Thread: Woman loses husband. Sues Cable Company
View Single Post
Old 19-05-2010, 16:46   #11
Flyboy
Inactive
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,375
Flyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful oneFlyboy is the helpful one
Re: Woman loses husband. Sues Cable Company
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuart C View Post
Was tempted to put this in the Other Telephone companies forum, but it's not a UK company..

Anyhow, a woman is suing Rogers Cable after they started bundling her mobile bill in with her husbands bills. The problem was caused when the husband opened the bill, and found several long phone calls to one number. He called the number, and spoke to the person who answered. What was said is not disclosed, but apparently caused the husband to leave the woman, their home and their children. The woman has since admitted to a short affair.

The court papers said “The husband used the previously private and confidential information that the defendant unilaterally disclosed to the husband to inquire about the people that the plaintiff was telephoning and the nature of such calls,”

The documents also claim that the account was in her maiden name, but was included in the account under her husband's name.

She claims they breached her privacy, and is sueing them (after the problems apparently caused her to lose her job.

Rogers, not surprisingly is denying doing anything to breach her privacy.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/05...s_privacy_sue/

Now, apart from the moral question of having the affair (I am not defending her for doing this), does she have a point? The account was under her maiden name, although, seemingly, the accounts are linked.
She most certainly does have a point. Irrespective of the nature of the calls, the company should have protected her privacy. This sounds like the days of when women's tax affairs were not separate from their husbands and they had no financial independence.

P.S. From the title of the thread, I thought it was one of those hoax articles and she had mislaid him in a supermarket or something, because the cable company had told to her to take him there for a prize.

---------- Post added at 15:46 ---------- Previous post was at 15:44 ----------

It does remind me of the American radio show who got a wife to hoax-call her husband to admit to an affair and he admitted to sleeping with her sister.
Flyboy is offline   Reply With Quote