vine93
09-09 04:59 PM
I started from below and tried twice which went to VM . All of them took message and Thanks. Since they are getting many calles, Most of them not transferring to other person, Front desk person itself taking message.
Took 45 minutes to cover all of them but time well spent. GO IV GO...
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 - took the message
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695 - took the message
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861 - took the message
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751 - took the message
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216 - My congressman, wanted me to leave a VM but I will try again. Called again and it went great.
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065 - took the message but said we cannot give a response as I am not from his constituency.
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265 - left a VM
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126 - called and spoke to a lady, she took the message but still tranferred to judiciary committe number, which no one picked.
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111 - left a VM
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755 - took the message
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 - took the message
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365 - took the message
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576 - took the message
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811 - VM
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035 - took the message with the zipcode
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431 - took the message
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203 - took the message
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 - took the message
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 - VM
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676 - Took the address and details.
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176 - took the message (said the bill is under judiciary and under review)
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 - DIDNT CALL HIM
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716 - took the message
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021 - took the message
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176 - VM
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351 - took the message
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911 - took the message
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 - took the message
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401 - took the message (didnt ask for anyting although I am from her state)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 - took the message with address
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 - took the message, very nice lady asked about the bill in detail.
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 - took the message, very nice guy asked in detail what the bill is about.
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 - took the message, asked about the bill in detail.
WOOOHOO, my first time making all the calls. My confidence was sky high after the first 5 calls. Very much worth it.
..................................................
$470 till date
Took 45 minutes to cover all of them but time well spent. GO IV GO...
_______________
House Judiciary Committee Members
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906 - took the message
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695 - took the message
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861 - took the message
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751 - took the message
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216 - My congressman, wanted me to leave a VM but I will try again. Called again and it went great.
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065 - took the message but said we cannot give a response as I am not from his constituency.
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265 - left a VM
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126 - called and spoke to a lady, she took the message but still tranferred to judiciary committe number, which no one picked.
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111 - left a VM
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755 - took the message
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706 - took the message
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365 - took the message
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576 - took the message
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811 - VM
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035 - took the message with the zipcode
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431 - took the message
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203 - took the message
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906 - took the message
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605 - VM
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676 - Took the address and details.
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176 - took the message (said the bill is under judiciary and under review)
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426 - DIDNT CALL HIM
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716 - took the message
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021 - took the message
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176 - VM
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) (202) 225-8351 - took the message
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911 - took the message
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236 - took the message
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401 - took the message (didnt ask for anyting although I am from her state)
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931 - took the message with address
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201 - took the message, very nice lady asked about the bill in detail.
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510 (ALREADY COSPONSOR DO NOT CALL)
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616 - took the message, very nice guy asked in detail what the bill is about.
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001 - took the message, asked about the bill in detail.
WOOOHOO, my first time making all the calls. My confidence was sky high after the first 5 calls. Very much worth it.
..................................................
$470 till date
wallpaper Cameron Diaz is the cover girl
vikki76
10-22 11:21 AM
My coworker and his spouse got both physical card and CPO mail yesterday on the same day itself . His PD is Jan 2005, EB-2 India and Nebraska service center.
jayz
01-10 02:54 PM
I just mailed my letter to the President, CC-ed Senators from my state, Congresswoman from my district and of course, IV. I also attached my past correspondance with the lawmakers to the letter, so they know that this has been an on-going struggle from the grassroot level.
2011 cameron diaz the mask stripe
malibuguy007
09-09 05:33 PM
Only 6 pages so far - we should be at 60!!!
more...
nosightofgc
01-24 01:11 PM
Flying through Asian Countires is not an option for people residing in East Coast. I am travelling to India in the next week Via Amsterdam. I am told by the consulate that we do not need Transit Visas. My H1B Visa is expired and I am travelling on AP. Did any one hear differently?
Thanks
Thanks
Desertfox
03-24 03:31 PM
-------------------------------------
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
-------------------------------------
It is illegal... On I-9 it clearly says that an employer can not deny employment because of an expiry date on a valid work authorization document. This makes sense, since the employer does not have any authority to check for this candidate's ability to renew the authorization, neither the candidate is obligated to share that information. Per DHS & DOL once you have valid EAD, you are good to go! I am curious though who should be responsible for educating these employers!:confused:
Based on the criteria above I dont see how it is illegal to ask what type of work authorization one has, and if EAD , how long it is valid. It may be illegal to disqualify a candidate who has EAD with validity for the required amount of time. But I sure can ask about the details within legal limits, can't I?
-------------------------------------
It is illegal... On I-9 it clearly says that an employer can not deny employment because of an expiry date on a valid work authorization document. This makes sense, since the employer does not have any authority to check for this candidate's ability to renew the authorization, neither the candidate is obligated to share that information. Per DHS & DOL once you have valid EAD, you are good to go! I am curious though who should be responsible for educating these employers!:confused:
more...

nilcritz
05-23 03:33 PM
Hi,
I do not have medical records to prove that I have taken some of the vaccination that is mandatory for the medical test. However, I do have taken those and my Doctor back in India has those records. Is there a way people know that these records in "any format" / a "specific format" can be faxed or fedexed here and can be used?
Any help will be highly apprciated.
- N
I do not have medical records to prove that I have taken some of the vaccination that is mandatory for the medical test. However, I do have taken those and my Doctor back in India has those records. Is there a way people know that these records in "any format" / a "specific format" can be faxed or fedexed here and can be used?
Any help will be highly apprciated.
- N
2010 cameron diaz the mask stripe

Cheran
04-24 04:04 PM
This guy doesn't have a clue. He is deviating so much from the core US policy, I don't know where it might end. I wonder whether we are better off with the last one????
more...
mammoy2k
01-08 12:03 PM
If you dont have PR, the rateyou pay is higher. Some deny loans as well.
I am on H1/EAD and own a home. Lenders don't deny you a loan solely based on your visa status. Some think its too risky to own a home before getting a green card. I think this is a personal choice you make based on your comfort level. IMHO, we should keep the home ownership out of this. If we include things that are simply not true, it will only make our letter(s) less credible.
I am on H1/EAD and own a home. Lenders don't deny you a loan solely based on your visa status. Some think its too risky to own a home before getting a green card. I think this is a personal choice you make based on your comfort level. IMHO, we should keep the home ownership out of this. If we include things that are simply not true, it will only make our letter(s) less credible.
hair dresses cameron diaz the mask
axp817
09-20 04:28 PM
I am not sure what is happening. When I went to USCIS during Infopass, the officer at the time told me that my case will be looked upon when the notice date comes up.
MY priority date is april25 2006 and the notice date was 09/18/2007. I didn't believe him. Even I raised the question in one of the forums and other guys shot me down saying the notice date is not important. But now I got an LUD on 09/19/2007 and that was the reason why I raised this question to you as well as HIINVIN66. I am assuming that the applications are looked upon based on the notice dates. If they under EB2, pre adjudcated and visa numbers availaible, MAY BE MAYBE we get green cards. IF not, We have to keep our fingers crossed. Let see what happens.....
That's been my understanding all along. Applications are approved per the Notice Date, provided the applicant's PD is current. But I know, we've all seen exceptions to that rule. I guess this is more relevant in your case since you're current, but I'm not, so it doesn't really matter too much anyway. I just don't want any RFEs.
MY priority date is april25 2006 and the notice date was 09/18/2007. I didn't believe him. Even I raised the question in one of the forums and other guys shot me down saying the notice date is not important. But now I got an LUD on 09/19/2007 and that was the reason why I raised this question to you as well as HIINVIN66. I am assuming that the applications are looked upon based on the notice dates. If they under EB2, pre adjudcated and visa numbers availaible, MAY BE MAYBE we get green cards. IF not, We have to keep our fingers crossed. Let see what happens.....
That's been my understanding all along. Applications are approved per the Notice Date, provided the applicant's PD is current. But I know, we've all seen exceptions to that rule. I guess this is more relevant in your case since you're current, but I'm not, so it doesn't really matter too much anyway. I just don't want any RFEs.
more...
ilwaiting
06-29 05:08 PM
DEAR GOD!!!!!! THIS APPEARS TRUE. THEY ARE CALLING FOR PLAINTIFFS.
American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) Seeks Plaintiffs for the Lawsuit on Visa Bulletin Fiasco
The AILF is an affiliate of the AILA and its litigation arm. They are seeking the victims who would participate as plaintiffs in the lawsuit by the organization against the government agencies relating to the outrageous and lawlessness of the agencies involving the management of immigrant visa numbers and implementing the visa bulletin in compliance with the law. Please contact your attorneys if you are willing to participate in the lawsuit.
American Immigration Law Foundation (AILF) Seeks Plaintiffs for the Lawsuit on Visa Bulletin Fiasco
The AILF is an affiliate of the AILA and its litigation arm. They are seeking the victims who would participate as plaintiffs in the lawsuit by the organization against the government agencies relating to the outrageous and lawlessness of the agencies involving the management of immigrant visa numbers and implementing the visa bulletin in compliance with the law. Please contact your attorneys if you are willing to participate in the lawsuit.
hot cameron diaz the mask stripe
anilsal
01-24 12:30 PM
http://anilgeneral.blogspot.com/2008/01/india-in-1835.html
Someone forwarded this recently.
This may not be true, as told by pegasus.
Someone forwarded this recently.
This may not be true, as told by pegasus.
more...
house 2011 cameron diaz the mask
andycool
08-18 10:01 AM
Hi AndyCool,
How did you open Infopass on aug 5th, because once SR is created they say wait for 45 days before opening infopass, as in the page where we open infopass it asks for SR#?
Can you please share what option you selected in the web page when you tried to open a Infopass appointment.
Thanks
Dreamer05
I just selected need Information thats all it has nothing to do with SR
How did you open Infopass on aug 5th, because once SR is created they say wait for 45 days before opening infopass, as in the page where we open infopass it asks for SR#?
Can you please share what option you selected in the web page when you tried to open a Infopass appointment.
Thanks
Dreamer05
I just selected need Information thats all it has nothing to do with SR
tattoo cameron diaz the mask stripe

mallu
09-12 11:17 AM
Anybody knows the status on item (22) mentioned in http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/pr_1186757867585.shtm ?
more...
pictures cameron diaz the mask stripe
hoolahoous
08-13 07:24 PM
i got my 'decision' email on 10th. But after that nothing. No CPO email/No welcome email/ No LUD.
I am hoping that they didn't let my case 'drop through cracks'. Considering USCIS's way of working I wouldn't be surprised. Will give a week or two more.
I am hoping that they didn't let my case 'drop through cracks'. Considering USCIS's way of working I wouldn't be surprised. Will give a week or two more.
dresses cameron diaz mask red dress.
Legal
06-29 03:51 PM
If your PD is current for the July bulletin, then your application has to reach on July 2nd which is a Monday.
If your application was to reach on Saturday, June 30, and if the mail room guy is working overtime (assuming that the hell has frozen over), then your application will be sent back soon enough. Of course, the mail room guy is not going to open it on the same day; he/she is only going to stamp the date. And then when they really open it (2, 3, 4 weeks from now), they will send it back to you.
If your application was to reach on Sunday, July 1st, and if the mail room guy is working overtime (assuming that the hell has frozen over AGAIN), then your application will be accepted.
But if either of the two things above happen, I am not sure that GC is going to be my priority since hell would have frozen over...and I believe that's where we currently are stuck! :-)
So just take a chill pill, guys, your lawyer should know that the application should reach between Monday, July 2nd and Tuesday, July 31st. The end date can change once the August bulletin comes out.
Thanks,
Jayant
Better to mail on Saturday and have it delivered on Monday.
If your application was to reach on Saturday, June 30, and if the mail room guy is working overtime (assuming that the hell has frozen over), then your application will be sent back soon enough. Of course, the mail room guy is not going to open it on the same day; he/she is only going to stamp the date. And then when they really open it (2, 3, 4 weeks from now), they will send it back to you.
If your application was to reach on Sunday, July 1st, and if the mail room guy is working overtime (assuming that the hell has frozen over AGAIN), then your application will be accepted.
But if either of the two things above happen, I am not sure that GC is going to be my priority since hell would have frozen over...and I believe that's where we currently are stuck! :-)
So just take a chill pill, guys, your lawyer should know that the application should reach between Monday, July 2nd and Tuesday, July 31st. The end date can change once the August bulletin comes out.
Thanks,
Jayant
Better to mail on Saturday and have it delivered on Monday.
more...
makeup cameron diaz the mask stripe

pappu
01-08 09:53 AM
Inclde this below ur signature???
I have mailed mine!! "We Shall Overcome"
---
PD: Dec 2005
EB Category: EB2
Current Status: Processing Jan 1 , 2000
Estimated Wait: 5-10 years
----
Good idea.
I have mailed mine!! "We Shall Overcome"
---
PD: Dec 2005
EB Category: EB2
Current Status: Processing Jan 1 , 2000
Estimated Wait: 5-10 years
----
Good idea.
girlfriend tattoo cameron diaz mask red

sganny
05-09 12:42 PM
Maybe we can use the H-1 B reform bill, to recapture unused visas during the last many years. Make H-1 B tough but at the same time, release those green card numbers. Carrot and Stick approach.
Guys,
This is one of the key reasons why we are not successful in our mission. All we can do is "lets kill H1/L1 so I can get GC", "lets not worry about EB3 as long as my EB2 is fine!". The only way we can make any progress is to stay united. Lets not try to find carrots that would really be sticks on people who are also part of this cause.
Guys,
This is one of the key reasons why we are not successful in our mission. All we can do is "lets kill H1/L1 so I can get GC", "lets not worry about EB3 as long as my EB2 is fine!". The only way we can make any progress is to stay united. Lets not try to find carrots that would really be sticks on people who are also part of this cause.
hairstyles images cameron diaz mask red
leoindiano
08-07 06:15 AM
SunnySurya, Flood,
I see that you guys didnt join IV until 2008. So, you know very less about this org. The people who only can think for their own wont come to join you at any stage, it was proven many times. They will just keep writing messages here and use valuable information on the forum.
I am EB2/Masters/PD Nov 2004. I do not not support your idea. I loose patience at times, but not to the extent of effecting other peoples chances. I know quite a few of my freinds who had masters, their corporate employers applied in EB3, none of them are trying to do conversion. But, i feel their pain.
I see that you guys didnt join IV until 2008. So, you know very less about this org. The people who only can think for their own wont come to join you at any stage, it was proven many times. They will just keep writing messages here and use valuable information on the forum.
I am EB2/Masters/PD Nov 2004. I do not not support your idea. I loose patience at times, but not to the extent of effecting other peoples chances. I know quite a few of my freinds who had masters, their corporate employers applied in EB3, none of them are trying to do conversion. But, i feel their pain.
shouldIwait
05-10 05:37 PM
Few responses to Mr. Hunter.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
I'm not blind to stereotyping in this forum or elsewhere. It's not you vs. them kinda thing. You ARE stereotyping based upon some TRUE things but it is still stereotyping, isn't it.
Also, you understood some of my comments wrong. All I was saying is that due to big ISV's like TCS/INFY/WIPRO and mushrooms of bodyshops the actual worker gets pennies on a dollar and they keep the booty. So it's not the worker who causes wage depression it's the circumvention of the spirit of law that these companies do which causes it. I say "spirit of law" because they still stay within the legal framework. As far as offshoring is concerned it's a big discussion in itself and forces of capitalism and globalization are at work. None of us can prevent that but we can counter it by moving up in the value chain.
The scenario you described about modus operandi of big Indian ISV's is 100% correct but to generally imply that Indians are 1/5th as good as Americans when it comes to IT (50 member team vs. 10-12 member team) is a supremacist attitude and completely untrue.
It is true that the Indian counterparts are usually of much younger age but rarely substandard for the job. Companies realize that IT is no-longer considered rocket-science and they can save a few bucks. Try to think objectively keeping personal impact aside.
Now regarding overall economic input of immigrants there are issues broader and larger than you mentioned. Some of the smaller points you mentioned are true but you are completely missing the big picture. We can discuss that in a different thread :)
When Bill Gates says best-and-brightest it applies to individuals and not a VISA category, he's not lying. Among the 65K every year you'll find people from all skill levels, cream-of-the-cream to just-about-ok, and a few rotten-apples too. The immigration system is not designed to test skill level. Overall it's old, irrelevant and doesn't help anyone. It needs to be re-designed but unfortunately people are divided on fake lines and ignore the real issues or rather real solutions.
Although you have said it differently but you are right that solution to mine and your problems lie at the same spot, a modern, common-sense, immigration system that promotes best-and-the-brightest (Indian and American) and discourages exploitation.
IVFOREVER
12-01 01:30 AM
Hi all ,
Whoever is using Vonage unlimited $24.99 or $32.XX world plan; Today I received a mail from Vonage .
"Dear XXXXXX XXXXXXX,
>
> Thank you for using Vonage as your Internet telephony provider.
>
> In the course of Vonageb
>
> Please reply this email or call 1-(866)-254-3704 (Monday to Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm EST) so that we may discuss your rate plan. If no response is received within 72 business hours, I will need to change your account to the Small Business Premium Unlimited Plan at $49.99 per month plus tax. Your international calls will be billed at the corresponding per minute rate for the destination you are calling. You may view these rates by visiting:
>
> Vonage - International Per-Minute Rates (http://www.vonage.com/international_per-minute_rates/?lid=sub_nav_international_rates&refer_id=WEBFT0706010001W1)
>
> Please be advised that if no response is received by December 7th, your account may face suspension or an immediate change in rate plan.
>
> Please review the Vonage Residential Terms of Service section 5.4 below.
>
> 5.4 Inconsistent with Normal Use.
> If you use the service or the device in a way that is inconsistent with the normal use for your service or plan, you will be required, at Vonage's sole discretion, to pay the rates for the service or plan that would apply to the way you used the service or device, or terminate the plan. For example, if you subscribe to one of our residential service plans, and your usage is inconsistent with normal residential use, you may thereafter be required to pay our applicable, higher rates for commercial service for all periods in which your use of our service or the device was inconsistent with normal residential use. Unlimited voice services are provided primarily for continuous live dialog between two individuals. Lack of continuous dialog activity, unusual call patterns, excessive numbers and/or consistent excessive usage (i.e., More than 5,000 minutes per line per month for unlimited residential calling and/or more than 10,000 minutes per line per month for unlimited small busine
> ss calling), will be considered indicators that use may be inconsistent with normal use, or that impermissible use may be occurring and may trigger an account review by us. The creation or use of related multiple accounts or excessive residential lines to circumvent these levels shall also be considered indicators that use of the service may be inconsistent with normal use for the subscribed monthly plan(s) and may trigger an account review by Vonage. Failure to contact Vonage in response to its notifications and/or failure to promptly correct usage activity to conform to normal use will result, in Vonage's sole discretion, in immediate mandatory transfer to another appropriate plan, suspension or termination of service. You acknowledge that if your service is terminated under this provision, you are subject to all applicable disconnection and device or other rebate recovery charges. Vonage's right to terminate your account under Section 6.5(b) (with or no reason) is not lim
> ited by this provision. For a non-exhaustive list of example!
> s of use
> s of our service inconsistent with normal residential use, see below.
> b
> b
> b
>
>
> If you have any questions, please reply to this email or contact me at 1-(866)-254-3704.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> XXXXXXX
> Vonage Usage Department
> Revenue Operations
> 1-(866)-254-3704
"
Whoever is using Vonage unlimited $24.99 or $32.XX world plan; Today I received a mail from Vonage .
"Dear XXXXXX XXXXXXX,
>
> Thank you for using Vonage as your Internet telephony provider.
>
> In the course of Vonageb
>
> Please reply this email or call 1-(866)-254-3704 (Monday to Friday 9:00am to 5:00pm EST) so that we may discuss your rate plan. If no response is received within 72 business hours, I will need to change your account to the Small Business Premium Unlimited Plan at $49.99 per month plus tax. Your international calls will be billed at the corresponding per minute rate for the destination you are calling. You may view these rates by visiting:
>
> Vonage - International Per-Minute Rates (http://www.vonage.com/international_per-minute_rates/?lid=sub_nav_international_rates&refer_id=WEBFT0706010001W1)
>
> Please be advised that if no response is received by December 7th, your account may face suspension or an immediate change in rate plan.
>
> Please review the Vonage Residential Terms of Service section 5.4 below.
>
> 5.4 Inconsistent with Normal Use.
> If you use the service or the device in a way that is inconsistent with the normal use for your service or plan, you will be required, at Vonage's sole discretion, to pay the rates for the service or plan that would apply to the way you used the service or device, or terminate the plan. For example, if you subscribe to one of our residential service plans, and your usage is inconsistent with normal residential use, you may thereafter be required to pay our applicable, higher rates for commercial service for all periods in which your use of our service or the device was inconsistent with normal residential use. Unlimited voice services are provided primarily for continuous live dialog between two individuals. Lack of continuous dialog activity, unusual call patterns, excessive numbers and/or consistent excessive usage (i.e., More than 5,000 minutes per line per month for unlimited residential calling and/or more than 10,000 minutes per line per month for unlimited small busine
> ss calling), will be considered indicators that use may be inconsistent with normal use, or that impermissible use may be occurring and may trigger an account review by us. The creation or use of related multiple accounts or excessive residential lines to circumvent these levels shall also be considered indicators that use of the service may be inconsistent with normal use for the subscribed monthly plan(s) and may trigger an account review by Vonage. Failure to contact Vonage in response to its notifications and/or failure to promptly correct usage activity to conform to normal use will result, in Vonage's sole discretion, in immediate mandatory transfer to another appropriate plan, suspension or termination of service. You acknowledge that if your service is terminated under this provision, you are subject to all applicable disconnection and device or other rebate recovery charges. Vonage's right to terminate your account under Section 6.5(b) (with or no reason) is not lim
> ited by this provision. For a non-exhaustive list of example!
> s of use
> s of our service inconsistent with normal residential use, see below.
> b
> b
> b
>
>
> If you have any questions, please reply to this email or contact me at 1-(866)-254-3704.
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> XXXXXXX
> Vonage Usage Department
> Revenue Operations
> 1-(866)-254-3704
"
No comments:
Post a Comment