Toronto Woman Sues Rogers For Exposing Affair

[troutman]

[fredr123]

Originally Posted by Pokerface

Don't cheat.

/advice

[mykalberta]

from a legal perspective would the husband be due half that since the offence took place before the divorce depending on prenup etc?

[worth]

“I lost everything,” she says. “I want others to know what a big corporation has done. I trusted Rogers with my personal information. We had a contract — and agreement that put my life right in their hands.”

She does have a point. If she had a phone bill in her own name and then Rogers bundled them together and the husband opened it, that's kind of a problem.

(Ir)Regardless, blaming Rogers for what they have done to her is just ######ed. I really hate people that can't own up to their own mistakes or take responsibility for themselves.

Rogers did nothing to you lady. You did it to yourself. Rogers didn't make you have an affair. Rogers didn't force you to call your mystery man for hours at a time. All they did was bundle your invoice together when your "husband" added internet to the house. Take some responsibility for yourself. Or use a payphone.

[fredr123]

Unrelated. Our neighbours a few houses down were having a big blow out in their driveway while I was raking our lawn. Plenty of f-bombs but the kicker was this exchange:

Wife: "You were ######ing her in Cuba and you're still ######ing her now! I saw your journal; it's all there and it's raw!"

Husband: "You wouldn't know about any of this if you weren't snooping in my stuff."

Wife: "..."

The way the husband uttered that response, as though it was the perfect defence to everything that he did, along with the way it left his soon-to-be-ex-wife speechless played out like a movie.

[Ice]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Unrelated. Our neighbours a few houses down were having a big blow out in their driveway while I was raking our lawn. Plenty of f-bombs but the kicker was this exchange:

Wife: "You were ######ing her in Cuba and you're still ######ing her now! I saw your journal; it's all there and it's raw!"

Husband: "You wouldn't know about any of this if you weren't snooping in my stuff."

Wife: "..."

The way the husband uttered that response, as though it was the perfect defence to everything that he did, along with the way it left his soon-to-be-ex-wife speechless played out like a movie.

I have a friend who discovered her husband was cheating (repeatedly) because he wasn't good about covering his tracks. In two years she had found letters, emails, pictures, and seen text messages. When she confronted him he told her if she didn't snoop in his stuff she wouldn't know about all of his mistresses so its her fault she's not happy anymore. Seriously?

[Jayems]

What kind of self-respecting man keeps a journal?

Dear Diary,

Today was wicked. Mowed the lawn, plowed the mistress. Wife doesn't suspect a thing! Life is grand.

[Khel]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Unrelated. Our neighbours a few houses down were having a big blow out in their driveway while I was raking our lawn. Plenty of f-bombs but the kicker was this exchange:

Wife: "You were ######ing her in Cuba and you're still ######ing her now! I saw your journal; it's all there and it's raw!"

Husband: "You wouldn't know about any of this if you weren't snooping in my stuff."

Wife: "..."

The way the husband uttered that response, as though it was the perfect defence to everything that he did, along with the way it left his soon-to-be-ex-wife speechless played out like a movie.

Ahem, that was a private conversation.

[VladtheImpaler]

I think it's quite an interesting legal issue, aside from all the common-sense stuff.

[mykalberta]

What did Rogers do wrong?

Husband called, Rogers saw the billing address was the same, husband was account holder at that billing address so they consolidated services to save them money, I am sure Rogers recorded the call, and asked the husband if the cell holder name was the wifes before they did it. If she was dumb enough not to have a po box the she deserves what she got.

I love her excuse...

“It was a mistake,” she said of the affair. “But I didn’t deserve to lose my life over it.”

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by fredr123

Unrelated. Our neighbours a few houses down were having a big blow out in their driveway while I was raking our lawn. Plenty of f-bombs but the kicker was this exchange:

Wife: "You were ######ing her in Cuba and you're still ######ing her now! I saw your journal; it's all there and it's raw!"

Husband: "You wouldn't know about any of this if you weren't snooping in my stuff."

Wife: "..."

The way the husband uttered that response, as though it was the perfect defence to everything that he did, along with the way it left his soon-to-be-ex-wife speechless played out like a movie.

Is the wife hot? Care to post a google map of the where the house is, maybe she is looking for payback

[loob job]

Ridiculous, if she didn't have her legs in the air she could have walked to Rogers and had it fixed the way she wanted to begin with.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by troutman

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/crim...er-affair?bn=1

A Toronto woman says the billing practices of Rogers Wireless Inc. led to her husband discovering her extramarital affair.

Now the woman, whose husband walked out, is suing the communications giant for $600,000 for alleged invasion of privacy and breach of contract, the results of which she says have ruined her life.

Actually, as described in the story, she does have a point. In fact, I think she would win that lawsuit.

Two different names, one envelope to one household is a way to save money by Rogers.

However, it does breach confidentiality as they cannot know the two names are related without confirming with BOTH parties. They might be simply roommates or even enemies who like to keep each other close. How would Rogers know?

Rogers did not have her permission to consolidate or release information to the gentleman. They probably got a call from the gentleman and offered to consolidate things under one statement and did so on his say-so.

It's ridiculous for Roger's to say the marriage would have terminated for other reasons. They have no way of knowing that.

Basically, Roger's screwed up.

Morally we can think this woman slimy but she's going to win in law I think. As she should.

As a sidebar, I remember a story going around that an Edmonton Oiler in the late 1980's was exposed after a travel agent phoned his house to confirm details of his Hawaiian vacation for two . . . . . . except the wife didn't know anything about it.

Cowperson

[Poison]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Actually, as described in the story, she does have a point. In fact, I think she would win that lawsuit.

Two different names, one envelope to one household is a way to save money by Rogers.

However, it does breach confidentiality as they cannot know the two names are related without confirming with BOTH parties. They might be simply roommates or even enemies who like to keep each other close. How would Rogers know?

Rogers did not have her permission to consolidate or release information to the gentleman. They probably got a call from the gentleman and offered to consolidate things under one statement and did so on his say-so.

It's ridiculous for Roger's to say the marriage would have terminated for other reasons. They have no way of knowing that.

Basically, Roger's screwed up.

Morally we can think this woman slimy but she's going to win in law I think. As she should.

As a sidebar, I remember a story going around that an Edmonton Oiler in the late 1980's was exposed after a travel agent phoned his house to confirm details of his Hawaiian vacation for two . . . . . . except the wife didn't know anything about it.

Cowperson

That can be easily fixed..........Surprise honey!!!!!

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

Actually, as described in the story, she does have a point. In fact, I think she would win that lawsuit.


Cowperson

Oh, she might "win", but I doubt her damages are $600,000.00.

[VladtheImpaler]

Originally Posted by troutman

Oh, she might "win", but I doubt her damages are $600,000.00.

Of course. I would like to see this go to trial, but I will boldly predict that Rogers will pay an undisclosed sum of money, and we never hear of this again...

[I_H8_Crawford]

I actually agree that she will likely win based on breach of privacy.

However (lawyers please correct me if wrong) I am assuming that part of the damages she is suing for is her loss of job/income, in which case could Rogers not make the assertion that the affair which she entered is the root cause of all said mental anguish, thus mitigating any damages which she is seeking??

Oh and just for Jiri - Kotalik, Stajan and White are still losers. (Gotta work it in every thread)

[valo403]

Originally Posted by troutman

Oh, she might "win", but I doubt her damages are $600,000.00.

I doubt we ever find out what her award is, I'd be stunned if this ever sees a courtroom.

[Resolute 14]

"'I lost everything,' she says. 'I want others to know what a big corporation has done.'"

Yeah, you selfish, self-centred biatch. You were the one cheating, but try to deflect your own failure onto someone else.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Being a massive whore aside, she has a very valid case.

True. I used to work at the front desk at a hotel and I can recall at least 3-4 incidents where married men would book a room with their mistress. The wife would call a month or 2 later asking about the hotel charge that appeared on her bill. Not knowing any better, we would tell her her "Oh your husband stayed here on such-and-such date". The wife would then freak out thinking her husband was out of town that date on a business trip...and slowly but surely, as she was on the line, she would piece together that an affair took place. It was kind of awkward being on the line with them.

Eventually this filtered down to management (probably a complaint from the husband) and we were told that privacy supercedes any type of moral obligation in these cases.

I do think she is a dumb whore for doing what she did, and l'm glad her husband found out and left her. But in her defence (and l HATE to say this) but Rogers most definetely should have kept her privacy confidential. A tough predicament nonetheless.