• edwardbear@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      10 hours ago

      I actually read somewhere that this is exactly the case they are making. It’s anti-consumer friendly or some dimwitted bulshit like that

      • theangryseal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        What if a poor woman is on her pee rod and cancels in anger before we put her on the phone with our best beggar?

        She’ll need to sign right back up the next week when her pee rod anger is gone.

        Think of the poor woman.

        And what about dudes? No get laid for a month and start getting cranky. What if been kicked in the nuts and cancel in anger?

        Think of the poor shattered test tickle.

        Be consumer friendly, please. Think of the children with no inner net bcuz cancel was too easy for drunk parents.

        Think of the poor child.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Although when cancellation requires only one click, it doesn’t give consumers a fair chance to be interrupted by a pressing matter.

  • bitwolf@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    13 hours ago

    Even worse ISPs are asking for routing numbers instead of credit cards now so you can’t even block or dispute payments.

      • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I feel no surprise billing should have had something that uncovered medical care be specifically spelled out and signed off by the patient before its done or the provider will be on the hook.

        • bamboo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          14 hours ago

          I think it is a tricky situation. For example, you might authorize a minor surgery for instance, only for the surgeon to realize there is a larger problem and they need to perform a more expensive procedure. If you are unconscious, there is no way to get consent, and likewise you want providers to have the flexibility to perform time sensitive procedures without concern that it would never be paid for because there wasn’t prior consent.

          • RidderSport
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 hours ago

            There’s an easy solution for that, you pay only fee of sum x for any surgery, the rest is paid by your insurance. They have the money, power and leverage to actually realise competition in the medical field