As we’ve covered the challenge of bill shock in recent weeks — including an in-depth look at how carriers can turn a problem into an opportunity, plus the FCC’s sudden interest in the topic — the mother of all bill shock cases (a contested $18,000 ISP bill) has been slowing playing itself out. Today, the AP reports that Verizon has let the case go, which was caused when a family let a two-year promotional offer expire and ran up its monster Internet service bill in little more than six weeks.
Reports the AP:
Bryan St. Germain ran up the charges over six weeks in 2006. He says he didn’t realize a two-year promotional offer allowing free access had expired. Verizon Wireless says it cut the phone bill in half before sending it to a collection agency but it considers the remaining balance uncollectible. Bob St. Germain says he’s glad Verizon has dismissed the charge but it remains on his credit report.
Connected Planet’s take,
Susana Schwartz:
So this kid (who is now an adult) thought he was getting “free data downloads,” but one has to wonder what role parents play in knowing what their kids are doing over a six-week period. Those of us on “this” side of the fence can see how unfair it is sometimes for an operator to provide the pipe and complex interconnections, only to have no recourse for recovering the costs incurred to deliver the service. To provide network-congesting services to someone only to get no payment just further enhances the message that proactive, in-network usage and policy controls will benefit not only customers, but service providers tiring of the reputation-tainting news and ultimate “forgiveness” they have to give in these high-profile cases in order to “save face.”
No one will feel sorry for the 800-pound gorilla UNTIL bandwidth-hungry data, peer-to-peer and torrent-type services deteriorate the experience of the “greater whole” enough that “bandwidth hogs” — accidental or not — will be viewed as “the bad guys.” At some point, parents and enterprises alike should try to be responsible for being more cognizant of what their kids or employees are doing day to day and do what they have to (like reading contracts and small print) to better understand the plans to which they have subscribed.
That’s our take on this. Let us know what you think in the comments section below:
Sure, but make no mistake that the wireless providers keep the plans complex on purpose, and 75% of people pay the small – medium overage charges because it’s not worth the hassle of calling them up and fighting about something they don’t understand. People shouldn’t use things they don’t understand and expect forgiveness for violating the contracts, but simply it for everyone’s sake.
If a person does not contact the supplier at the end of the promotional period to communicate their intentions, why not send a text message to the user? or better yet just turn off the service, thus forcing a call.
I agree that everyone needs to pay more attention to their contracts, but also let\\\’s simplify the contracts and throw out the legal jargon that clutters many of the contracts.
There seems to be a lack of common sense and reasonableness in our society anymore. Really…..$18,000.00 for 6 weeks of internet services. One can get an OC-3 for this price. $18,000.00 for a single internet connection? This is analogous to signing a 1000 page agreement for the gardner to cut your grass and trim your hedges for $50/mo for two yrs and then (noted on page 923) the price goes to $14000.00 /mo.
The person signing the agreement should not have done. But in the case of cell phones etc., no one has a choice. They all are that way.
The Govt. should not dictate what is a reasonable charge ( ie. Fascism/Communism/Socialism etc ). BUT, it is reasonable that it be legaly required for a reasonable citizen with average education to be able to fully read and understand the agreement. The only reason to make a contract intentionally complex, is to try and pull the wool over the customer\’s eyes.
It did not cost $18k to deliver this kid’s data—-that dog won’t hunt.
It also does carriers no favors to advertise data plans that don’t deliver on the advertised speeds. When there is enough smoke in the public’s eyes, they don’t need to find a fire, and this, whether you like it or not, is a huge plume of smoke.
How about simpler terms and no fine print as a start? why is that a necessary part of doing business with a carrier? It sets an adversarial stage for all other drama to play out on. The customer perceives that the deck is stacked against them and this type of story just confirms their perception…how many feel-good ads will it cost to try to dent that perception? I would propose “ALOT!”…and even that won’t convince users.
There will *never* be a “bad guy” regular Joe user when carriers carry around a big stick and pummel people with it from time to time. And users will never buy that argument when the network provides less than advertised performance—that logic just won’t fly.
I agree consumers should be much more vigilant about their vendor relationships and contracts. My guess is the first carrier that takes an aggressive, client-friendly approach to terms and pricing models, will gain an Apple-like rabid fan base…
Wireless and Wired Carriers play the same game with coustomers. How come all the other supplier of Business and Residential services remind us when our agreements will expire? Because attorneys were paid to create hard to understand agreements. Good customer service requires vendors to play fair. How about it Telecom Carriers
Wired and Wireless?
Jay is almost correct when he says the charges are akin to an OC-3. Actually, (sorry Jay) I believe they are more in line with an OC-12 ! Nevertheless, you’ve put things into proper perspective.
Let\\\’s face it, the reason for these trials (especially wireless internet) is to hook users and keep them there. OK, perhaps that\\\’s marketing 101, but, Jay is correct to point out that if the user does not sign up after the trial ends, the carrier should terminate the service IMMEDIATELY rather than assume the user wants to keep it.
By the way, whoever thinks that this one customer caused VZ to incur the type of costs implied here, either doesn’t understand the industry or has become an apologist for VZ.
Again, Jay (and others on this post) are correct about service contracts.….keep it simple. Has anyone ever really read one? When trailing a service, subscribes are actually signing up for that service with a one month contract rescission period. To be fair VZ doesn’t hide this, but it is still bothersome to me that I have to take the action to cancel something that doesn’t work well or doesn’t really suite my needs rather than allow the trial to lapse. If I want the service, I will be sure to take a positive step and actually buy it.
By the way, did anyone ever try to cancel a service or correct a billing error with VZ? Good luck! . Errors multiply, prompting multiple calls and long on-hold times just for the privilege to speak with a real person, who may then perhaps understand the problem (key word is perhaps). But, I’ve never had a problem buying a service; they have that down fairly well.
funny how this article leaves out the fact that he was using a cell phone as a tether modem – which is against the TOS for most cell phone carriers and plans…
this customer got away with violating the terms of the contract for 2 whole years, over burdening a data network that was designed for cell phone use by tethering his laptop to his cell phone.
either the customers contract had expired, and he was placed into the month-to-month terms of the carrier, or the customer had to sign a new contract – in either case, the new terms should have been presented to the customer prior to him accepting them, and continuing to use the service, if continuing to use his cell phone as a tether modem (which was likely a violation of the initial contract) was an important factor, this is something that should have been discussed when he signed the new contract
enough with supporting the provider (with whom i have personal reasons why i try not to deal directly with) – as for the providers responsibility, there should be a monthly cap on charges that can be incurred within a single billing cycle, and $18,000 seems extremely excessive. while i do not think that it would be possible to make a blanket cut off rate for all customers, overages should be limited to something reasonable (say $200 to $300 within a billing cycle) the limits could even be imposed on a device basis for business or family plans with multiple devices. many phone companies (mostly long distance/international providers) have capped monthly bills in the past, and many continue to do so today, so why can the cellular industry not follow in these footsteps.
a cap on overage usage benefits both the consumer and the carrier. it benefits the consumer by them not having to be shocked by an unpayable bill, and it benefits carriers by reducing there risk of providing access to services with out payment. even in the event that a customer fails to pay the overages within a capped system, it limits the losses of the carrier, and frees up network access to those customers who pay for services…
FCC is not doing their job, so the public has to force the issue to get FCC educated and apply caps and standards for public service.
Everyone needs to assemble and provide business ethics for public safety.
This has been going on since the internet service has been provided and shows us that they are not educated enough to provide a good service for happy customers.
I do not mean to be critical, but caps and good communication will keep the Public Utilities Commission on-line complaint busy just policing these actions.
Please use your option to protect yourself!!!
You’re right. Consumers need to be cognizant of contract stipulations, and carriers ultimately must move to tiered billing. One further step might help head off bandwidth hogs, prevent bill shock and keep customers happy — adoption of convergent billing systems integrated with CRM. Carriers still using legacy systems have an abundance of options. More on this here: http://crawfordpr.com/2010/05/20/bss-cant-we-prevent-the18000-bill-shocker/
I had the same problem with VZ and am still fighting their “charges” for the same confusing, contract small print that I somehow missed during my busy life.
Because of the charges I racked up and because VZ refused to let me pay a minimum amount after I was laid off…I discontinued services (more VZ fees) and switched to Straight Talk. VZ actually hung up on me yesterday (no call back) when I was trying to dispute the charges for early termination.
I also got 4 other family members to switch from VZ to Straight Talk after what happened to me.
The ST phones are lame but I now have unlimited talk and text for $46.00 per month…a far cry from the $150.00 min. per month I used to pay for almost 6 years. Foolish me.
I asked for some alert on other occasions and VZ said they wouldn’t do that or didnt have the technology….really??!
Let’s be real….nobody has the time to proactively check after EVERY service….banks, cell phone companies, day cares, movie downloads…etc. etc. And if you have kids….you have even less time & energy. Can you hear the quality of American life going down the drain…?
They know all this and that is why they will not alert you! It’s just not American to me….so I hope people fight back, get mad and demand that these companies start to “DO THE RIGHT THING”….for once.
@Heidi – good to see that you moved over to a prepaid cellular solution.
My problem with your comments is that you seem to not have time to look after ANY of your responsibilities..
you should constantly check on your banking information – you are responsible for any charges to your account unless you dispute them.
you should at least monthly check on your phone bill, and if there are additional charges either look at your usage habits, or adjust your package.
if you do not have the time to check after the daycare that look after your children – then i am not really too sure that you should have children. child care is something that you should be extremely involved in…
if you can not keep up with movie downloads, then perhaps you should refrain from downloading movies…
the quality of life going down the drain? really? is technology really harming your quality of life? gee.. what did they do before computers and telephones? i would hate to know what you thought of the quality of life in some third world countries where they do not have these “problems”