


It's no different then any other customer agreements.

Here are two examples.

Comcast:


> NEITHER COMCAST NOR ITS AFFILIATES, SUPPLIERS, EMPLOYEES, AGENTS OR CONTRACTORS WARRANT THAT THE COMCAST EQUIPMENT OR THE SERVICES WILL MEET YOUR REQUIREMENTS, PROVIDE UNINTERRUPTED USE, OR OPERATE AS REQUIRED, WITHOUT DELAY, OR WITHOUT ERROR.


TW:


> TWC MAKES NO WARRANTY THAT THE SERVICES WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, SECURE, OR FREE OF VIRUSES, WORMS, DISABLING CODE OR CONDITIONS, OR THE LIKE, OR THAT THE TWC EQUIPMENT WILL OPERATE AS INTENDED


If you want to look up the rest, you'll find all the same legalese. It's always been that way and always will be so let it go.

Mike


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

MicroBeta said:


> It's no different then any other customer agreements.
> 
> Here are two examples.
> 
> ...


Yep...again....it's an all encompassing covering their arse statement. It is not strictly related the DirecTV DVR's and what have you. Their are hundreds of reasons why service could not be delivered.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

As I read their agreement there are a few things that some others in this forum may want to be concerned with. The pertinent language reads...

You shall have no right to sell, give away, transfer, pledge, mortgage, remove, relocate, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time.

I'd be careful about moving that receivers...even within your own home as that could be considered a relocation and would trigger a problem under the lease.

Also, those of you that are using cooling systems like laptop coolers...especially those plugged into the USB ports on the device...that could be considered an alteration/tampering with the device (you're attaching a non-approved device and changing air flow/operating temperature/power usage). The same may also be said for external drives as they are non-approved devices that while attached to the receive alter its operation.

The word "remove" is also interesting. Do they mean you can never remove the equipment from your home or does it mean it can never be removed from the installation point (same as the relocation comment).

Strangely, there is no explicit language about simply opening the case.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

HDTVsportsfan said:


> That is a be all "covering their backsides" statement that all companies are forced to use because of lawsuits, Is my guess.





paulman182 said:


> I guess we will have to disagree about the meaning of "agree."
> 
> I take it to mean, when I sign the "agreement" I am agreeing, however reluctantly, to the terms.


The average person accepting a TOS is that the provider, despite their legalese, will perform within a reasonable and acceptable range in providing the services or products and that the legalese is just there as a backside covering. In fact, most people dont read the TOS's and if you gathered up and read every one you'd ever signed, you'd find that you've agreed to do all sorts of things, given up all sorts of stuff, and that you've broken dozens of them without even knowing it. I'd further estimate that most people who sign up for directv service have never read the TOS and have no idea whats in it.

But many people have a hard time with gray areas and can only operate in a black and white environment.

Some of you guys should go and read your credit card TOS and see how much of that you really agree with


----------



## ricochet (Aug 21, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> From the DIRECTV Equipment Lease Addendum
> 
> You shall have no right to sell, give away, transfer, pledge, mortgage, remove, *relocate*, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time.


Has anybody here moved a receiver from one room to another?

Did you think you were breaking your lease agreement when you did that?

Will you call DirecTV and have a tech come and do it the next time?

If a receiver you moved has problems in the future will you try and get DirecTV to replace it for free or will you admit to violating the lease and pay the penalty?


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Ken S said:


> I'd be careful about moving that receivers...even within your own home as that could be considered a relocation and would trigger a problem under the lease.


I'm pretty sure I saw a post a couple of days ago where a guy moved his receiver to another room, subsequently had trouble with it and when he called directv was told that he wasnt supposed to move the equipment and so he'd be charged for the service call to fix it, even though he had the protection plan.

Theres a whole lot of room under the term "tampering". By its broadest definition, almost every here has "tampered" with their unit if they're ever changed a cable, swapped a BBC, run a ground wire, moved it, plugged anything into it, etc.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

ricochet said:


> Has anybody here moved a receiver from one room to another?
> 
> Did you think you were breaking your lease agreement when you did that?
> 
> ...


That's if you consider "relocate" to mean moving to another room or even across the same room....which I don't....so no, I've never violated that part of the agreement. :grin:

AAMOF, when I got a second TiVo (pre-lease agreement but the terms were almost the same), the CSR asked me if I wanted the tech to move the old one or if I would be doing it. That implies that by "relocate" they mean to another physical address. 

Mike


----------



## BattleScott (Aug 29, 2006)

I can't find a video anywhere so everyone just imagine the scene from "The Jerk" where the butler's wife receives the "substantial penalty for early withdrawal...":lol:


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

You can do what you want with regard to DirecTV's equipment. If you do something that violates the agreement, then DirecTV may or may not come after you. You make the choice. If DirecTV does come after you, please don't come on here and whine.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> That's if you consider "relocate" to mean moving to another room or even across the same room....which I don't....so no, I've never violated that part of the agreement. :grin:
> 
> AAMOF, when I got a second TiVo (pre-lease agreement but the terms were almost the same), the CSR asked me if I wanted the tech to move the old one or if I would be doing it. That implies that by "relocate" they mean to another physical address.
> 
> Mike


Not to nitpick, but you're creating implications as a function of reading your interpretation of the TOS. By the black and white reading of it, you cant even push it an inch or you've 'moved' it.

In some peoples interpretation, putting in a larger hard drive or replacing a defective fan with the same model fan may not be "tampering".

As proof of this implied interpretation, I note that directv used to send out units with stickers over the case saying not to open them, and now they dont. So what they're telling us is that its okay to open the case. They did something and it was interpreted.

:sure:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> I'm pretty sure I saw a post a couple of days ago where a guy moved his receiver to another room, subsequently had trouble with it and when he called directv was told that he wasnt supposed to move the equipment and so he'd be charged for the service call to fix it, even though he had the protection plan.


Never had a problem with switching rooms. Most of my HRs are listed as being in the "family" room. And I don't let the installers do anything with my HRs. After my experience with an installer who was stunned when I shut off the blue ring, I have learned that they have nothing to contribute when it comes to the HRs themselves. The Protection Plan folks and the folks at the CMG have concurred with my assessment of the competency of the installers.



> Theres a whole lot of room under the term "tampering". By its broadest definition, almost every here has "tampered" with their unit if they're ever changed a cable, swapped a BBC, run a ground wire, moved it, plugged anything into it, etc.


I've had installers who told me to throw away the BBCs, I've never had an installer ask me which room the HR in question was in, and I've had installers tell me that my system couldn't possibly work the way it's wired up. Never heard from D* about any of these issues.

Rich


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> How about Freedom of Speech and this is Not a "Directv" Forum but a Forum that deals with Directv, Dish, and other Satellite Companies but is not OWNED by DIRECTV and is a FORUM that promotes Free Speech about Issues concerning them.
> 
> rahlquist, you sound like you work for D*. People can do with their DVRs as they like as long as they accept the consequences for their actions and it is not up to you to tell them what they should or shouldn't do. You make your own decisions and we'll make ours.


Wow, ok let me first say I don't see the same thing you do here, I see a forum for open discussion but as pointed out by others its still a privately run and owned forum subject to the owners and their agents decisions as to what is appropriate. That said I dont work for DirecTV or DBStalk though my wife was once a DirecTV CSR. And I agree, if people want to open their DVR be it leased or not and accept the consequences for that action then thats up to them.



> Your statement "Personally I dont think DBSTalk should even allow this thread to continue since if no one reports being penalized it may lead you to the false assumption that Nobody has been penalized." would be OKAY if DIRECTV OWNED this FORUM and stated that to everyone here but the last time I checked they didn't OWN this Forum and we can Express our opinions and do whatever we want with our DVRs if we want to while accepting the possible legal consequences of doing it.


Wow for someone toting the FOS flag you sure want to silence me. Refer to what I said before. Whats ok to post here is up to DBSTalk and not you or I. I stand by my opinion that some posts are a waste of bandwidth. They create an uneeded air of controversey over what should be a simple subject with simple choices.


You are a person of your word and stand by the agreements you make.
You choose to ignore the agreements you make and you vioilate them however you wish.
Personally I'll be the first to admit, my owned Directivo got a new HD put in it, by me, when it died. I also have an owned R16 and HR20, I could do whatever I choose with them. I may upgrade the HR20 one day who knows. I just think that having one of these "I can open my box if I want to" threads popping up every 5th week is ridiculous. Either do it or drop the subject, but you dont have to come here and brag about it, or look for the moral support to work up the nerve to do it. Thats why I said the thread IMHO was a waste to be here all. IMHO its just the little guy with horns on your shoulder wispering in your ear... It's ok, take a bite, nobody will know.

My other point was that Directv can send the signal strengths home on a phone home basis and even have a CSR call you to setup a free appointment to realign your dish. We know this is a fact.

What makes any of you think its beyond their ability to iterate what interface the HD in your DVR is connected to and its serial number ord even size and compare it to their records on an automatic basis. Food for thought.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> Not to nitpick, *but you're creating implications as a function of reading your interpretation of the TOS*. By the black and white reading of it, you cant even push it an inch or you've 'moved' it.
> 
> In some peoples interpretation, putting in a larger hard drive or replacing a defective fan with the same model fan may not be "tampering".
> 
> ...


Not to nitpick but the implication came from the CSR questioning whether I wanted the tech to move the receiver or move it myself. :grin:

In this case I wasn't reading into the written word, rather using the fact that DirecTV gave me tacit permission to move a receiver on my own.

There's a bit of a distinction there. 

Mike


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

rahlquist said:


> What makes any of you think its beyond their ability to iterate what interface the HD in your DVR is connected to and its serial number ord even size and compare it to their records on an automatic basis. Food for thought.


No doubt thats possible. However I wish directv were as competent and their software as well thought out on the reliability of tuning and recording shows as their security, DRM and customer tracking efforts. :lol:


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> What you are doing is akin to going over to your neighbor's house without his permission and rearranging his speakers. It may be harmless but it's his house and his speakers.


With all due respect, this is not even close.

We have leased the speakers from our neighbor and they are in our living room. He placed them there and said "don't move them". But now they are in my way so I am sliding them over 2 feet. I understand that if I break them while I'm sliding them across the carpet that I am responsible to him for the repair/replacement. But at the same time, I paid him for their use and they are in MY living room. I will use them how ever I see fit so long as I don't hurt them.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

t_h said:


> As proof of this implied interpretation, I note that directv used to send out units with stickers over the case saying not to open them, and now they dont. So what they're telling us is that its okay to open the case. They did something and it was interpreted.
> 
> :sure:


I'd like to remind all of you that whether something is right or wrong does not depend on whether someone is watching or not. Is there any question that these are leased receivers? Is there any question that they are someone else's property, not yours? Is there any question about how you should treat someone else's property (i.e., with respect and according to their wishes?)

For now, content yourselves thusly: Someone _is_ watching your behavior in this thread, whether or not you can see that person. Someone _has given you this final warning_ and asks politely that you consider your actions carefully and with respect to others. That includes tampering with equipment owned by someone else against their express wishes, and it also includes being accusatory to other members of this forum without the express permission of the staff.

"A word, to the wise, should be sufficient."


----------



## elaclair (Jun 18, 2004)

RobertE said:


> I did nothing to any of my recievers. They haven't charged me anything.
> 
> What I'm posting is the consequences of doing so. People asked for what can happen. I provided that information.
> 
> Is that clear now?


Robert, I'm thinking that Throck is fairly new to DBSTalk and doesn't realize that you have first-hand visibility to things that happen on the service side. Once he's aware of that, I'm sure he'll understand how you can know it's happened, without it happening to you.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Throckmorton said:


> With all due respect, this is not even close.
> 
> We have leased the speakers from our neighbor and they are in our living room. He placed them there and said "don't move them". But now they are in my way so I am sliding them over 2 feet. I understand that if I break them while I'm sliding them across the carpet that I am responsible to him for the repair/replacement. But at the same time, I paid him for their use and they are in MY living room. I will use them how ever I see fit so long as I don't hurt them.


The fun of analogies. Openings for interpretation. 

This is an individual morality issue. And aside from those who are trying to confuse the issue via _reductio ad absurdum_ and introducing the whole concept of "can we even move the receivers", this is about opening the neighbors speakers if leased or opening his house and moving his speakers.

I have not opened any of my leased receivers. I do not intend to. That is me. (Tho I admit I sometimes have driven faster then the speed limit or otherwise pushed some boundaries of "right vs. wrong") 

To answer the OPs question: Yes, there have been some consequences to some people. Is that your real question or are you asking "what are the consequences?" Or is it "what is the likelihood you will be caught?"

Anyway, you might get caught. You might get consequences. It is for you to chuse(*). 

And it is for none of us to judge. Only to educate.

Thanks,
Tom

* Chuse was a proper spelling at the time of the formulation of the US Constitution.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

I have to "wonder" how many others thought [knew] this thread was going to end up "here". :nono:


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

NO COMMENT!!!


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

veryoldschool said:


> I have to "wonder" how many others thought [knew] this thread was going to end up "here". :nono:


70 Posts? Easily... actually that is lightweight for us. 

Especially for a question of the eternities. 



richierich said:


> NO COMMENT!!!


Does a "YELLED" "no comment" (with three slammers) actually imply a comment? 

Obscure movie quote "...god forbid this paper ever runs anything without an exclamation mark."


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> Obscure movie quote "...god forbid this paper ever runs anything without an exclamation mark."


 !rolling

I see you found my English teacher too... :lol:


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

no comment .......:lol:


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> The fun of analogies. Openings for interpretation.
> 
> This is an individual morality issue. And aside from those who are trying to confuse the issue via _reductio ad absurdum_ and introducing the whole concept of "can we even move the receivers", this is about opening the neighbors speakers if leased or opening his house and moving his speakers.
> 
> ...


Tom,

It's a contractual issue at best. To call this a moral issue is going overboard. Morality may come into play if a person does violate the contract and harms the receiver and then claims they hadn't made any changes. That is if that contract is held to be valid (don't forget there is an ongoing class action suit on just that matter).

Taking responsibility for one's actions seems to be a missing trait lately...whether it be the individual consumer poking around where he/she shouldn't be or the corporation developing shoddy software.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I have to "wonder" how many others thought [knew] this thread was going to end up "here". :nono:


So...how about that DLB?


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Ken, 

I guess I see the contractual issues as moral issues. To decide what lines to cross or just "bend."  

That said, intentions also play big part of the equation.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## timmmaaayyy2003 (Jan 27, 2008)

At the risk of being flamed myself, back when I did work for DTV as a Tech support agent, I was issued an R-10. When I mentioned to a co-worker in Tech II all the hacks being discussed at tivocommunity.com, I was told that all DVR's from the R-10 forward do in fact have a sensor and that it would put up a "Call Support" message with a code that the case had been opened.

I own my R-10 and have looked around on the web for information and have found posts that claim that a chip is needed for the device to not know when it has been altered.

Does DTV need stickers? I somehow doubt it.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> To answer the OPs question: Yes, there have been some consequences to some people. Is that your real question or are you asking "what are the consequences?" Or is it "what is the likelihood you will be caught?"


My only intent was to find out if the "threat" was ever acted upon. Nothing more.

I had _no idea_ the thread was going to end up here.

But as I read the preachings of the "moral police" I can certainly see what happened.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

timmmaaayyy2003 said:


> At the risk of being flamed myself, back when I did work for DTV as a Tech support agent, I was issued an R-10. When I mentioned to a co-worker in Tech II all the hacks being discussed at tivocommunity.com, I was told that all DVR's from the R-10 forward do in fact have a sensor and that it would put up a "Call Support" message with a code that the case had been opened.
> 
> I own my R-10 and have looked around on the web for information and have found posts that claim that a chip is needed for the device to not know when it has been altered.
> 
> Does DTV need stickers? I somehow doubt it.


There is no such case sensor in the HR21-200 I own. Now, can they tell a different hard drive is in there? Most likely.

The reality is they could probably care less about people swapping in HDs...it's the liability of people playing in the box and getting hurt or damaging the device or attempting to circumvent their security that the clause is really meant to target. Like just about every other consumer contract of adhesion it's as broad as they can possibly make it.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Ken S said:


> The reality is they could probably care less about people swapping in HDs...it's the liability of people playing in the box and getting hurt or damaging the device or attempting to circumvent their security that the clause is really meant to target. Like just about every other consumer contract of adhesion it's as broad as they can possibly make it.


+1


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Ken S said:


> There is no such case sensor in the HR21-200 I own. Now, can they tell a different hard drive is in there? Most likely.
> 
> The reality is they could probably care less about people swapping in HDs...it's the liability of people playing in the box and getting hurt or damaging the device or attempting to circumvent their security that the clause is really meant to target. Like just about every other consumer contract of adhesion it's as broad as they can possibly make it.


Too true. One way to look at the issue is that the rules must apply to all to be fair, and the vast majority of people who did open their cases would very likely do damage.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Too true. One way to look at the issue is that the rules must apply to all to be fair, and the vast majority of *people who did open their cases would very likely do damage*.


Even experienced, careful people can have an accident. 

What do you do then?

Mike


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

MicroBeta said:


> Even experienced, careful people can have an accident.
> 
> What do you do then?
> 
> Mike


People who SMOKE their receivers should be treated the same as Paul Brown's description of traitors...

(Name that very obfuscated movie reference...)


----------



## timmmaaayyy2003 (Jan 27, 2008)

Ken S said:


> There is no such case sensor in the HR21-200 I own.


That you know of. It was my understanding that the message only showed up in the event of a HD failure and in certain parts of the system test.

It could be that the R-10 was a unique situation since previous DVR's were being hacked to enable Tivo2Go and USB transfers that were being heavily hacked at the time.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

There are two issues here... 

(1) is there a way for DIRECTV to tell your receiver has been tampered with, regardless of whether there is a sticker? To this the answer is yes, and I'm sorry I cannot give more details than that. 

(2) whether or not they can tell, is it ethically right to tamper with someone else's property? To this I say no, and I believe I've already put forth my argument.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Even experienced, careful people can have an accident.
> 
> What do you do then?
> 
> Mike


You break it...you should report the issue to DirecTV and pay a reasonable fee to replace/repair the item you damaged.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Ken S said:


> You break it...you should report the issue to DirecTV and pay a reasonable fee to replace/repair the item you damaged.


And according to the lease agreement that would be $470. 

Mike


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

Ken S said:


> So...how about that DLB?


I want it. 

Regarding this subject, I would probably take the risk by opening it if there were a failure of an obviously user replaceable piece, i.e. fan. It would seem ridiculous to wait for DTV to send a new receiver or a tech for such a simple issue. I may also open it to clean out dust. But that's not likely.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

My statement that "People can do with their DVRs as they like as long as they accept the consequences for their actions" meant that if they are willing to pay to OWN their DVR if DIRECTV finds out then what is wrong with that.

I was not advocating that everyone run out and Tamper with their DVR or Hack it or anything to that effect but if they had the financial resources and were willing to pay $470 or whatever the cost would be that Directv would assess you if they found out you had Upgraded your hard drive because Directv didn't provide a larger hard drive, then so be it.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> My statement that "People can do with their DVRs as they like as long as they accept the consequences for their actions" meant that if they are willing to pay to OWN their DVR if DIRECTV finds out then what is wrong with that.
> 
> I was not advocating that everyone run out and Tamper with their DVR or Hack it or anything to that effect but if they had the financial resources and were willing to pay $470 or whatever the cost would be that Directv would assess you if they found out you had Upgraded your hard drive because *Directv didn't provide a larger hard drive*, then so be it.


Do you know of anyother service provider that has a larger recording capacity?

Mike


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I don't look at other Service Providers because I am a Directv guy even if they have a few shortcomings but I am betting that Directv will in the long run be the Service Provider that offers the most and best in Quality HD Programming.

I am not a "Directv Basher" or a "Directv FanBoy" ready and willing to drag out my DIRECTV FLAG for all to see but I just tell it like it is and for some people that upsets them but I try to be Truthful and Helpful in my posts and my responses.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> I don't look at other Service Providers because I am a Directv guy even if they have a few shortcomings but I am betting that Directv will in the long run be the Service Provider that offers the most and best in Quality HD Programming.
> 
> I am not a "Directv Basher" or a "Directv FanBoy" ready and willing to drag out my DIRECTV FLAG for all to see but I just tell it like it is and for some people that upsets them but I try to be Truthful and Helpful in my posts and my responses.


I actually try to keep up on the other providers. How else can I make an informed decision?

My point was that DirecTV already have more HD recording capacity then most. Dish comes close (more is some cases) but other than that&#8230;.. :grin:

Mike


----------



## Thaedron (Jun 29, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I have to "wonder" how many others thought [knew] this thread was going to end up "here". :nono:


LOL... one :beatdeadhorse:



Ken S said:


> So...how about that DLB?


Followed by another :beatdeadhorse:

But to the OP's intent... I haven't yet returned any of my leased receivers, nor have I opened any of them. So my 'no' vote is meaningless.

No offense to the OP or any other DBSTalk poll starters, but many of us (myself included) are good good at many things, but quality poll writing ain't one of em...

This poll should have only asked for votes if you have both altered AND returned a leased DVR and THEN whether or not you have "suffered the wrath of the DirecTV lease agreement legal team". Or perhaps something along the lines of...


I have not opened any of my DirecTV leased DVRs
I have not returned any previously opened DirecTV leased DVRs
I have both opened and returned one or more leased DirecTV DVRs without recourse
I have both opened and returned one or more leased DirecTV DVRs and was subjected to some recourse by DirecTV (fully detailed in a post to follow)

Then for the purposes of the point the OP is trying to make, you throw out all of the first two responses.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> I actually try to keep up on the other providers. How else can I make an informed decision?
> 
> My point was that DirecTV already have more HD recording capacity then most. Dish comes close (more is some cases) but other than that&#8230;.. :grin:
> 
> Mike


Yes, but others have a much better and more complete VoD library which means you don't need as much recording space. Their VoD stuff also doesn't take up HD space as it is watched.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

richierich said:


> I am betting that Directv will in the long run be the Service Provider that offers the most and best in Quality HD Programming.


Not to go off topic (dammit!) but I'm not sure I care. Everything except the travel channel is in HD, and I have a good 12-15 channels in HD I dont care about, mostly kids channels that run 95% animations that look just fine in SD.

After my dad had his HD tivo/comcast setup put in, I looked extensively for what channels I had in HD that werent on cable. Darned if I could find any.

Why does this matter? Because the delivery of excess HD channel content drives additional technical complexity into the system that we rely on to perform at a "utility" level. So more HD channels = more satellites = more complex equipment = lower tolerances = higher install requirements.

All the stuff that bit me in the backside this year.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

Thaedron said:


> This poll should have only asked for votes if you have both altered AND returned a leased DVR and THEN whether or not you have "suffered the wrath of the DirecTV lease agreement legal team".


Well, yeah, I did, it the OP:



> Has anyone ever:
> 
> Opened their DVR (for what ever reason)
> Later returned that DVR
> And then ACTUALLY been "punished" by D* for opening the box


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Throckmorton said:


> Well, yeah, I did, it the OP:


Wait, are you saying that you've been punished?

Mike


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Wait, are you saying that you've been punished?
> 
> Mike


That's a joke, right?

You couldn't really be misreading me that badly, could you?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Throckmorton said:


> That's a joke, right?
> 
> You couldn't really be misreading me that badly, could you?


Sorry, I've been up for three hours and I haven't had my coffee yet. :icon_cof: :grin:


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Sorry, I've been up for three hours and I haven't had my *coffee *yet. :icon_cof: :grin:


Ah, I understand completely. I'm enjoying some Caribou Sumatra at the moment.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Guys...this is all pretty straight forward.

There is a clear statement in the DirecTV agreement when you use leased equipment that states the consequences of opening up a DVR or receiver, so that's not really much to debate.

For those who understand the potential charges that may be incurred through their actions of violating those terms, and still go ahead and proceed with opening up a device....they would likely be prepared to pay the funds due for their choice.

I do not condone nor would encourage anyone to violate the terms of their agreement. 

There is, of course, the added risk of opening a unit whereby one does not know what they are doing with the insides of the equipment. In any case...if you don't own your equipment, and don't know specifically what you are doing....why even risk anything?

All that said....tinkerer beware....


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Guys...this is all pretty straight forward.
> 
> There is a clear statement in *the DirecTV agreement when you use leased equipment that states the consequences *of opening up a DVR or receiver, so that's not really much to debate.
> 
> ...


Yes, I can agree with that. But I would also like to reiterate that the _only point_ of this thread was to try to determine if these "consequences" have ever been meted out. It was never meant to debate the moral/ethical/legality of doing so.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> My only intent was to find out if the "threat" was ever acted upon. Nothing more.
> 
> I had _no idea_ the thread was going to end up here.
> 
> But as I read the preachings of the "moral police" I can certainly see what happened.


It doesn't take much for a post of this type (about something D* doesn't want you doing) to end up where they all end up....

Don't believe me start one asking how to download the recordings off of the hard drive.... :lol:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Or better, don't


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> Don't believe me start one asking how to download the recordings off of the hard drive.... :lol:


I'll just say that there should be a way to do that especially with mediashare. I imagine there is even, but it cannot be discussed here. Or at the very least be able to backup your season passes in case of failure.

I think it's a good assumption that the crew on this site is not the typical DTV customer. And out of the millions and millions of customers they have, the vast majority would never open their receivers. I said I would if a fan failed and I didn't want to wait on DTV to replace it. Makes perfect sense to do that in my mind. I might call first and see what the shipping time of a new receiver would be. If unacceptable or I had to wait on a tech is where I would decide to do the repair myself. But your average Joe would just call and have a tech or have a replacement.

It's a good question whether someone has been busted. I'd be curious to know. But from what I've read so far, not many of "us" have returned a receiver.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Again to answer, yes someone has been busted. I'm not at liberty to discuss any details.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> I actually try to keep up on the other providers. How else can I make an informed decision?
> 
> My point was that DirecTV already have more HD recording capacity then most. Dish comes close (more is some cases) but other than that&#8230;.. :grin:
> Mike


I have way too much money tied up with Directv to even think about leaving to go to another Provider and about the only things I don't have with them is MRV and an ATM attached to my HR2Xs. I have DLB with my two HR10-250s but now that I have 2 HR2Xs side by side with 4 Tuners and 100 Series Links combined and a ton of recording capacity I don't need DLB because I can simply Record 2 Programs at once and then flip back and forth between them or switch to the other DVR and do the same thing and then delete them at the end if I chuse to (cute ain't it Tom).

I am very happy with all of the HD Programming that Directv provides me and if I get The Travel Channel soon I will then be a very quiet and happy camper. :hurah:


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Tallgntlmn said:


> I'll just say that there should be a way to do that especially with mediashare. I imagine there is even, but it cannot be discussed here. Or at the very least be able to backup your season passes in case of failure.
> 
> I think it's a good assumption that the crew on this site is not the typical DTV customer. And out of the millions and millions of customers they have, the vast majority would never open their receivers. I said I would if a fan failed and I didn't want to wait on DTV to replace it. Makes perfect sense to do that in my mind. I might call first and see what the shipping time of a new receiver would be. If unacceptable or I had to wait on a tech is where I would decide to do the repair myself. But your average Joe would just call and have a tech or have a replacement.
> 
> It's a good question whether someone has been busted. I'd be curious to know. But from what I've read so far, not many of "us" have returned a receiver.


I've had a receiver die and call in on a Thurs. Night- 9 to 10 ish and had the replacement on my porch Saturday, so shipping is actually really great through D*.


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Again to answer, yes someone has been busted. I'm not at liberty to discuss any details.


A better question, and I imagine you can't divulge would be what did this person do to the receiver? Merely open it or something more? 


dodge boy said:


> I've had a receiver die and call in on a Thurs. Night- 9 to 10 ish and had the replacement on my porch Saturday, so shipping is actually really great through D*.


Then that wouldn't be a problem. I was thinking more like receiver goes dead or something fails, call D* and wait 4 days ground shipping from CO. Or worse, wait 3 weeks for an installer. Given what you said, I'd have to reassess my thought of doing my own service.


----------



## Thaedron (Jun 29, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Again to answer, yes someone has been busted. I'm not at liberty to discuss any details.


It was Earl wasn't it... That's the real reason that he disappeared... :eek2::lol:

Poor Earl, swimming wit da fishes...

Apologies in advance for going way OT...


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> Yes, I can agree with that. But I would also like to reiterate that the _only point_ of this thread was to try to determine if these "consequences" have ever been meted out. It was never meant to debate the moral/ethical/legality of doing so.


I'm not quite sure how you could possibly have one without the other .. There are a lot of different opinions that read these threads.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Tallgntlmn said:


> A better question, and I imagine you can't divulge would be what did this person do to the receiver? Merely open it or something more?


No, we are not going there ..


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> There are a lot of different opinions that read these threads.


You do it by leaving the opinions out of it entirely. That's why I didn't ask for them. They don't matter.

I just wanted to gather the facts. Those aren't really open to debate.


----------



## billsharpe (Jan 25, 2007)

I know there are rules and I voted that I just wanted to see the results, but this thread has become absolutely fascinating, warts and all.

We'll never know what that guy (if only one and a guy not a gal) did to his machine to incur DirecTV's wrath, but it must have been something pretty darn apparent.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Tallgntlmn said:


> A better question, and I imagine you can't divulge would be what did this person do to the receiver? Merely open it or something more?


Now come on you know that if anyone here knew the answer to that, they couldn't tell you even if they wanted to.


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

billsharpe said:


> I know there are rules and I voted that I just wanted to see the results, but this thread has become absolutely fascinating, warts and all.
> 
> We'll never know what that guy (if only one and a guy not a gal) did to his machine to incur DirecTV's wrath, but it must have been something pretty darn apparent.


Maybe D*tv should have hired him/her as a security consultant instead of punishing him/her.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

dodge boy said:


> Now come on you know that if anyone here knew the answer to that, they couldn't tell you even if they wanted to.


I really doubt the person who voted yes, is actually someone who got punished. More likely, it's someone voting because they they know of a situation that was actually another individual, or someone voting as a form of fear mongering. It's not like it's a serious offense that someone would be ashamed of. I'd bet that if someone was dinged for this, they'd WANT to tell the story, either because they were PO'd about it, or to warn others. It's not like we're dealing with issues of national security. Personally, I think associating this with morals/ethics is... odd. :scratch:


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

DarinC said:


> I think associating this with morals/ethics is... odd. :scratch:


Entering into an agreement and then not honoring that agreement, no matter how big or small it may seem, is a reflection of ones character. Now some agreements, although not the TV viewing kind, could be argued it is more moral for someone to get out of than to honor.


----------



## cygnusloop (Jan 26, 2007)

Hey, I am perfectly fine with "You break it, you buy it". 

That said, I really hope (and am pretty sure) that DIRECTV doesn't spend a lot of time and resources tracking down HDD upgraders. Just doesn't seem worth their time to do so.

Now, I recall threads on this board about folks wanting to OC the processers, install water cooling, and other such nonsense. THAT gets into a whole different area. I think I remember a thread from way back about someone who actually painted their silver HR20-700 black. That might raise an eyebrow in the returns dept.


----------



## l8er (Jun 18, 2004)

"It's dead, Jim."


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

dodge boy said:


> Entering into an agreement and then not honoring that agreement, no matter how big or small it may seem, is a reflection of ones character.


Morals and character are subjective terms that have more to do with intent than results. Someone can violate the the letter of an agreement without believing they are violating the spirit of the agreement.


----------



## spunkyvision (Oct 12, 2006)

Throckmorton: Thanks for asking the question. I have been wanting to know the actual facts about it as well.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

A bit more to help feed into your paranoia... it's not terribly difficult for someone to use available tools to find out who you are online. If you say "My DVRs have been opened" then basically you're providing a roadmap that DIRECTV can use, with or without DBSTalk's cooperation, to figure out who you are. 

Folks, the internet is NOT anonymous. You cannot hide.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Wouldnt they need dbstalk to provide them with the users IP address that they posted under, and then the users ISP to provide a name and address associated with the IP address...which could only be obtained by subpoena for suspected illegal activities?

Granted, the internet IS way less anonymous than many think. I guess if your email address listed is your real name and you state what city and state you live in, you're not going to be hard to find.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Hmm...I did a google search for "directv $470 tampering opening dvr" and the only results I got were this thread, a bunch of terms and conditions from various reseller sites, and a brazillion people complaining about not knowing the box was leased and having to send it back, or having to pay early termination fees for a contract they didnt know they signed up for.

Couldnt find a single person complaining about having been charged for opening up the box, in all the internets.

So I guess in the instances its allegedly happened, people felt like they deserved it and didnt complain about it online.


----------



## MycroftHolmes (Dec 9, 2008)

I'm not sure how they could get the IP address without the cooperation of DBSTalk, but assuming that you're posting from your home network and further assuming that your DVR is networked, they can easily figure out which IP belongs to which subscriber.

I'm not sure why they would bother. It seems like a lot of trouble to go through to punish fans for upgrading their boxes. I’m not advocating violating the lease agreement, but do I think that taking what seems to be TiVo’s attitude of allowing modification without actually advocating or supporting those modifications is the best way of handling the situation. Punishing people who don’t actually do damage to their equipment, when those people are likely the companies most loyal customers, seems counterproductive to me.


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Folks, the internet is NOT anonymous. You cannot hide.


Maybe not, but you can make it more difficult. Post from Starbucks. Post using your neighbor's WiFi. Post using a public terminal. I remember once seeing a guy downloading music (and not thru iTunes) at a sports bar because he didn't want to use his own connection to do so.

Fact is, this is not criminal. It's a violation of a lease term and nowhere near serious enough for a company like D* to come looking. It would simply not be worth the cost. There is another board I read where a company is suing forum members. The board owner has vehemently defended his members and won't give up their info. They have spent tons on lawyers to hold their ground. Any doubt dbstalk would do the same thing? I bet they would.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> Hmm...I did a google search for "directv $470 tampering opening dvr" and the only results I got were this thread, a bunch of terms and conditions from various reseller sites, and a brazillion people complaining about not knowing the box was leased and having to send it back, or having to pay early termination fees for a contract they didnt know they signed up for.
> 
> Couldnt find a single person complaining about having been charged for opening up the box, in all the internets.
> 
> So I guess in the instances its allegedly happened, people felt like they deserved it and didnt complain about it online.


Here is the official word just for you.

http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=1100106

I goggled directv customer agreement and this was the first link. :grin:

Mike


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> I goggled directv customer agreement and this was the first link. :grin:


It would appear you were goggling for something different than t_h was.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

t_h said:


> Wouldnt they need dbstalk to provide them with the users IP address that they posted under, and then the users ISP to provide a name and address associated with the IP address...which could only be obtained by subpoena for suspected illegal activities?
> 
> Granted, the internet IS way less anonymous than many think. I guess if your email address listed is your real name and you state what city and state you live in, you're not going to be hard to find.


I think you're confusing civil and criminal matters. Violation of a lease agreement is not a criminal matter (or illegal as you described it).

In other words I could yell from the top of the closest mountain that I opened a receiver and there's nothing illegal about it. DirecTV could refuse me as a customer based on that, or any other reason they choose as long as it wasn't discriminatory (they couldn't refuse my service based on religion for example), but that's the extent of any penalty unless they could prove damages. In civil court the only remedy is monetary based on damages.

The lease agreement in itself is nothing more than a textbook case of an unconscionable agreement (by tasset approval none-the-less).

-Joe


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Tallgntlmn said:


> Maybe not, but you can make it more difficult. Post from Starbucks. Post using your neighbor's WiFi. Post using a public terminal. I remember once seeing a guy downloading music (and not thru iTunes) at a sports bar because he didn't want to use his own connection to do so.
> 
> Fact is, this is not criminal. It's a violation of a lease term and nowhere near serious enough for a company like D* to come looking. It would simply not be worth the cost. There is another board I read where a company is suing forum members. The board owner has vehemently defended his members and won't give up their info. They have spent tons on lawyers to hold their ground. Any doubt dbstalk would do the same thing? I bet they would.


So what you're advocating is knowingly taking action to disguise yourself, which equates to knowing that what you're doing is wrong. Do I understand you properly?


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> A bit more to help feed into your paranoia... it's not terribly difficult for someone to use available tools to find out who you are online. If you say "My DVRs have been opened" then basically you're providing a roadmap that DIRECTV can use, with or without DBSTalk's cooperation, to figure out who you are.
> 
> Folks, the internet is NOT anonymous. You cannot hide.


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> So what you're advocating is knowingly taking action to disguise yourself, which equates to knowing that what you're doing is wrong. Do I understand you properly?


Not quite. I was saying the internet can be more anonymous if desired. In context to this thread, D* would likely not bother to pursue in regard to something on this forum and dbstalk would likely put up a fight to keep its members confidential if they did.

But that's totally OT for this thread. I say we get DLB and MRV, how about you


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

DarinC said:


> dodge boy said:
> 
> 
> > Entering into an agreement and then not honoring that agreement, no matter how big or small it may seem, is a reflection of ones character. Now some agreements, although not the TV viewing kind, could be argued it is more moral for someone to get out of than to honor.
> ...


Exactly.

I paid good money for my HRs and they live in my house for the sole purpose of entertaining me. And I pay over $100 a month for them to do so.

I will use them how I see fit and if that means opening the case to replace a hard drive then you can bet I will have no moral or ethical qualms about doing it. Until they are returned they are mine.

And I recognize this is an extreme view but it is just as valid of an opinion as that of other posters here who feel differently.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Please .. :backtotop .. This thread is not about Internet duplicity


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> Exactly.
> 
> I paid good money for my HRs and they live in my house for the sole purpose of entertaining me. And I pay over $100 a month for them to do so.
> 
> I will use them how I see fit and if that means opening the case to replace a hard drive then you can bet I will have no moral or ethical qualms about doing it. Until they are returned they are mine.


Remind me not to enter into a contract with people of this mindset. Obviously agreements with such people are only expediencies.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

DarinC said:


> Morals and character are subjective terms that have more to do with intent than results. Someone can violate the the letter of an agreement without believing they are violating the spirit of the agreement.


I concur.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Throckmorton said:


> Exactly.
> 
> I paid good money for my HRs and they live in my house for the sole purpose of entertaining me. And I pay over $100 a month for them to do so.
> 
> ...


So according to your thinking, I lease a car, I get it home and remove the drive train, stick in a supercharged big block V-8, convert it to rear wheel drive, tub the car, but as long as I return it in stock condition the car company should not have a problem. After all I will have way more tied up in any vehicle and will get more entertainment out of it than some silly DVR. OK, I want to explain to the dealer.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

dodge boy said:


> So according to your thinking, I lease a car, I get it home and remove the drive train, stick in a supercharged big block V-8, convert it to rear wheel drive, tub the car, but as long as I return it in stock condition the car company should not have a problem. After all I will have way more tied up in any vehicle and will get more entertainment out of it than some silly DVR. OK, I want to explain to the dealer.


WOW, what an ABSURD ARGUMENT!!! What was Tom's saying about "Reductio Ad Absurdum?

Directv says you can't open up the box or you will be penalized by accessing you $470 for the Full Cost Of Owning Your DVR!!! Well, if I have a Million Dollars or whatever in the Bank and want to Open up my DVR and install a larger drive so I can enjoy Directv better and remain a long and loyal customer and pay my big bill on time then I don't think Directv minds because of the agreement. If I get shocked or whatever I can't Sue Directv because of the Agreement. It is a Disclaimer for God's sake, let's not make this more than it is.

How hard is that to understand? It is not a Felony and not even a Misdemeanor. Leave it as is or if found out to be tampered with pay a small penalty such as $470 which some can afford to pay and others might not be as willing to pay the penalty as others who can afford to.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

richierich said:


> WOW, what an ABSURD ARGUMENT!!! What was Tom's saying about "Reductio Ad Absurdum?


Methinks you got dodge boy's whole point. 

Use a line of logic and reduce it to a point of absurdity.

I think his point was well said. Maybe in a few more posts we'll have to rename him to Dodge Man. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Well, if when you Return the car and you have removed everything then they will not know and will probably sell the car at such a cheap cost to recover their investment which isn't very much after they have charged you alot for you leasing of the car (who would actually fall for leasing?). 

They are interested in your monthly fees for the life of your contract and they are making a killing with me but I am a very satisfied customer and would not think of going anywhere else unless FIOS turns out better but I doubt that it will in my neighborhood before Dec. 21, 2012!!! (There he goes again with those dam exclamation points. Is he Shouting at us or is he just using that for EMPHASIS? I don't know. He must have bought an awful lot of them at the latest raffle though as he uses them like CRAZY!!!)


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

richierich said:


> (who would actually fall for leasing?).


That's what people who don't understand leasing say... 

Oh, sorry... Was that off-topic? :lol:


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

AirRocker, Please PM me an explanation as everyone I know has leased a car had told me of the horrid stories of how they were screwed and nickel and dimed for every little ding, etc. and actually ended up paying for 80% of the car which then the Leasor Auctioned off for about 50% plus all of the extra charges involved.

Unless you own your own business and need an expensive write-off it is ABSURD!!! Unless you are in the business of Leasing Cars and why do most car companies want to Lease Instead Of Selling you the car? Because they make alot more MONEY!!!


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

richierich said:


> AirRocker, Please PM me an explanation as everyone I know has leased a car had told me of the horrid stories of how they were screwed and nickel and dimed for every little ding, etc. and actually ended up paying for 80% of the car which then the Leasor Auctioned off for about 50% plus all of the extra charges involved.
> 
> Unless you own your own business and need an expensive write-off it is ABSURD!!! Unless you are in the business of Leasing Cars and why do most car companies want to Lease Instead Of Selling you the car? Because they make alot more MONEY!!!


http://www.leaseguide.com/lease03.htm

I leased a car and was not charged a dime at the end of the lease.


----------



## davring (Jan 13, 2007)

At one time I leased vehicles (app. 30 at a time) for my business and will never do it again. We now purchase every car and truck, much less trouble in the long run, at least for our uses.


----------



## rahlquist (Jul 24, 2007)

Tallgntlmn said:


> Fact is, this is not criminal. It's a violation of a lease term and nowhere near serious enough for a company like D* to come looking. It would simply not be worth the cost. There is another board I read where a company is suing forum members. The board owner has vehemently defended his members and won't give up their info. They have spent tons on lawyers to hold their ground. Any doubt dbstalk would do the same thing? I bet they would.


What something is worth is in the eye of the beholder as I mentioned earlier;
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070912/092259.shtml

As you can see DirecTV when riled can go after people quite energetically.

Anyhow as per the back to topic request by our friendly mods I believe at least 2 have stated that yes people have had this done (been charged $ for tampering). So sounds like that answer has been provided.


----------



## Canis Lupus (Oct 16, 2006)

I actually got money back on a lease trade-in. It qualified for a low mileage rebate. Of course I was trading the car in for one I bought, but I did still get $500 towards the purchase.



tcusta00 said:


> http://www.leaseguide.com/lease03.htm
> 
> I leased a car and was not charged a dime at the end of the lease.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Okey, back to the Topic!! Didn't mean to derail this wonderful discourse on the "Has Anyone Ever Suffered the Consequences of...".

You should never Violate Your Lease Agreement Unless You Are Prepared To Suffer The Consequences!!!

What if you were shocked after opening the DVR. What if you cut yourself on the sharp edges in the box.

Please leave this to a Professional Company such as DIRECTV Or WEAKNEES or PTVUPGRADE or whomever as they are better at doing this than we are.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

richierich said:


> Directv says you can't open up the box or you will be penalized by accessing you $470


They don't even say that much. They say not to alter or tamper with it. Merely opening it up is neither. It's a box held together by screws. It can be opened and closed back up without materially changing it. Some might say that you've altered or tampered with it when you change out the drive, but then the question becomes: is connecting a different drive to the internal sata port significantly different than connecting a drive to the esata port? In either case, what you have done can be completely reversed... in the end, you haven't materially changed the product. All the "changes" were to components specifically designed to allow non-destructive assembly/replacements.

Personally, I think the terms are simply there to protect themselves. They want the customer liable for any damage they may do, they don't want to be liable for the customer harming themselves in the process (nor do they want the cost of having to build in safety features for user-accessible components), and they want another avenue for going after those who may be attempting mods to steal service. Publicly, they HAVE to discourage tampering to protect themselves, but realistically, they probably have little interest in punishing those who do, as long as they don't do it in a way that is detrimental to DirecTV.

Obviously though, no one should mess with it who isn't prepared to pay for the unit. They aren't designed for user service, so anything could happen.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> Here is the official word just for you.


Here's another official word. According to my friend, who is a contract lawyer and named partner of a major firm, and who has worked extensively in the entertainment business although not with directv, the lease agreement only states that you have to pay $470 if the equipment is not returned, or if it is returned damaged or with more than normal wear and tear.

There is a clause in there regarding selling, tampering, etc. However, there is no verbiage in the contract assessing a fee or penalty for any of those, providing the equipment is returned in good working order. The fee schedule that Microbeta pointed to in fact, contains no fee structure for tampering with and never mentions that the device is not to be opened.

Tampering is defined as:

1: to carry on underhand or improper negotiations (as by bribery)
2 a: to interfere so as to weaken or change for the worse -used with with<did not want to tamper with tradition> b: to try foolish or dangerous experiments -used with with c: to render something harmful or dangerous by altering its structure or composition <was charged with tampering with consumer products>

Obviously #1 is not applicable. In option number two one must weaken or make a change for the worse, foolishly or dangerously experiment with or render the device harmful or dangerous.

All that having been said, she notes that if your receiver had a sticker on it that said you cannot open it or you will violate the terms of your lease, you removed the sticker, and directv can prove that such a sticker was in evidence, they may file a civil suit claiming breach of contract and sue you for damages. But the contract as written would not allow them to simply assess a $470 fee if you returned the receiver in good working order.

Read from all that what you will.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

DarinC said:


> They don't even say that much. They say not to alter or tamper with it. Merely opening it up is neither. It's a box held together by screws. It can be opened and closed back up without materially changing it. Some might say that you've altered or tampered with it when you change out the drive, but then the question becomes: is connecting a different drive to the internal sata port significantly different than connecting a drive to the esata port? In either case, what you have done can be completely reversed... in the end, you haven't materially changed the product. All the "changes" were to components specifically designed to allow non-destructive assembly/replacements.
> 
> Personally, I think the terms are simply there to protect themselves. They want the customer liable for any damage they may do, they don't want to be liable for the customer harming themselves in the process (nor do they want the cost of having to build in safety features for user-accessible components), and they want another avenue for going after those who may be attempting mods to steal service. Publicly, they HAVE to discourage tampering to protect themselves, but realistically, they probably have little interest in punishing those who do, as long as they don't do it in a way that is detrimental to DirecTV.
> 
> Obviously though, no one should mess with it who isn't prepared to pay for the unit. They aren't designed for user service, so anything could happen.


Very Good Post! +1


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

richierich said:


> ...everyone I know has leased a car had told me of the horrid stories of how they were screwed and nickel and dimed for every little ding, etc.


Actually, I leased mine years ago. When the lease was up, the car was worth $14k and the buyout was $11.6k. I bought it since it was a good deal. Still driving it today. Now with the nickel and dime thing, it could be true. When they inspected it, they noted the spots where I leaned on it between sets in the garage.

Along the same lines as this topic, I leased one previous to the current one. When I turned it in there were no charges levied. While it was in my possession, I had installed an Alpine stereo. That was modification that Honda never knew about. I took it back with all original equipment. Didn't get charged a thing. They never knew about the after-market stereo. Kind of like D* may never know if you swapped drives while in your possession if you returned it with the OEM drive. 


rahlquist said:


> As you can see DirecTV when riled can go after people quite energetically.


I'm sure they would. But this is about opening/modifying a receiver. Quite different than potentially stealing signal. I highly doubt they would go after anyone on this board saying they have opened their receiver. If they did, there would be a thread as long or longer than the DLB thread about how D* came after them. Note: I said for saying it on this forum, not doing it. I know someone has been busted from previous posts.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

What everyone seems to be missing is this....You open it, you break it, you’re going to pay $470. 

Simple as that.

All the arm chair lawyering in the world isn’t going to change that. 

Mike


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

However, what if you Open It and Don't Break It and Install a Larger Drive that Directv didn't have at the time they offered it to you as a Leased DVR and you continue to pay your Monthly Fees as promised, will Directv care or decide to prosecute you for the $470 or will they consider that over the Long Run they will make alot of money off of you as a good customer as long as you didn't Break It and you continue to be a Valued Customer spending alot of money for your fantastic HD via Directv.

I don't know but as a hypothetical question that is very interesting indeed. I just want to watch Great HD Programming when I want and what I want and as much HD Content as I can store on my device.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> However, what if you Open It and Don't Break It and Install a Larger Drive that Directv didn't have at the time they offered it to you as a Leased DVR and you continue to pay your Monthly Fees as promised, will Directv care or decide to prosecute you for the $470 or will they consider that over the Long Run they will make alot of money off of you as a good customer as long as you didn't Break It.


:shrug:


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> What everyone seems to be missing is this....You open it, you break it, you're going to pay $470.
> 
> Simple as that.


I agree 100%.

What I'm not seeing is anything that prohibits opening the box and changing a disk drive or fan, as long as you return the thing to directv in original and good working order when you terminate service, or any room to charge a fee if they "detect" you've opened it.

However, the agreement says that they can change the terms any time they want, and you'll either have to like it or pay a cancellation fee to leave. My lawyer friend said that was EXTREMELY unusual, as most service providers allow a customer to cancel when terms change substantially in a contract period.

So tomorrow they could stick something in there that says "If you open or have opened your box, you will be subject to a $5000 fee upon determination by directv that the box has been opened."

And you'd either pay that, or pay your termination fee.

Havent opened mine yet and dont have any plans to. If one of them blew a fan or something happened with the internal drive (which I dont use) that prevented it from operating...I'd have to think it over.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> I agree 100%.
> 
> What I'm not seeing is anything that prohibits opening the box and changing a disk drive or fan, as long as you return the thing to directv in original and good working order when you terminate service, or any room to charge a fee if they "detect" you've opened it.
> 
> ...


Changing the drive or fan is altering. You can't get around that.

What are the consequences? :shrug:

Mike


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Folks, I have edited the poll. I will not disclose the circumstances, but I have changed the number of votes for option #1.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

t_h said:


> So tomorrow they could stick something in there that says "If you open or have opened your box, you will be subject to a $5000 fee upon determination by directv that the box has been opened."
> 
> And you'd either pay that, or pay your termination fee.


Well your lawyer friend doesn't know much about grandfathering clauses as it is the Fee that they announce that they will assess at the time of your contract and you are grandfathered in just as you are with your packages. There is no way that would hold up in court.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> What everyone seems to be missing is this....You open it, you break it, you're going to pay $470.


I don't think anyone is arguing that.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

richierich said:


> Well your lawyer friend doesn't know much about grandfathering clauses as it is the Fee that they announce that they will assess at the time of your contract and you are grandfathered in just as you are with your packages. There is no way that would hold up in court.


According to her reading, the clause says that you accept any changes unless you choose to cancel your service, at which time any early cancellation fee would apply.

If you choose not to cancel, you aint grandfathered. You've accepted the new terms and conditions and agree that they apply to you.

"4. CHANGES IN CONTRACT TERMS

We reserve the right to change the terms and conditions on which we offer Service. If we make any such changes, we will send you a copy of your new Customer Agreement containing its effective date. You always have the right to cancel your Service, in whole or in part at any time, and you may do so if you do not accept any such changed terms or conditions. If you do cancel, you may be charged an early cancellation fee if you entered into a separate programming agreement or a deactivation fee. You will be issued a credit, if any, in accordance with Section 5. If you elect not to cancel your Service after receiving a new Customer Agreement, your continued receipt of Service from us will constitute acceptance of the changed terms and conditions. If you notify us that you do not accept such terms and conditions, then we may cancel your Service as provided in Section 5, as we cannot offer Service to different customers on different terms, among other reasons."

I actually never read the agreement until today. It is extremely strict from a legal perspective, including exclusion of the warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. In other words, if the box does nothing whatsoever, its a-okay.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

The problem with "Reductio Ad Absurdum" is logically tying it back to the premise. In this case, if DIRECTV feels harmed, they will charge a reasonable fee. If they attempt an unreasonable fee, they will never get customers. 

So I'm pretty sure, while they might _legally_ be able to raise the fee to $5 zillion, they would lose much, much more if they did so never would.

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

dodge boy said:


> *So according to your thinking*, I lease a car...


Uh, lol, no.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> What everyone seems to be missing is this....You open it, you break it, you're going to pay $470.
> 
> Simple as that.


That pretty much says it all.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Tom Robertson said:


> So I'm pretty sure, while they might _legally_ be able to raise the fee to $5 zillion, they would lose much, much more if they did so never would.


I think I've expandiod ad absurdium 

My point wasnt that they could create absurd fees. It was that there doesnt appear to be a specified fee for anything other than not returning the box or returning it broken. But due to the terms of the contract, they could institute one today if they wished and unless a customer canceled their service, a fee for 'tampering' or 'altering' would apply.

Then we could revisit what constitutes "tampering" and "altering", since there seems to be a good bit of variability in what "relocating" and "moving" means.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> I think I've expandiod ad absurdium


 :scratchin



> My point wasnt that they could create absurd fees. It was that there doesnt appear to be a specified fee for anything other than not returning the box or returning it broken. But due to the terms of the contract, they could institute one today if they wished and unless a customer canceled their service, a fee for 'tampering' or 'altering' would apply.
> 
> Then we could revisit what constitutes "tampering" and "altering", since there seems to be a good bit of variability in what "relocating" and "moving" means.


Hypothetically speaking&#8230;.

Let's assume that the receiver is not opened to merely look inside.

Now, if I replace a fan or a drive then I have altered the receiver. I don't think anyone can deny that changing what's in there is altering the receiver.

Tampering; one could argue that opening the receiver for the purposes of "upgrading" something would be contrary to DirecTV's intended purpose. As such that could be considered tampering.

Does anyone know if the screws on the drive or fan are marked so that someone can tell if they've been removed?

Mike


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

The fact is, we don't know exactly what DirecTV would consider "tampering," but if I had a dead unit and I had even removed the screws, I'd be worried about returning it.

Doesn't matter what our lawyer friends say. Fighting this would be a lot bigger deal to me than it would to them.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> I don't think anyone can deny that changing what's in there is altering the receiver.


But one can certainly make the argument that changing out the internal drive isn't much different from adding an external drive. One requires screws to be screwed while the other doesn't. Adding an external drive isn't supported, but doesn't seem to be considered nearly as controversial.



> Does anyone know if the screws on the drive or fan are marked so that someone can tell if they've been removed?


I had to change out a bad drive in one of my HR21s, and I'm 95% sure that they weren't. Granted, that unit is owned, but honestly, I would not have had qualms doing it with my leased unit either (though that one has an external drive, mostly because I know that if the drive fails, I can just unplug it and have that unit up and running again in a matter of minutes). There is no space for an external drive on the owned unit, so that was never an option.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> Now, if I replace a fan or a drive then I have altered the receiver. I don't think anyone can deny that changing what's in there is altering the receiver.


I cant disagree. My point was that it appears that many people brushed by the clause to not "relocate" the box, and feel its fine to move the box from one place to another inside the home or even to move it themselves to a new residence. They felt fairly free to apply their own definition of "relocate". But then put the brakes on when it came to "alter". Altering is interpreted as opening the box, against the terms of the lease agreement: immoral. Relocating the box: moral.

Maybe I'm seeing this too much as a black and white thing, but if you feel that violating any reasonably interpreted aspect of the agreement is immoral, then so are any other violations.

Are you altering if you replace your old LNB with a SWM you bought online, or a better LNB? How about adding a ground wire to the dish and cabling, since the installers rarely put them in? You're substantially changing aspects of the system, and if you do it wrong, could cause the equipment to stop functioning properly or even damage it.

If you installed a ground and shortly thereafter a receiver stopped working, would you expect to pay $470 when returning it?

If you stick a disk drive in it but return it with the original disk in it, have you altered it?

If you move to a new house, take your dish and receivers and reinstall them in the new home, have you relocated them?


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

rich584 said:


> I really doubt that anyone does any actual refurbishing. When you get an HR that the power cord keeps falling out of or one that will recognize no remote, how could they possibly be refurbished? I got one that wouldn't even boot up.
> 
> I know that D* sends them to a contractor to be "refurbished" and I think all they do is repackage them and off they go to some other poor guy.
> 
> Rich


I have had first hand experience with a refurb(one of many). This particular one arrived securely packaged, no damage of any kind to the exterior of the box it came in, not even scuff marks. Lo and behold when I opened it up the left front panel corner was severely cracked, the top left and right rear corners of the case were dented. As upset as I was when I saw this damage I went ahead and activated it, advising the rep of the damage. Needless to say, functionality was shot, no HD channels, pixelation and lockups throughout. Called right back to deactivate and sent it back once I got the recovery kit. Subsequent refurb o.k., so far. My sad story of a refurb being told, please explain to me what refurbishing is supposed to accomplish. Seems to me I got a repackaged piece of junk. It looks like I'm one of the "other poor guys"


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

t_h said:


> If you move to a new house, take your dish and receivers and reinstall them in the new home, have you relocated them?


Yes, but calling Movers' Connection could be construed as getting permission for that from DIRECTV.


----------



## paulman182 (Aug 4, 2006)

I think that DirecTV might try to blame the failure on the customer if they determine he opened the box, whether he actually "tampered" or not.

The dish is considered to be customer property.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Yes, but calling Movers' Connection could be construed as getting permission for that from DIRECTV.


And another 2 year extension of your customer commitment.

So is what you're saying that you believe that moving a receiver within a home or to a new home is a violation of the lease agreement?


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

johnp37 said:


> please explain to me what refurbishing is supposed to accomplish.


I would anticipate that for a box that was used for a short time period (under a year) and was returned in good working order, blow the dust out of it and wipe it off, and rebox it.

For a unit used for more than a year, or returned defective, that the defective component would be replaced, wear-sensitive components like the disk drive and fan replaced, and fully tested for operation within certain tolerances and guidelines.

I dont know if thats how it works but thats how I'd hope for it to work. I'd hate to think they just wipe the box off, run it through its self test and if it passes, send it back to a customer.


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

t_h said:


> And another 2 year extension of your customer commitment.
> 
> So is what you're saying that you believe that moving a receiver within a home or to a new home is a violation of the lease agreement?


I believe that it's possible that moving it from one place to another without notifying the owner of the equipment might be construed as a violation, yes. I do not believe that moving it from one place to another within the home is a violation.


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Yes, but calling Movers' Connection could be construed as getting permission for that from DIRECTV.





t_h said:


> And another 2 year extension of your customer commitment.


Does it really add another 2 year extension? In that case, does it really make sense to call MC? Does MC give you free install at the new place? I realize MC gives them a way to get the next person who moves in because you are supposed to leave your dish.

I am probably going to have to upgrade. I also plan on moving in less than 4 months depending on the job situation. I was simply going to yank my dish, take my equipment to the new place, hook it up and be happy. Of course, I would let D* know later or if I couldn't acquire signal. My billing address never changes due to being a PO Box, only the service address changes. I may rethink that but it's usually what I do. I wouldn't want to be charged by my complex for leaving a dish. At the same time, even if it is a violation, would they bother charging me if I remain a customer and am happy?

I have moved as described above previously while under agreement and never got extended. I've been without an agreement since 1/06. I moved in 6/04 and 6/07. But I never called MC because I didn't need to due to the install being so easy. And it was not leased equipment.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> But one can certainly make the argument that changing out the internal drive isn't much different from adding an external drive. One requires screws to be screwed while the other doesn't. Adding an external drive isn't supported, but doesn't seem to be considered nearly as controversial.
> 
> I had to change out a bad drive in one of my HR21s, and I'm 95% sure that they weren't. Granted, that unit is owned, but honestly, I would not have had qualms doing it with my leased unit either (though that one has an external drive, mostly because I know that if the drive fails, I can just unplug it and have that unit up and running again in a matter of minutes). There is no space for an external drive on the owned unit, so that was never an option.


Who's gonna check the HR for tampering or altering? The refurbishing contractor? They don't "fix" anything as far as I can see. And if they can't fix the boxes, why would anyone think that they have the expertise to tell if anyone has ever been in the box?

Those returned boxes go directly to the refurbishing contractor, as far as I know. Nobody at D* gets to see them.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

johnp37 said:


> I have had first hand experience with a refurb(one of many). This particular one arrived securely packaged, no damage of any kind to the exterior of the box it came in, not even scuff marks. Lo and behold when I opened it up the left front panel corner was severely cracked, the top left and right rear corners of the case were dented. As upset as I was when I saw this damage I went ahead and activated it, advising the rep of the damage. Needless to say, functionality was shot, no HD channels, pixelation and lockups throughout. Called right back to deactivate and sent it back once I got the recovery kit. Subsequent refurb o.k., so far. My sad story of a refurb being told, please explain to me what refurbishing is supposed to accomplish. Seems to me I got a repackaged piece of junk. It looks like I'm one of the "other poor guys"


All the refurbishing contractor does is repackage them and send them back out again, I think. By the way, if that box you are talking about is a 20-100 or a 21-100, I think I may have had it at one time.

How could they possibly send out a "refurbished" receiver in the condition that you report? In any refurbishing or rebuilding the last step must always be to test the equipment. They sure don't do that.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> I would anticipate that for a box that was used for a short time period (under a year) and was returned in good working order, blow the dust out of it and wipe it off, and rebox it.
> 
> For a unit used for more than a year, or returned defective, that the defective component would be replaced, wear-sensitive components like the disk drive and fan replaced, and fully tested for operation within certain tolerances and guidelines.
> 
> I dont know if thats how it works but thats how I'd hope for it to work. I'd hate to think they just wipe the box off, run it through its self test and if it passes, send it back to a customer.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> But one can certainly make the argument that changing out the internal drive isn't much different from adding an external drive. One requires screws to be screwed while the other doesn't. Adding an external drive isn't supported, but doesn't seem to be considered nearly as controversial.
> 
> I had to change out a bad drive in one of my HR21s, and I'm 95% sure that they weren't. Granted, that unit is owned, but honestly, I would not have had qualms doing it with my leased unit either (though that one has an external drive, mostly because I know that if the drive fails, I can just unplug it and have that unit up and running again in a matter of minutes). There is no space for an external drive on the owned unit, so that was never an option.


You can't even look at a car that has been in an accident and tell if the screws holding the parts that were damaged were removed or changed. If the repairs were done correctly. Just went thru that and almost traded the SUV that had been damaged in and the people at the dealership couldn't tell the car had been in an accident until I told them.

Rich


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

Mods, can we close this thread, please? There is nothing more to be said.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

t_h said:


> I cant disagree. My point was that it appears that many people brushed by the clause to not "relocate" the box, and feel its fine to move the box from one place to another inside the home or even to move it themselves to a new residence. They felt fairly free to apply their own definition of "relocate". But then put the brakes on when it came to "alter". Altering is interpreted as opening the box, against the terms of the lease agreement: immoral. Relocating the box: moral.


As I've stated before, DirecTV gave me the option of moving a receiver to another room on my own or having a tech do it.

I can go to BB, purchase a receiver and install it my self and DirecTV will have no idea where it is in my house.

I can go online and change the location of a receiver on my account without the assistance of a CSR.

Clearly the "relocate" clause does NOT apply to moving it around my house



> Maybe I'm seeing this too much as a black and white thing, but if you feel that violating any reasonably interpreted aspect of the agreement is immoral, then so are any other violations.
> 
> Are you altering if you replace your old LNB with a SWM you bought online, or a better LNB? How about adding a ground wire to the dish and cabling, since the installers rarely put them in? You're substantially changing aspects of the system, and if you do it wrong, could cause the equipment to stop functioning properly or even damage it.
> 
> If you installed a ground and shortly thereafter a receiver stopped working, would you expect to pay $470 when returning it?


 When I return the receiver they won't have any idea whether or not I changed my LNB. BTW, AFAIK you don't have to return the dish&#8230;do you? :scratchin

If they can prove that improper grounding caused the failure then yes, you pay $470.



> If you stick a disk drive in it but return it with the original disk in it, have you altered it?


 This is not a cogent argument.

That's like asking if a tree falls in the forest does it make a sound. Well of course it does. 

Just because you put the old drive back doesn't change a thing. All you did was alter the receiver and then try to cover it up by putting the old one back.



> If you move to a new house, take your dish and receivers and reinstall them in the new home, have you relocated them?


Of course you have but, IMHO, that's just ok.

IMO, the relocate thing is about preventing theft. e.g. DirecTV thinks the receiver is in my family room but it's actually in my daughters living room fifteen miles away. Two households, two dishes, with one household paying the lease fee and getting the Premier Package. I think this is the purpose of the relocate clause.

Mike


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

jwd45244 said:


> Mods, can we close this thread, please? There is nothing more to be said.


In your opinion.

You don't have to read any thread you don't want to....apparently you want to keep reading this one. :grin:

Mike


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> In your opinion.
> 
> You don't have to read any thread you don't want to....apparently you want to keep reading this one. :grin:
> 
> Mike


 Everybody "needs" to watch a train wreck. :lol:


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

jwd45244 said:


> Mods, can we close this thread, please? There is nothing more to be said.


For the moment, you're all behaving, and I've received no request from the original poster, so... consider yourselves being watched but the thread stays open. Feel free not to post in it.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Feel free not to post in it.


Just like DirecTv service has many channels DBSTalk has many threads!!!


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> > If you stick a disk drive in it but return it with the original disk in it, have you altered it?
> 
> 
> This is not a cogent argument. ... Just because you put the old drive back doesn't change a thing. All you did was alter the receiver and then try to cover it up by putting the old one back.


I don't fully agree. The drive can be easily removed and replaced without any detriment to the drive or the DVR. That is the point of screws (if it were epoxied in, that would be a different matter). If you remove the access card, have you altered the DVR? Granted, the access card slot was designed for user access, while the internal drive bay was not. I'm sure they don't _want_ untrained users poking around in there. But it's not like we're talking about soldering in extra components to alter the functionality of the unit. A hard drive is a typically user serviceable part, applied in this case in a non user serviceable area. You are proceeding at your own risk, and you are responsible for your own actions. But I still think we're making a mountain out of a mole hill here.



MicroBeta said:


> jwd45244 said:
> 
> 
> > Mods, can we close this thread, please? There is nothing more to be said.
> ...


THIS I agree with.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

We can play all the games with semantics we want.

IMHO, at the end of the day the goal *IS NOT* to keep us from installing a bigger drive.

The goal *IS* to keep our hands out to the box altogether.

We may want to try to justify our actions by saying "if I return it in working order with the original parts then I haven't altered it".

The fact is the overwhelming majority of subs don't have any business messing around inside electronic components and that's what they're trying to prevent.

Mike


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> The fact is the overwhelming majority of subs don't have any business messing around inside electronic components and that's what they're trying to prevent.


Amen brother. And that's not just the D* DVR. That's every piece of electronic equipment.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

DarinC said:


> I don't fully agree. The drive can be easily removed and replaced without any detriment to the drive or the DVR. That is the point of screws (if it were epoxied in, that would be a different matter). If you remove the access card, have you altered the DVR? Granted, the access card slot was designed for user access, while the internal drive bay was not. I'm sure they don't _want_ untrained users poking around in there. But it's not like we're talking about soldering in extra components to alter the functionality of the unit. A hard drive is a typically user serviceable part, applied in this case in a non user serviceable area. You are proceeding at your own risk, and you are responsible for your own actions. But I still think we're making a mountain out of a mole hill here.
> 
> THIS I agree with.


If you remove the access card it's certainly not altering the receiver. Heck, if you got the thing from a retail store, you're the one who put the thing in the slot to begin with. :grin:

In our world a hard drive is a user serviceable part.

However, most everyone I know hasn't go a clue how to replace one. I'm an engineer and I can't tell you a single engineer I work with that can replace a drive. I've had to help a couple install RAM and hook up their new HDTVs.

You can't compare the general sub to the level of knowledge and experience you'd find on a forum like DBSTalk.

The general sub has not business opening a receiver.

Mike


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> The goal *IS* to keep our hands out to the box altogether. ... The fact is the overwhelming majority of subs don't have any business messing around inside electronic components and that's what they're trying to prevent.


Agreed. It's those who ARE comfortable with electronic components that are probably more interested in this topic. But in a litigious society, companies have to design for the lowest common denominator.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

MicroBeta said:


> I'm an engineer....
> 
> Mike


 "enough said" :lol:

I have yet to find a PC with security torxs screws, and most don't even need any tools to change a drive anymore.


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Up front, i'm not picking on you, i'm just proving a point that there are a lot of interpretations on this agreement. Seems there are some that disagree on the interpretation or feel that they can bend one part, but another is inviolable.



MicroBeta said:


> When I return the receiver they won't have any idea whether or not I changed my LNB.





> Just because you put the old drive back doesn't change a thing. All you did was alter the receiver and then try to cover it up by putting the old one back.


So on one hand, doing something they cant determine is acceptable, on the other, its not?

Is something really altered if you remove something and then put it back exactly as it was?

1 : to make different without changing into something else 2 : castrate , spay

Lets not even open up the castrate/spay can of worms...

Last question on this. If I receive a box with loose screws on the back and the case buzzes, and I tighten the screws to fix the buzz, should I pay $470 when I send it back?



> Of course you have but, IMHO, that's just ok. I think this is the purpose of the relocate clause.


Stuarts perspective differs from yours on this. I'm interested in this piece because by Stuarts interpretation, every time you move you need to call directv and have them move the equipment, incurring a 2 year commitment extension.

I've moved my own dish and receivers a number of times over the years. My take is as long as I notify Directv that there is a new service address I should be okay.

I havent opened my boxes, as I got esatas for a stupidly cheap price and its a simple way to handle the drives since I can connect them to my computer for testing and copying without yanking drives or opening the HR or the PC.

But I've seen where an esata lacks the reliable connection, throughput and reliability of an internal drive. Its tempting to trade a few minutes of time and a little disassembly to eliminate a whole range of potential issues.

But not if its going to cost me $470.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

I sure miss the days when everyone owned their DirecTV equipment, and you had to install it all yourself.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

t_h said:


> Stuarts perspective differs from yours on this. I'm interested in this piece because by Stuarts interpretation, every time you move you need to call directv and have them move the equipment, incurring a 2 year commitment extension.


The "free" movers connection comes with the programing extention.
Paying for a service call doesn't.
Anybody still think there are "free lunches"?


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

veryoldschool said:


> The "free" movers connection comes with the programing extention.
> Paying for a service call doesn't.
> Anybody still think there are "free lunches"?


Although I'm obviously out of date on the topic, I _thought _the mover's connection was free because it was in DirecTV's best interest for the former residence to be left "DirecTV ready", to put them on more even footing with cable from the perspective of the next owners/tenants. If it were ME, and I had the choice of a free install and a 2 year commitment, or taking my dish and putting it up myself with no commitment, *I* would do the latter in a heartbeat.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

First, I don't feel picked on. If I have problem with someone they'll get a PM from me. :grin:


t_h said:


> Up front, i'm not picking on you, i'm just proving a point that there are a lot of interpretations on this agreement. Seems there are some that disagree on the interpretation or feel that they can bend one part, but another is inviolable.
> 
> So on one hand, doing something they cant determine is acceptable, on the other, its not?


Again, not a cogent argument.

Installing a new LNB has squat to do with the receiver. Why the heck would they care about the condition of the receiver because I messed with the dish.



> Is something really altered if you remove something and then put it back exactly as it was?


Of course it is.

How about this&#8230;.IMO, the purpose of all this is to keep subs out the boxes so by putting the drive back in you've actually altered the receiver twice.

Playing games with semantics doesn't change the facts. If I make 15 changes to something but in the end it is exactly the way it started, I still altered it 15 times (or 16 :grin: )



> 1 : to make different without changing into something else 2 : castrate , spay
> 
> Lets not even open up the castrate/spay can of worms...
> 
> Last question on this. If I receive a box with loose screws on the back and the case buzzes, and I tighten the screws to fix the buzz, should I pay $470 when I send it back?


All right, we can keep making up as many unlikely scenarios we want but really, how likely is something like this?

I've never seen a single electronic component or computer with loose case screws(well once but it wasn't new out of the box). I used to be IT and have installed literally hundreds of PCs and have never seen this.



> Stuarts perspective differs from yours on this. I'm interested in this piece because by Stuarts interpretation, every time you move you need to call directv and have them move the equipment, incurring a 2 year commitment extension.
> 
> I've moved my own dish and receivers a number of times over the years. My take is as long as I notify Directv that there is a new service address I should be okay.


Like I said, this is just my opinion. Stuart most likely has a more accurate view of this.

However, based on my experience with DirecTV on moving a receiver within my own home I believe, for now, my perception to reasonable.

Is it reasonable to call for tech to move a receiver from one wall in the living room to another? How long will it take to get that appointment? 

D* - Hello, DirecTV how may I help you.
Me - Yeah, I need to have tech come out and unplug and move my receiver so I can paint my wall.
D* - Ummm, what?

Ok, you got me, an unlikely scenario but that's the point. 

If the intent were to not allow you to move a receiver within your own home then riddle me this.

*How would you buy a HR22 from Best Buy and install it in you house?*



> I havent opened my boxes, as I got esatas for a stupidly cheap price and its a simple way to handle the drives since I can connect them to my computer for testing and copying without yanking drives or opening the HR or the PC.
> 
> But I've seen where an esata lacks the reliable connection, throughput and reliability of an internal drive. Its tempting to trade a few minutes of time and a little disassembly to eliminate a whole range of potential issues.
> 
> But not if its going to cost me $470.


If while you have your hands in there you break it, then that's what it's going to cost you. :grin:

Mike


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> The "free" movers connection comes with the programing extention.
> Paying for a service call doesn't.


Out of curiosity, what does a service call cost? I imagine it is cheaper than it would be to add to your agreement.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

MicroBeta said:


> Playing games with semantics doesn't change the facts. If I make 15 changes to something but in the end it is exactly the way it started, I still altered it 15 times


I would say there is a difference of interpretation, rather than your interpretation being "fact", and the opposing one being "playing games with semantics".


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Mike...Everything is semantics.

A service call is $50, but I dont think they're going to deinstall your old dish and gear, take it to your new house and then reinstall it for $50. Last time I checked a basic install was $200-500 and a custom one where they fish a lot of cable and deal with multiple stories went for $750 and up.

Directv will do this for you for free, as though it is a new install, and they do leave the old dish and wiring at the old house to encourage the new homeowner to subscribe, but there is a 2 year commitment extension for the "free" move. I know, they hit me with it. Never mentioned it on the phone.

When I "upgraded" to the "free" HR's, they extended it an additional 2 years. Again, nobody on the phone mentioned it. Its written in some fine print in the document the installer has you sign when he's done, and refers to the directv web site for full details of the agreement.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Fair enough.

Semantics was a poor choice of words.

How about this? If were to discuss the intention of "relocate", "tamper", or "alter" we should use reasonable scenarios.

I find this discussion interesting and want to read differing opinions. 



DarinC said:


> I would say there is a difference of interpretation, rather than your interpretation being "fact", and the opposing one being "playing games with semantics".





t_h said:


> Mike...Everything is semantics.
> 
> A service call is $50, but I dont think they're going to deinstall your old dish and gear, take it to your new house and then reinstall it for $50. Last time I and deal with multiple stories went for $750 and up.
> 
> ...


 By Mike I think this might be directed at me. However, I don't know how this fits into what "relocate" or "alter" means.

I thought that was what I was discussing, unless you intended to quote a post of mine from yesterday.

Mike


----------



## Greg Alsobrook (Apr 2, 2007)

Which came first... the chicken or the egg?? :grin:


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

AirRocker said:


> Which came first... the chicken or the egg?? :grin:


Chicken soup or Egg drop soup?
:lol:


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

The egg, of course.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Tallgntlmn said:


> Out of curiosity, what does a service call cost? I imagine it is cheaper than it would be to add to your agreement.


 They used to be $70, but I think they're now $50.


----------



## jrcobb (Feb 20, 2009)

If I bought My HR20-700 from Best buy is it considered leased or bought?


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

jrcobb said:


> If I bought My HR20-700 from Best buy is it considered leased or bought?


It is a lease. :grin:

It should say something in all the paperwork.

Mike


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

t_h said:


> A service call is $50, but I dont think they're going to deinstall your old dish and gear, take it to your new house and then reinstall it for $50. Last time I checked a basic install was $200-500 and a custom one where they fish a lot of cable and deal with multiple stories went for $750 and up.


A service call generally means tweaking the dish to gain signal again, right? I think I could move my dish, install it, and acquire the 101 on my own. The 99 and 103 might cause me some issues without the meter. That would be what I would need the service call for. Then I call D* and not get extended. At least it sounds like it would work that way. 


MicroBeta said:


> By Mike I think this might be directed at me. However, I don't know how this fits into what "relocate" or "alter" means.


Since I had asked about moving and not calling MC and then having a service call, I imagine it was directed to me. I could be wrong though.


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> From the DIRECTV Equipment Lease Addendum
> 
> http://www.directv.com/DTVAPP/global/contentPage.jsp?assetId=P500014
> 
> ...


Sorry but the Agreement does not say that. You have attempted to cut and paste together sentences from two different paragraphs to imply that the stated charges apply if you "remove, relocate, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time", while deleting the text in the agreement that clearly states when you can be charged for the receiver.

The agreement clearly states that you can be charged for a receiver that is "not returned to DIRECTV within thirty (30) days of the termination of your DIRECTV programming services or is damaged when it is returned to DIRECTV", and short of obvious customer caused damage to the box, the "damaged when returned" clause is virtually unenforceable.

Here is the full paragraph from the lease agreement that states when you _can_ be charged for the cost of the receiver...
[From the "DirecTV Equipment Lease Addendum"]


> *RETURN OF DIRECTV EQUIPMENT.* If you cease to be DIRECTV's customer for any reason (whether voluntarily or involuntarily) or if you decide to disconnect/cancel/terminate your DVR service or HD Access fee (if you are leasing a DVR or HD Receiver), you must call DIRECTV within seven (7) days after the termination of your DIRECTV programming services, DVR service or HD Access fee, as applicable, to (i) make arrangements for DIRECTV to pick up all your DIRECTV equipment; or (ii) obtain information from DIRECTV necessary to arrange for a ground or air freight service to pick up and deliver all of your DIRECTV equipment to DIRECTV. You acknowledge that the DIRECTV equipment belongs to DIRECTV and the DIRECTV equipment, including the access card inserted into each receiver, must be returned to DIRECTV in good working order, normal wear and tear excepted. In the event that all of the DIRECTV equipment is not returned to DIRECTV within thirty (30) days of the termination of your DIRECTV programming services or is damaged when it is returned to DIRECTV, you agree to pay DIRECTV the sum of $55 per each DIRECTV standard receiver; $200 for each DIRECTV DVR Receiver; $240 for each DIRECTV HD Receiver; or $470 for each DIRECTV HD DVR Receiver that is not returned to DIRECTV or that is damaged when it is returned to DIRECTV as compensation for a portion of the expenses incurred by DIRECTV in establishing your account and providing you the DIRECTV equipment for your use. Visit DIRECTV.com or call 1-800-531-5000 for details.


In other words, it's not surprising that nobody here has ever complained of being charged for their receiver after returning it despite having knowingly or unknowingly violated one or more of the other clauses in the lease agreement, and it's not surprising that the poll above shows the same thing.


----------



## Ken S (Feb 13, 2007)

1. In the land of contract law...generally a contract is going to be construed/defined tightly against the drafter (DirecTV). This is especially the case in contracts of adhesion.

2. Why isn't hooking up an eSATA considered tampering? It's not a released function and certainly affects the operation of the device.

3. Why isn't hooking up a laptop cooler to the box considered tampering? It uses the USB port, draws power and changes airflow within the box.

4. How about those who use the USB to power other devices (iPods)?


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

CCarncross said:


> What is the point of this poll anyway? What could this poll possibly accomplish?


Perhaps it will educate the people who keep incorrectly posting claims stating that actions that *they interpret* as violating some part of the lease agreement are cause for and will cause the customer to be charged for a leased receiver when it it returned.

If this poll prevents just one such bad information post in the future, it will have accomplished something.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

cartrivision said:


> Sorry but the Agreement does not say that. *You have attempted to cut and paste together sentences from two different paragraphs to imply that the stated charges apply if you "remove, relocate, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time", while deleting the text in the agreement that clearly states when you can be charged for the receiver.*
> 
> The agreement clearly states that you can be charged for a receiver that is "not returned to DIRECTV within thirty (30) days of the termination of your DIRECTV programming services or is damaged when it is returned to DIRECTV", and short of obvious customer caused damage to the box, the "damaged when returned" clause is virtually unenforceable.
> 
> ...





cartrivision said:


> Perhaps it will educate the people who keep incorrectly posting claims stating that actions that *they interpret* as violating some part of the lease agreement are cause for and will cause the customer to be charged for a leased receiver when it it returned.
> 
> If this poll prevents just one such bad information post in the future, it will have accomplished something.


First of all I did not miss lead anyone or imply something that wasn't true.

I included the link so that everyone could read it.

It would be stupid of me to think I could make a claim to intentionally mislead everyone; as you clearly accuse me of.

If you had been reading this thread, you would have already seen me and others discussing the distinction between not returning, damaging, and relocating/tampering/altering receivers.

Further, if you had bothered to read any of my posts you would also have seen I was pointing out that opening the receiver and causing damage is the chance we take when we open the box

Read the complete thread before you accuse someone of attempting to intentionally mislead people and forcing a skewed interpretation on them.

You want to discuss this further we can do it via PM, otherwise let it go.

Mike


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

Ken S said:


> 1. In the land of contract law...generally a contract is going to be construed/defined tightly against the drafter (DirecTV). This is especially the case in contracts of adhesion.
> 
> 2. Why isn't hooking up an eSATA considered tampering? It's not a released function and certainly affects the operation of the device.
> 
> ...


Not to mention that anyone who has moved their receiver from where it was originally installed is in violation of the lease clause stating _"You shall have no right to sell, give away, transfer, pledge, mortgage, remove, relocate, alter or tamper with the DIRECTV equipment at any time."_

The way I view the lease agreement, DirecTV is asserting that the equipment belongs to them... that they don't want you tinkering with it or modifying it do anything that it was not intended to do (namely, theft of service).... that you must pay for the services that you agreed to pay for in return for the use of the receiver.... and that they want their receiver back when you discontinue service.

All the evidence suggests that DirecTV doesn't really care much about anything else that may or may not technically violate the lease agreement, and they surely aren't charging people for their receivers because something that they did violates the strictest interpretation of the agreement.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Obviously things are digressing to requiring either a law degree or PHD in astrophysics to debate this issue.

Its simple really...and has been repeated been explained.

Perhaps an "Enter at your own risk" stick should be placed on the back of each unit...


----------



## cartrivision (Jul 25, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Guys...this is all pretty straight forward.
> 
> There is a clear statement in the DirecTV agreement when you use leased equipment that states the consequences of opening up a DVR or receiver, so that's not really much to debate.


Actually, there are no consequences whatsoever spelled out for violation of most of the provisions in the lease agreement. The only consequences that are spelled out are that you can be charged a fee if you fail to return a receiver or return it broken. Additionally, in the areas that the agreement does not provide for consequences for violating it's terms, there is are varying reasonable opinions on what exactly constitutes a violation of the lease agreement.... so there is quite a bit that is subject to debate.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

If this thread continues to :beatdeadhorse: it may attract and bring down the wrath of PETA upon us.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

cartrivision said:


> Actually, there are no consequences whatsoever spelled out for violation of most of the provisions in the lease agreement. The only consequences that are spelled out are that you can be charged a fee if you fail to return a receiver or return it broken.


Good statement. There are no liquidated damages set forth in the agreement regarding "CARE OF EQUIPMENT". As a result the only remedy DirecTV has under the agreement is arbitration (assuming you dispute any claims by DirecTV).


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

Ken S said:


> 1. In the land of contract law...generally a contract is going to be construed/defined tightly against the drafter (DirecTV). This is especially the case in contracts of adhesion.
> 
> 2. Why isn't hooking up an eSATA considered tampering? It's not a released function and certainly affects the operation of the device.
> 
> ...


Here's another: Doesn't connecting the AM21 ATSC receiver alter the the original functionality of the non-ota enabled HR 21/22/23 receivers? And, as we all know, the AM21 is provided by Directv and recommended for those subscribers who want OTA.


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

johnp37 said:


> Here's another: Doesn't connecting the AM21 ATSC receiver alter the the original functionality of the non-ota enabled HR 21/22/23 receivers? And, as we all know, the AM21 is provided by Directv and recommended for those subscribers who want OTA.


This is just ridiculous.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

johnp37 said:


> Here's another: Doesn't connecting the AM21 ATSC receiver alter the the original functionality of the non-ota enabled HR 21/22/23 receivers? And, as we all know, the AM21 is provided by Directv and recommended for those subscribers who want OTA.


No. The functionality is builtin and present all the time. Like many things, it doesn't become enabled until you plug the accessory in.

So your attempt at "Reductio Ad Absurdum" fails. Try again in Double Reductio Ad Absurdum where the stakes are even higher. 

Cheers,
Tom


----------



## racermd (Dec 18, 2006)

tcusta00 said:


> This is just ridiculous.


What's ridiculous is why we need to sign such lengthy, wordy, restrictive contracts in the first place. Common sense *should* apply in all cases. Alas, common sense is far less common than one would hope which is why companies need to cover their behinds with all sorts of 'get out of jail free' language whether they intend to use it or not.

What's even more ridiculous is mandatory binding arbitration clauses in contracts between businesses and end-users. It completely strips away the rights of the individual and gives all leverage to the company when a contract dispute needs to be settled. Off topic? Only partially.

If one *did* manage to somehow give D* a reason to believe that they violated a clause in the agreement, you dispute it and decide to invoke the mandatory binding arbitration clause (your only recourse, per the agreement), you're stuck with the resolution that the arbitrator hands down - the very person(s) that D* pays! There's inherently a conflict of interest, but there's nothing you can do about it since it's *binding* and *mandatory*. No jury trial. No government judicial body of any kind - except when it suits D* (see the clauses in section 9 of the subscriber agreement about the DMCA and other anti-pirating activities where the laws are pretty much going to give D* a win, anyway). You explicitly waive your rights under actual written constitutional law and are bound by the terms of the contract you signed and, as a result, the decision of the arbitrator paid for by D*.

Unfortunately, the alternative is E*. But... they have a nearly identical clause. Cable company? Oooh, too bad. Try again. There really are no viable alternatives. Want to strike out that part of the contract before signing? Good luck, as D* will refuse to agree to the modified terms (for many reasons, not just because they want to continue using arbitration).

Let's look at a hypothetical situation where D* thinks you 'tampered' with your HR2x and they fine you like they said they would in the agreement. If you really didn't do so and you know you're innocent, you can't take D* to court over it. You MUST go through the arbitration process where you're MUCH less likely to get an outcome in your favor since D* pays the arbitration company. If that company wants to keep getting money from D*, they will find in their favor whenever possible. Otherwise, D* will take their money to an arbitration company that WILL find in their favor more often. As a result, the arbitration company being fair and unbiased is at odds with their financial viability. This imbalance in power is precisely why companies are using it in contracts with individuals. In my opinion, it has ceased to be an imbalance of power and has become an abuse of power.

This post isn't meant as a troll, but I feel the need to get others riled up about the mandatory binding arbitration clause that keeps appearing in customer contracts. I'm not singling D* out for any particular reason other than they're a common discussion point on these forums. Many companies have such clauses - take a read through the things you've signed recently.

I will say that mandatory binding arbitration is fair in the legal context (because we all agreed to it as subscribers and customers), but it isn't fair in the 'life' sense. To me, it's anti-customer. The arbitration clause is pretty normal when businesses are dealing with each other as it's a more level playing field. But it should NOT be allowed in business-to-individual contracts since arbitration tilts the playing field too far in the favor of the business.

Okay - I think I'm done ranting for now. When there's enough momentum behind an anti-arbitration movement, I'll definitely jump in with whatever support I can muster. But I'm just one guy and have better things to put my effort and time into than leading this charge. Feel free to discuss.


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

Cartrivision thinks I "attempted to cut and paste together sentences from two different paragraphs to imply" something that wasn't true for the purposes of misleading everyone.

I thought everyone would read the link I provided so we could discuss what was in the lease agreement.

Since we actually discussed those two paragraphs at length I thought everybody understood. Apparently I may have been mistaken.

I thought I was pretty clear on what was just my own opinion and didn't think I kept "incorrectly posting claims" about the lease agreement.

It was not my intent to post false information or to hide what was really in the lease agreement anyone.

I thought my point was simple. You aren't allowed to open it and if you damage it by doing so you'll be subject to paying the $470. At least that's what I thought I said. Since cartrivision thinks I was making false claims, I may not have conveyed that point correctly.

*If I've mislead anyone I sincerely apologize.*

Mike


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

It certainly looked as if it were designed to be Misleading to me and definitely misled me until I read cartvision's Post which made it more clear to me that it was intended to make you return the unit in proper working order.

Whether you meant that is a different story now that you have posted to clear up that intention. Sometimes it sounds as if you Work for Directv which is what I mentioned way back in my First Post. Maybe that is unintentional by you but you really seem to like to Wave the good ole Directv Flag every chance you get. Maybe you are just Over Zealous in your attempts to defend Directv at every turn.

Just my $.02. Not trying to slam you or anything but that is the view from my perspective and a couple of other posters have also mentioned that to me as well.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

RobertE said:


> If this thread continues to :beatdeadhorse: it may attract and bring down the wrath of PETA upon us.


The Wrath of PETA is already upon us as they are WATCHING VERY CLOSELY the DLB Thread and are ready to take action any day now for Beating That Dead Horse into Horse Pate. :lol:


----------



## Mike Bertelson (Jan 24, 2007)

richierich said:


> It certainly looked as if it were designed to be Misleading to me and definitely misled me until I read cartvision's Post which made it more clear to me that it was intended to cause you to return the unit in proper working order.
> 
> Whether you meant that is a different story now that you have posted to clear up that intention. Sometimes it sounds as if you Work for Directv which is what I mentioned way back in my First Post. Maybe that is unintentional to but you really seem to like to Wave the good ole Directv Flag every chance you get. Maybe you are just Over Zealous in your attempts to defend Directv at every turn.
> 
> Just my $.02 not trying to slam you or anything but that is the view from my perspective and a couple of other postes have also mentioned that to me as well.


I guess I thought you would've read the link.


----------



## David MacLeod (Jan 29, 2008)

MicroBeta said:


> I guess I thought you would've read the link.


give it up Mike you'll just drive yourself crazy. losing battle here.
funny, the person who ends a majority of his posts talking about the glorious hd d* has is calling you a flag waver.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

David, I Complain when Directv doesn't get it right and I Compliment Directv when they do. I just tell it like it is and I don't go out of the way to wave the flag or to bash. I am simply here to learn things, to help others learn things and to improve upon my Directv equipment so I can enjoy better HD Programming.

If I can make the Directv DVR better by my bringing attention to certain shortcomings then so be it, it makes Directv happy by helping them to build a better DVR for their other customers and it makes me happy when I have a DVR that works properly and delivers Great HD Programming to me and my family.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

Sorry Rich, no objectivity allowed. You must pick a side, and stick to it.


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

DarinC said:


> Sorry Rich, no objectivity allowed. You must pick a side, and stick to it.


Sorry Darin, I guess then I will pick Directv's side. Guess I better drag out my Directv Flag and start waving it.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> I sure miss the days when everyone owned their DirecTV equipment, and you had to install it all yourself.


Didn't D* have a clause in that agreement that prohibited you from opening the box and switching hard drives?

Rich


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

rich584 said:


> Didn't D* have a clause in that agreement that prohibited you from opening the box and switching hard drives?


Honestly, I don't remember exactly. But I do know that tons of people (including myself) were doing this with their d-TiVos. If I buy a product, I'll do with it what I will. If they want to forbid me from subscribing to their service with my hardware, that's their right. Technically, I *think* the issue wasn't so much changing out the hardware, as it was messing with the software. Unlike the HR2x, the OS resided on the HD, so upgrading a d-TiVo wasn't as simple as just taking out the old drive and plugging in a new drive, like it is on the HR2x. The OS had to be told where the user space was, and in some cases the kernel may even have to be updated. But I thinks it's another one of those cases where they didn't _really_ care if people bumped up their capacity. It was the "other" software hacks they had a problem with.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

richierich said:


> It certainly looked as if it were designed to be Misleading to me and definitely misled me until I read cartvision's Post which made it more clear to me that it was intended to cause you to return the unit in proper working order.
> 
> Whether you meant that is a different story now that you have posted to clear up that intention. Sometimes it sounds as if you Work for Directv which is what I mentioned way back in my First Post. Maybe that is unintentional by but you really seem to like to Wave the good ole Directv Flag every chance you get. Maybe you are just Over Zealous in your attempts to defend Directv at every turn.
> 
> Just my $.02 not trying to slam you or anything but that is the view from my perspective and a couple of other postes have also mentioned that to me as well.


Very perceptive! You never cease to amaze me. That's the opinion I formed months ago when he castigated me for saying that I thought the 100s were (generally speaking and in comparison to the other models) junk.

Think I'll leave it at that.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> Honestly, I don't remember exactly. But I do know that tons of people (including myself) were doing this with their d-TiVos. If I buy a product, I'll do with it what I will. If they want to forbid me from subscribing to their service with my hardware, that's their right. Technically, I *think* the issue wasn't so much changing out the hardware, as it was messing with the software. Unlike the HR2x, the OS resided on the HD, so upgrading a d-TiVo wasn't as simple as just taking out the old drive and plugging in a new drive, like it is on the HR2x. The OS had to be told where the user space was, and in some cases the kernel may even have to be updated. But I thinks it's another one of those cases where they didn't _really_ care if people bumped up their capacity. It was the "other" software hacks they had a problem with.


I do remember reading the TiVo agreement, but I don't have a clue as to what I read. Do seem to remember something about not opening them up too. Them you could hack, I don't see anyone talking about doing anything that would give you those same kinds of "hacks'' that were illegal on the HRs. What could be illegal about changing a hard drive?

Rich


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

rich584 said:


> What could be illegal about changing a hard drive?


Nothing that I could imagine.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

rich584 said:


> Guess you're not religious either.


I wasn't answering a religious question. I was answering a child's riddle.

I answered it scientifically.

I don't think this forum is appropriate for religious discussions.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Throckmorton is correct, DBStalk is not a place for religious discussions.

Let us stay close to topic, I would rather not have to close a thread.

Thanks,
Tom


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Tom Robertson said:


> Throckmorton is correct, DBStalk is not a place for religious discussions.
> 
> Let us stay close to topic, I would rather not have to close a thread.
> 
> ...


OK, no problem. Didn't expect to have a religious discussion, just passing on a conversation I had been privy to in answer to a question that had been asked.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> Nothing that I could imagine.


I don't think I've ever signed anything about a lease agreement except for the first (or second) HR. I bought that one at CC and it did state that that HR was a leased item and that I had a certain amount of time to activate it. That was in the fall of '06. I have signed nothing since. I just bought three new HRs over the last six or seven months and never signed my name to anything. Curious. How does any company hold you to a lease agreement without signed papers?

Rich


----------



## deltafowler (Aug 28, 2007)

Forget taking it part. Who's taken one of the ugly silver boxes apart and painted it black?

Why doesn't skinit.com make skins for these things?


----------



## Tallgntlmn (Jun 8, 2007)

deltafowler said:


> Forget taking it part. Who's taken one of the ugly silver boxes apart and painted it black?


That was the first thought I had when I got my D-TiVo. I hope when I get one of the HR boxes it is black. I can't stand silver components. I am so glad that trend has gone by the wayside.


----------



## Thaedron (Jun 29, 2007)

MicroBeta said:


> Installing a new LNB has squat to do with the receiver. Why the heck would they care about the condition of the receiver because I messed with the dish.


Just an observation, but in the whacky world of DirecTV one-side slanted agreements, we all "own" our dishes, LNBs and cabling.

So IMO anything you do to a dish or LNB should be totally unrelated to the topic of altering leased equipment.

Also, IMHO, DirecTV should buck up and take responsibility for the dish as well. They probably do in most cases, but with cable or telephone, if I'm not getting signal as the cable enters the outside wall of my home, they are responsible to return to service. Per the letter of DirecTV's agreements, they are not.

Apologies if this is straying too far OT.


----------



## Thaedron (Jun 29, 2007)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Obviously things are digressing to requiring either a law degree or PHD in astrophysics to debate this issue.
> 
> Its simple really...and has been repeated been explained.
> 
> Perhaps an "Enter at your own risk" stick should be placed on the back of each unit...


LOL... :lol:

"enter at your own risk" pretty well sums it up.

So does cartrivision's post:



> The way I view the lease agreement, DirecTV is asserting that the equipment belongs to them... that they don't want you tinkering with it or modifying it do anything that it was not intended to do (namely, theft of service).... that you must pay for the services that you agreed to pay for in return for the use of the receiver.... and that they want their receiver back when you discontinue service.


IMO, that's the spirit of the agreement. The stated penalties are there to define what "risk of opening or tampering" really means and really for the gross offenders.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Tallgntlmn said:


> That was the first thought I had when I got my D-TiVo. I hope when I get one of the HR boxes it is black. I can't stand silver components. I am so glad that trend has gone by the wayside.


They might be ugly on the outside, but on the inside, I think, the 20-700s are the most reliable, stable, least finicky and have more tolerance for various eSATAs than any other HR we have seen so far. That might have some bearing on why they sell so well on eBay. That said, if I cared more about aesthetics than performance, I would much prefer the black ones.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

deltafowler said:


> Forget taking it part. Who's taken one of the ugly silver boxes apart and painted it black?
> 
> Why doesn't skinit.com make skins for these things?


This is exactly how entrepreneurs make tons of money. See a need, fill that need. You have the idea, why not run with it? I'd buy them.

Rich


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Magnetic appliques.

Then everyone would be happy.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Black Duct Tape....

Just make sure you pretend their's a bug inside and cut out some air holes...:lol:


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> Magnetic appliques.
> 
> Then everyone would be happy.


I went and gave my 20-700s a good long look and if you put on a "skin" such as my son has on his X-Box, there would be no ventilation at all. Perhaps they are best left alone.

Magnetic appliqués, indeed. :lol:

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Lookee there, someone else voted that he had suffered the consequences and didn't post anything about it...again?

Rich


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

How about a dark, but well-ventilated cabinet?


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

rich584 said:


> Lookee there, someone else voted that he had suffered the consequences and didn't post anything about it...again?


Theres always a comedian.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

t_h said:


> Theres always a comedian.


 Hence the three point margin of error in polls.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> Theres always a comedian.


Sad, but true. I still don't expect to see someone do that in an atmosphere such as this. Oh, well...

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Hence the three point margin of error in polls.


Huh. Never considered that, just assumed people flat out lied.

Fred got his mini-blizzard. He's happy now. :lol:

Rich


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Folks, I was reminded again today how easy it is for someone to find out who a so-called "anonymous" poster is. I think we've got a good discussion brewing here, but I ask you, please don't announce to the world that you've broken a contract (or worse, the law) on a forum where your identity wouldn't be that hard to figure out.


----------



## Tom Robertson (Nov 15, 2005)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Folks, I was reminded again today how easy it is for someone to find out who a so-called "anonymous" poster is. I think we've got a good discussion brewing here, but I ask you, please don't announce to the world that you've broken a contract (or worse, the law) on a forum where your identity wouldn't be that hard to figure out.


Even though DBStalk doesn't release your private information without your permission, if you leave enough clues they can figure it out...


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

My HR-21 died yesterday. A replacement is on the way and I'll be returning the now dead one.

I'm sure glad I never opened the case.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

Throckmorton said:


> I'm sure glad I never opened the case.


Of course, the flip side of that is: perhaps the drive is what went bad, and you wouldn't even be returning it had you opened it up.


----------



## Throckmorton (Dec 7, 2007)

DarinC said:


> Of course, the flip side of that is: perhaps the drive is what went bad, and you wouldn't even be returning it had you opened it up.


Which would be a big savings for D*...


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

rich584 said:


> Huh. Never considered that, just assumed people flat out lied.


Having some experience with polling, thats also an issue. Most respondents will answer a poll (internet or real life) with the answer they feel most flatters them or is most expected/respectable.

One may also pad their poll by selecting their venue. I remember one news article that talked about peoples tastes in beverages and based on a poll, found that people were moving away from more expensive wines and towards beer.

The poll was conducted at a truck pull/monster truck event, everyone who agreed to do the poll got a free hat, and Budweiser funded the poll.

So the results of that poll were:
- Everyone who really wanted a free hat
- Who saw the big bud sign over the polling booth and figured 'beer' was the good answer to make sure they got the hat
- People who were at a truck pull in the first place

I'm guessing the margin of error vs the total population was darn high.

Anyhow, back to topic...I wonder what the deal is if you return a receiver that directv finds to be broken when they get it, and you have the protection plan. Do they still charge you the $470, per the contract? Or is it n/c because you have the PP. Or is the PP canceled on your last day of service, and since they received the unit after your last day of service, are you SOL?

Note that I said nothing about the device having been opened, modified or tampered with.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> Having some experience with polling, thats also an issue. Most respondents will answer a poll (internet or real life) with the answer they feel most flatters them or is most expected/respectable.
> 
> One may also pad their poll by selecting their venue. I remember one news article that talked about peoples tastes in beverages and based on a poll, found that people were moving away from more expensive wines and towards beer.
> 
> ...


Good story! Back to topic: I've always had the PP and I don't know what would happen. But for D* to find out anything about your return, they would have to be notified by the contractor who purportedly "refurbishes" their HRs. I've gotten several replacements with the front panels hanging loose (what's up with that?) and various other obvious defects. I can't imagine them inspecting an HR for tampering if they have so much trouble ''refurbishing" lol::lol::lol an HR. And in the end, the HR remains on their lease list anyhow, so why would they care?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> Of course, the flip side of that is: perhaps the drive is what went bad, and you wouldn't even be returning it had you opened it up.


I think the vast majority of ''deaths" cannot be attributed to hard drive failure. In all this time, with all the HRs I've had and all the eSATAs I've had only one hard drive has failed (I'm not counting the ones I've knocked over while running or that kind of thing caused by my playing around with them.) And that one hard drive was the one in the 2TB Cavalry that I filled up to full capacity, so maybe I did have something to do with that one going bad.

Rich


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Good story! Back to topic: I've always had the PP and I don't know what would happen. But for D* to find out anything about your return, they would have to be notified by the contractor who purportedly "refurbishes" their HRs. I've gotten several replacements with the front panels hanging loose (what's up with that?) and various other obvious defects. I can't imagine them inspecting an HR for tampering if they have so much trouble ''refurbishing" lol::lol::lol an HR. And in the end, the HR remains on their lease list anyhow, so why would they care?
> 
> Rich


You got that exactly right. When I went thru the H20-100 recall DirecTV sent me 6 replacements. All were H20-700's, supposedly refurbs. Out of 6 only 1 worked. The rest were obviously just thrown into boxes as refurbs. In reality none were correct. The one that actually worked was missing three of the feet on the bottom and the front panel was not aligned properly.

-Joe


----------



## t_h (Mar 7, 2008)

Maybe directv ought to charge their refurbisher $470 a unit for unsuccessful tampering.

Could be a hell of a revenue source.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

t_h said:


> Maybe directv ought to charge their refurbisher $470 a unit for unsuccessful tampering.
> 
> Could be a hell of a revenue source.


I don't know about the DirecTV contractor, but I'm familiar with a company that "refurbishes" computers returned from big box stores. The amount they get per box is very low. The result is that they usually see if the box powers on and then reload the software via a hard drive duplicator then throw it in a box and ship it out. If the computer really had an intermittent problem it would never be detected in the procedure. Some of the boxes come in three or four times.

I imagine the same is true for DirecTV. The company is paid a couple of bucks per receiver and they see if they power on and that's about it. Often people are paid at piece rate and spending time finding problems doesn't put food on the table.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

rich584 said:


> I think the vast majority of ''deaths" cannot be attributed to hard drive failure.


I would tend to disagree. The hard drive is the most mechanical component, and I would think the only one that is _expected _to die in the product's life. These things can act pretty flaky when the HD begins to go. I had one that had a bad HD from the beginning, but it took 3-4 months for the drive to completely fail. At no point in that time did it ever indicate there was a problem with the drive, but when the drive was finally replaced, it suddenly acted "normal".


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Alot of intermittent problems can be attributed to a Power Supply Unit failing or not outputting enough power to properly power the hard drive and CPU, etc. I have known a person whose DVR exhibited every symptom of a hard drive failing who figured out how to adjust the Power Supply Unit upwards so it was again outputting 3.3 Volts and everything worked perfect after that adjustment. Others tried it and met with success.

I even have a link to a company that fixes DVRs and this is one of the first things that they look at.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

Yes, I'm not suggesting the HD is the _only _potential failure point, but on average, I would expect it to be the most likely. The PS issue is interesting though... if that's the case, then it sounds like a QC issue. If it's relatively common for them to be miscalibrated, sounds like a simple fix at the factory. But no matter what they do, hard drives _will _fail. Particularly in a product that has them grinding away 24x7. I wonder how long before SSDs start making it to DVRs.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

csgo said:


> You got that exactly right. When I went thru the H20-100 recall DirecTV sent me 6 replacements. All were H20-700's, supposedly refurbs. Out of 6 only 1 worked. The rest were obviously just thrown into boxes as refurbs. In reality none were correct. The one that actually worked was missing three of the feet on the bottom and the front panel was not aligned properly.
> 
> -Joe


That's normal, sadly.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

t_h said:


> Maybe directv ought to charge their refurbisher $470 a unit for unsuccessful tampering.
> 
> Could be a hell of a revenue source.


Or, perhaps, they could find a contractor that actually understands the meaning of "refurbishing".

But to blame the contractor is not entirely reasonable. The company that hires the contractor (D*) is responsible for making sure that the contractor understands and follows the protocols set by the hiring company. Think that's being done?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

csgo said:


> I don't know about the DirecTV contractor, but I'm familiar with a company that "refurbishes" computers returned from big box stores. The amount they get per box is very low. The result is that they usually see if the box powers on and then reload the software via a hard drive duplicator then throw it in a box and ship it out. If the computer really had an intermittent problem it would never be detected in the procedure. Some of the boxes come in three or four times.
> 
> I imagine the same is true for DirecTV. The company is paid a couple of bucks per receiver and they see if they power on and that's about it. Often people are paid at piece rate and spending time finding problems doesn't put food on the table.


Well, this post gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling. That sounds just like what they are doing for D*. Still, this is D*'s fault. The hiring company is responsible for setting the standards for work by a contractor.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> I would tend to disagree. The hard drive is the most mechanical component, and I would think the only one that is _expected _to die in the product's life. These things can act pretty flaky when the HD begins to go. I had one that had a bad HD from the beginning, but it took 3-4 months for the drive to completely fail. At no point in that time did it ever indicate there was a problem with the drive, but when the drive was finally replaced, it suddenly acted "normal".


Never had that experience with an HR. That I know about. One of the things I liked about the TiVos was that when the hard drive failed you couldn't get past the Welcome window and you knew the HD was shot.

I do have eSATAs on most of my HRs and always test the internal drive to see if the same problems arise as have using the eSATAs. That does seem to eliminate the hard drives as the problem. I have yet to have a problem that wasn't apparent on both the internal and external drives.

In fact, the thing I've always really liked about the HRs was that they didn't seem to destroy the hard drives as the TiVos regularly did.

I dunno, these things are enough to drive you nutz.

Rich


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I don't know much about the refurb process for DIRECTV but it does seem there are varying levels of quality. Of course, some problems are harder to find than others. I'm not sure it's fair to say that 6 bad refurbs in a row is "par for the course." I think that's a little less common. If DIRECTV had to put 6 boxes in every home trying to get a good replacement, they'd stop doing refurbs.


----------



## ICM2000 (Sep 14, 2006)

Tom Robertson said:


> Even though DBStalk doesn't release your private information without your permission, if you leave enough clues they can figure it out...


This is exactly why you SHOULD NOT post your extensive A/V or Home Theater equipment list in order to participate in any type of CE or equipment testing program. It is too easy to figure out locations. This type of posting should be a private function only.


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I don't know much about the refurb process for DIRECTV but it does seem there are varying levels of quality. Of course, some problems are harder to find than others. I'm not sure it's fair to say that 6 bad refurbs in a row is "par for the course." I think that's a little less common. If DIRECTV had to put 6 boxes in every home trying to get a good replacement, they'd stop doing refurbs.


I'm one for one with an HR20-700 that was damaged by a nearby lightning strike. I was sent a refurb -700 and it has worked perfectly for well over a year. Interestingly, when I got it, it was still registered to another user, who had never gotten the account on the receiver terminated. That took some fancy footwork.

My point being, six for six bad refurbs sounds quite peculiar to me. Either I was very lucky, or the OP was very, very, very unlucky. It doesn't seem credible that D* would knowingly participate in a circular shipping system for which they are paying the bills.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I don't know much about the refurb process for DIRECTV but it does seem there are varying levels of quality. Of course, some problems are harder to find than others. I'm not sure it's fair to say that 6 bad refurbs in a row is "par for the course." I think that's a little less common. If DIRECTV had to put 6 boxes in every home trying to get a good replacement, they'd stop doing refurbs.


I don't know what the "process" is either. But that post did not surprise me in the least. I even got a 21-100 from the CMG that did nothing. Plug it in and nothing. Went completely berserk over the phone with somebody from CMG and the next day I got a brand new 21-200.

No more, I'll just buy a new one from now on. Too much stress. I can afford to buy one and not be upset for days on end playing "refurb roulette".

Rich


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Rich, without going into too much detail, you and I have discussed your particular situation in the past and after your experience (which I also believe to be abnormal) I don't blame you.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I don't know much about the refurb process for DIRECTV but it does seem there are varying levels of quality. Of course, some problems are harder to find than others. I'm not sure it's fair to say that 6 bad refurbs in a row is "par for the course." I think that's a little less common. If DIRECTV had to put 6 boxes in every home trying to get a good replacement, they'd stop doing refurbs.


I too don't know the DirecTV refub process, but have worked with RMAs in several companies, though none were "retail" products.

"From what I've seen", in the early days of the H20 & HR20, there wasn't a refurb department. They came in and went out without much [anything] done.
DirecTV has contracted "someone" in Florida to refurb the STBs. I have been in a chat with "someone" from DirecTV that feels their contractor is doing a "good job". This comes [I believe] from a visit to the contractor. Now I know what happens when a customer comes for a visit. It is called putting on a "dog & pony show". What the customer "sees" has little to do with what happens when their not visiting. Not that I'm saying this is wrong since every company wants to put on a "good face" for the customer.
Now I've also been involved in "no notice inspections", which are much more realistic. "The team" walks in and pulls "x" number of units off the line and then wrings them out completely. This is costly to do but does give the customer a better idea of what the quality of the work really is.
Not all problems will ever be caught. It simply isn't "cost effective" to test to this level.
This means it's a "numbers game". How many do get caught/fixed for what cost.
Regretfully, this is exactly how these STBs are made [new].
"The problem" is we, the customers, are the ones that end up doing "the tests".


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

csgo said:


> You got that exactly right. When I went thru the H20-100 recall DirecTV sent me 6 replacements. All were H20-700's, supposedly refurbs. Out of 6 only 1 worked. The rest were obviously just thrown into boxes as refurbs. In reality none were correct. The one that actually worked was missing three of the feet on the bottom and the front panel was not aligned properly.
> 
> -Joe


A bit confused on your statement.

There has not been a recall on H20-100. The recall was on some H20-600s. Not all units were affected.

There has not been, nor will there ever will be a H20-700.

Going 1 for 6 is a little hard to believe. You'll just have to trust me when I say this, but I have had a lot of exposure to refurbs and I have not ever seen that high of a failure rate. Not saying refurbs are perfect, but 1 for 6. Sorry, don't buy it.


----------



## csgo (Oct 15, 2006)

RobertE said:


> A bit confused on your statement.
> 
> There has not been a recall on H20-100. The recall was on some H20-600s. Not all units were affected.
> 
> ...


You are correct they were H20-600's. My error.

Yes, the 1 for 6 is true. I ended up with 17 receivers to get 6 good ones. Some were dead, some wouldn't find a satellite signal, some had parts missing, one smelled like an electric fire, one had the smell of cigarette smoke so bad I wouldn't have it in my house. I had 5 of the junk receivers in my garage for a couple of months that I finally had the garbage man haul off. They didn't have the shipping labels in them and I called twice to get them but they never sent them.

It's really an amazing story that I'm sure cost DirecTV quite a bit of money, but they're too stupid to know or care.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Stuart Sweet said:


> Rich, without going into too much detail, you and I have discussed your particular situation in the past and after your experience (which I also believe to be abnormal) I don't blame you.


I've come to the conclusion that my original install of the 5LNB dish was the cause of many of my problems. After the CMG completely reinstalled my "system", I have had no HR failures. That reinstall was completed in late April of last year and, so far, no failures. In fact, I have so few problems now that I feel kind of "left out".

I actually went so far as to purchase an HR22-100 a month ago just to see if I could get a new one to work. Never had a new 100 before and it is working perfectly.

I can't say enough about the CMG. Don't know what I would have done if not for them. They literally told the installers to come to my home and do what I told them to do (I'm paraphrasing here).

Rich


----------



## HDTVsportsfan (Nov 29, 2005)

CMG?
Case Management Group???


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> I too don't know the DirecTV refub process, but have worked with RMAs in several companies, though none were "retail" products.
> 
> "From what I've seen", in the early days of the H20 & HR20, there wasn't a refurb department. They came in and went out without much [anything] done.
> DirecTV has contracted "someone" in Florida to refurb the STBs. I have been in a chat with "someone" from DirecTV that feels their contractor is doing a "good job". This comes [I believe] from a visit to the contractor. Now I know what happens when a customer comes for a visit. It is called putting on a "dog & pony show". What the customer "sees" has little to do with what happens when their not visiting. Not that I'm saying this is wrong since every company wants to put on a "good face" for the customer.
> ...


In the chemical and plastics industry, all we ever had were "no notice inspections". By teams from other plants, by OSHA (really scary) and by any other regulating body that had an urge to look around. I realize the difference between producing chemicals and plastics and producing DVRs is that our industry was just plain dangerous, both environmentally and to employees.

But still, you'd think D* would have a "liaison" person or department to ensure that contractors were following all the protocols and safety requirements that they have to have set with their various contractors.

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

HDTVsportsfan said:


> CMG?
> Case Management Group???


Yup, and a fine group it is!

Rich


----------



## racermd (Dec 18, 2006)

DarinC said:


> Yes, I'm not suggesting the HD is the _only _potential failure point, but on average, I would expect it to be the most likely. The PS issue is interesting though... if that's the case, then it sounds like a QC issue. If it's relatively common for them to be miscalibrated, sounds like a simple fix at the factory. But no matter what they do, hard drives _will _fail. Particularly in a product that has them grinding away 24x7. I wonder how long before SSDs start making it to DVRs.


Being an IT pro, I need to chime in...

There are so many possible failure points in what amounts to a computer. One of the interview questions I give candidates is "Give me one (and only one) possible cause for a randomly crashing computer and the reason why." The crux, of course, is that there is no 'one' right answer. The power supply fluctuates, the RAM has a bad chip on the module, the hard disk has a bad sector, a flaky fan could cause overheating, any number of interconnects making intermittent contact, etc. The point is to get someone to talk through a problem to see how they think. It's also to see if someone can commit to one thing with options around them.

But back to the point - the hard disk is less likely to be the failure point so long as it continues to spin. I've heard stories (and experienced this myself, once) where hard disks that have been running non-stop for nearly a decade will refuse to spin up after being powered down. A solid thump will sometimes get them going again, but there are no guarantees. It's a phenomenon known in IT circles as 'sticktion'.

Personally, I'm more worried about the power supply in the HR boxes than I am about the hard disks. The power supplies in special-purpose computers (which the HR boxes really are) are typically built as cheaply as possible while still meeting the minimum spec. Rarely are they built for quality and durability unless it's outlined in the spec, like a military-grade or other ruggedized component. Electrical fluctuations can make it past the cheap power supplies and cause all sorts of other difficult-to-detect problems in the box. Word of advice - if you can, put the HR box on a UPS since even the cheaper ones will clean up all but the crappiest power from your outlets. If you can't do that, try a voltage regulator. Failing that, use a power conditioner. It's a simple thing that will prevent all sorts of other problems down the road.

And back to the ORIGINAL topic again, by putting a UPS or other power-conditioning device on the outlet, you'll have less of a need to crack that box open and dig around in an attempt to fix it yourself.

And, again, I still have not opened any of my HR boxes, though I have now added an eSATA drive to one of them (as an initial troubleshooting measure for a problem that I resolved another way, anyway). For what it's worth, a 1TB WD Green drive seems to behave MUCH better than the internal drive, despite the Green drive being a low-power unit that was never intended to serve in a DVR-style role to begin with.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

racermd said:


> Being an IT pro, I need to chime in...
> 
> There are so many possible failure points in what amounts to a computer. One of the interview questions I give candidates is "Give me one (and only one) possible cause for a randomly crashing computer and the reason why." The crux, of course, is that there is no 'one' right answer. The power supply fluctuates, the RAM has a bad chip on the module, the hard disk has a bad sector, a flaky fan could cause overheating, any number of interconnects making intermittent contact, etc. The point is to get someone to talk through a problem to see how they think. It's also to see if someone can commit to one thing with options around them.
> 
> ...


Great post! I talked to my wife last night and she has had the same experience with PCs and hard drives that I have. She has been using PCs since 1981 (an Apple) and I've been using them since the middle 80s and neither of us has experienced a hard drive failure. Admittedly, we always had the newest models and never went two years without a replacement. But that's still a lot of years between the two of us with no hard drive failures.

Even the eSATAs that I have had and returned for various reasons, mainly noise, all worked except the 2TB that I recently filled up and probably wrecked myself.

Rich


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Excellent Post Racermd!!! I have been trying for a long time to tell people exactly what you posted though not in as much detail or with as much experience in the IT field.


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

racermd said:


> Being an IT pro, I need to chime in...
> 
> There are so many possible failure points in what amounts to a computer....


Very true. I've worked in IT as well. In my _experience_, the most common computer problem is by far software issues (poorly written software, bad installs/uninstalls, conflicts, data corruption, etc.). But from the computers *I've* been responsible for, hard drives have been the most common _hardware_ failure. Yes, I've had motherboards, power supplies, and other components go bad, but HDs have been #1. I would bet that most power supply failures are fan/dust related (unless we're talking about cheap ones, or overloaded ones in modified PCs). Since there's only one fan in the HR, who knows what would go first in a high heat scenario.


----------



## dyker (Feb 27, 2008)

I only read a few pages of this thread but really, doesn't d* already know who opened their box? How hard is it for these units which, in many cases, are connected to the internet (those who hack are also probably those who attach the rj45)... how hard to just get the drive size and post it back to D*? :grin: I guess if D* cared to enforce, they'd be doing that. If they really *don't* care to enforce they won't. The survey indicates to me that they don't care to enforce.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

dyker said:


> I only read a few pages of this thread but really, doesn't d* already know who opened their box? How hard is it for these units which, in many cases, are connected to the internet (those who hack are also probably those who attach the rj45)... how hard to just get the drive size and post it back to D*? :grin: I guess if D* cared to enforce, they'd be doing that. If they really *don't* care to enforce they won't. The survey indicates to me that they don't care to enforce.


They also don't want to aggravate their good customers more than they already have. And they really aggravated a lot of us when the HRs first came out.

And besides that, wouldn't their getting the hard drive size be rather futile when you throw eSATAs into the mix?

Rich


----------



## DarinC (Aug 31, 2004)

rich584 said:


> they really aggravated a lot of us when the HRs first came out.


And continue to aggravate some of us a couple years later.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

DarinC said:


> And continue to aggravate some of us a couple years later.


Darin, you gotta admit that it has gotten so much better. The forum used to be loaded with POS posts and now...well, it's kinda boring at times. No really good arguments, no new and wonderful glitches to complain about, nothing really bad.

Look at this thread, not even much arguing on what should be a relatively controversial topic.

In March of '07...I don't even want to think about it. We gotta face it, they've (D*) done well.

Rich


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

I know I am very pleased with my DVRs and if I could just get HR to HR MRV working on mine I would be Ecstatic. Not very much to ***** about nowadays but that was my goal to help Directv get my DVRs to work better, faster, more reliably and yes we have a ways to go but there has been exponential improvement in my experience.

Now let's just use them for what they are intended for, to give us great HD experience.


----------



## TBlazer07 (Feb 5, 2009)

Ahhhh, the infamous "stiction." - it's been so long, but "way back" in the days of the 60 MEGAbyte hard drives there was an RLL (remember them?) drive that you literally had to stick your hand inside the case and spin the spindle on the bottom of the drive to get it going or remove it from the case and use centrifugal force by spinning it at the end of a 6' rope :hurah: ... but it would work for years as long as you would be willing to reach in give it a spin (Seagate ST238??). Seagate denied the problem existed for years. I dealt with dozens of them back then.



racermd said:


> Being an IT pro, I need to chime in...
> 
> I've heard stories (and experienced this myself, once) where hard disks that have been running non-stop for nearly a decade will refuse to spin up after being powered down. A solid thump will sometimes get them going again, but there are no guarantees. It's a phenomenon known in IT circles as 'sticktion'.


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

rich584 said:


> Darin, you gotta admit that it has gotten so much better. The forum used to be loaded with POS posts and now...well, it's kinda boring at times. No really good arguments, no new and wonderful glitches to complain about, nothing really bad.
> 
> Look at this thread, not even much arguing on what should be a relatively controversial topic.
> 
> ...


I never thought I would admit it but you are absolutely right, D* is doing much better, BUT, as the expression goes, don't rest on your laurels, D*. There's still a long way to go. Keep up the good work.


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

johnp37 said:


> I never thought I would admit it but you are absolutely right, D* is doing much better, BUT, as the expression goes, don't rest on your laurels, D*. There's still a long way to go. Keep up the good work.


John, I think you killed the thread! Way to go!

Rich


----------



## Richierich (Jan 10, 2008)

Ain't it Hell when you don't have anything to ***** about!!! :lol:


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

rich584 said:


> John, I think you killed the thread! Way to go!
> 
> Rich


Well you saying it is dead kinda killed that thought ..


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

richierich said:


> Ain't it Hell when you don't have anything to ***** about!!! :lol:


Boring is what it is. What kind of Blu-ray player do you have?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Well you saying it is dead kinda killed that thought ..


I'd still like to hear the story behind that one guy who voted that he had suffered. Or did he...?

Rich


----------



## tcusta00 (Dec 31, 2007)

rich584 said:


> I'd still like to hear the story behind that one guy who voted that he had suffered. Or did he...?
> 
> Rich


I think we're all suffering the consequences of this thread being resurrected, I'll tell ya that. :grin:


----------



## johnp37 (Sep 14, 2006)

Rats, and I thought I killed it. LOL


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

johnp37 said:


> Rats, and I thought I killed it. LOL


I don't like to see this sort of thread. Maybe it's just paranoia on my part, I do have a tendency to look at the worst case scenario. I kinda "grew up" in the Navy and at the time there were still signs all over the place that said, "Loose lips sink ships". My first thought when I saw this thread was, "Oh boy, let's see if we can make D* aware that something might be going on that they are not aware of." Never a good thing to do. Why wake the sleeping dog?

What we do in the privacy of our homes should not be put into print if it is "controversial" in an adverse way.

What possible "good" could come out of a thread such as this? "Good" for us, I mean. My opinion: Kill it, lock it up and let's get on to some positive things, such as figuring out which BD player I should buy. Now that's a subject that lots of people can learn from. Did anyone learn anything from this thread?

Rich


----------



## Rich (Feb 22, 2007)

tcusta00 said:


> I think we're all suffering the consequences of this thread being resurrected, I'll tell ya that. :grin:


See post#301. Perhaps that will put an end to this.

Rich


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

Folks, I'm closing this one for now, just to keep it from getting "bumped." 

If you've got something "on topic" to post, send me a PM and I'll open it, anytime after 3/10/09.


----------

