Tuesday, November 4, 2003

An Open Letter to the LA Times (part 2 of 2)

This morning, as I was getting ready for work, a very nice LA Times telemarketer called and said, because I'm a customer in such good standing, you'd start delivering the paper to me for the rest of the week for free.  (Oh joy!  What a lucky girl I am!)  I told the rep I was not interested and, in fact, should have been on your Do Not Call list.  "Would you like me to put you on the list right away?" she asked.

Well, as a matter a fact, I would have liked to have been put on the list last month, when I went to the trouble of calling you for the sole purpose of asking to be put on your Do Not Call list.  Remember?  The time when I said I'd cancel my subscription if you called again?  Yeah, that time.

Consider my subscription cancelled.  Consider this my third request to be placed on your internal Do Not Call list.  Consider this my notice that if you call me again, I will report you, and I sincerely hope you will be fined for it.


pegluh said...

LA Times is probably taking one of 2 positions: they contract out their telemarketting to several companies and they don't "always talk to each other and maintain their own list." Or "the Do Not Call list is still unsettled at the moment" so they are effectively ignoring it. Either way, good riddance! I'd copy that letter to the FTC, actually.

nzforme said...

UPDATE: I called the cancel the subscription. They asked why. I told them. They said it takes up to 30 days to show up on their list. I said it had probably been more than 30 days. They said they had no record that I asked to be on the list. I said this was, in fact, the problem. They told me that stopping the paper wouldn't stop the calls. I said it damn well better because I was now AGAIN requesting placement on their do not call list.

andreakingme said...

Dang newspaper salespeople.

You go, NZ. What a succinct and well-put rant.