

Most Americans who receive any form of local or long distance phone service can expect a several page bill, even for the most limited and simplistic of packages, featuring arcane sounding terms like "Federal Subscriber Line Charge" and "EAC Rate Svc." Complex and confounding statements from everything from Credit Card to your Satellite TV providers have become commonplace in the American experience, enough so that thousands will dutifully toss off a check for whatever is listed next to "amount due" and be done with the entire accursed mess.
And that's just what "they" want you to do.
"They" of course, are service providers. Phone, cable, credit, electrical - whatever the product, there is money to be made in the subtlety and nuance of obfuscated charges and mysterious line items. It is a technique pioneered by the nation's more unsavory credit card companies charges Elizabeth Warren, professor of bankruptcy law at Harvard Law School.1 Profit margins on customers who religiously pay their bills on time are thin indeed, but a tidy sum can be made by charging those same diligent bill-payers an obscure and unsubstantiated fee. Most, Warren asserts, will skip right over the cryptic charge and pay the bill as usual, and even those that take note are likely to have little patience with long hold times, random transfers, and maddeningly inept phone menu systems.
From 1996 to 2003, Credit Card Company revenues from fees more than quadrupled, to $7.7 billion
2 and today they are larger still. Where pioneers find profit, the marketplace as a whole is quick to follow and while Credit Cards continue to lead the way, customer advocacy groups allege fraudulent charges on all manner of other bills and services.
By way of example, Verizon Communications, a telephone and data services company operating landlines throughout much of the Eastern United States, has drawn a glut of complaints from customers over third-party charges. The underlying structure of national telephone networks allows third parties to charge telephone accounts and collect those charges through the service provider, which then offloads the charge onto the customer. While this makes Verizon a more sympathetic participant in the entire sordid mess, it does little to defray the cost of the fraudulent charges passed on to Verizon's customers.
The practice of inserting these charges is called "cramming," and it has attracted the ire of Verizon, AT&T, and SBC customers from New York to Virginia. In one fairly prevalent scam, charges are "crammed" into the bill by charging the account for receiving fictitious collect calls or else for using a cleverly disguised and massively marked up directory assistance line. The additions often appear under a heading like "Miscellaneous Charges and Credits," typically under the official sounding auspices of the "Operator Assistance Network." An average "call" plus a vague and poorly defined "USF Carrier Admin Fee" and tax runs the typical customer about $7.50: hardly a fortune, but multiplied over potentially thousands of phone bills, a tidy sum nonetheless.
Local phone companies plead that they have no option but to push the charges through under existing laws, but little is being done to either inform or defend thescam's victims from further abuse. What few customers manage to conform to the absurd support hours, penetrate the infuriating voice driven telephone menu systems, and suffer the extended wait times featured by Verizon and other local phone providers are met with disappointment. Even after repeated requests, Verizon refuses to credit the charge back to its customers, referring them to a complaint line for the "Operator Assistance Network" instead.
Suspiciously, the OAN's questions line runs like a well oiled machine. Wait times are almost non-existent and the call center employees are over-eager to void the charge from a customer's phone bill - often doing so before even being asked. Even so, while waiting for the tech to complete the void request, customers may expect a lengthy and protracted explanation of why the "10 15 15 800" (typically appearing on phone bills as a call to 101-515-8000) service under contention is so desirable - a masterfully crafted sales pitch by any stretch of the imagination. Contentious customers may wish to ask that the service be blocked from their phones in the future. OAN will generally comply with this request without complaint.
Expect to wait two months for any promised credit to appear for a contested charge.
1. NPR - Elizabeth Warren on the Credit Card Industry
2. Washington Monthly - Taking Charge
I think the problem really boils down to how we track credit. We don't dare delay a payment for a bill to dispute it in fear that they will report us to the credit bureaus, ruining our credit. Its even more of a pain to remove a bad item from our credit reports than it is to dispute a bad bill. And it takes time. So if you plan to buy a new car, or take out a student loan then you dare not hesitate to pay every questionable bill. Not only that, but some credit cards are set to hike up your interest rates if your credit score changes, even if you never miss a payment to them.
This is all because we trust faceless companies and databases more than we trust people.
Customer service wouldn't be so bad, if we didn't treat the customer as guilty until proven innocent.
The system that I would like would be if I found a charge I wanted to dispute then I would send the payment for the bill for everything except that charge, fill out my dispute of that charge on some form and then mail it to them. It is then their responsibility to contact me regarding working out this issue to collect the money.
Instead, if you send a payment that is not full today, they'll just report you to a credit agency, ruin your credit report and eventually sick a collection agency on you. At all times you are treated as guilty and the party 100% responsible to sort everything out.
I think you should be considered innocent and it is their responsibility to sort the bill out if they want the payment.
I called AT&T (used to be SBC) the other day to contest a $3 charge we had on our home phone line for long distance. We never call long distance on the home phone, we always use our cell phones for that anyway. (Frankly, I don't even know why we need a home phone, except for the fact that it makes it easier to get calls from telemarketers or random pollsters, but I digress.)
They insisted that it would cost me ~$9 to remove the $3 charge. I was ticked, and let the friendly AT&T person know that. They didn't do a thing about it, just kept insisting (rather forcefully, but that may be because I was upset) that it was absolutely necessary. I ended up agreeing to it, although I should've escalated my complaint.
Anyhow, good article Killfile. Nice to see something completely unrelated to politics, religion or war. :)
Frankly, I don't even know why we need a home phone, except for the fact that it makes it easier to get calls from telemarketers or random pollsters, but I digress.
I don't have one. I tried an IP phone for a year, never actually plugged it into the cable modem and then said screw it, I'll just use my cell. I hope more cell companies go the T-Mobile route and let you use your home wireless to make an IP call when you are home.
I don't have the phone. T-Mobile doesn't have enough other coverage in my area. But I believe it responds to the same number. If it didn't that ruins a ton of usefulness. Or maybe if someone calls you it responds in normal cell mode, but if you dial out then you use the wireless.
This is definitely a real revolutionary feature that is truly customer friendly. Once most networks pick the feature up (and competition will drive them to eventually) we really can replace the home phone with the cell phone.
I was very happy ever since I ditched my home phone to get by with only a mobile phone, that is, until I got my iPhone and now get very spotty service at my house with AT&T.
Calvin
Pioneers get the arrows in their butts.
It's not that it's GSM. Actually, T-Mobile worked really well at my house. There's no way I'd give my iPhone up now, even if I have to stand on my roof to make calls (as it is now, there are a couple corners of my house where I can talk on the phone if I keep it on speakerphone).
ATT is terrible is AZ too.
A friend of mine had their service, but got out of the contract simply by complaining about the service in a lot of areas. They know how bad it is. As far as the billing is concerned, I used to work in Verizon Billing (residential land lines), I know what is going to happen. They send you a book of a bill and say you can call in to ask for the "bill detail" removed, because you don't want to receive the document box every month. The remove it. Now you get that nice little envelope, but no longer know what you are paying for. ATT's service is so shoddy, you go roaming in between buildings, and they start charging you over fifty cents a minute.
Verizon should have picked up the iPhone. They're crooks to, but their signal is the strongest.
T-Mobile has far better coverage then AT&T, Thats my only problem with the iPhone.
Calvin, I have the exact same problem. I had coverage inside with T-Mobile, switched for iPhone, now no coverage inside except on the top floor. It's a real drag.
In my office, I can inside the elevator and use my T-Mobile, the people with AT&T have to stand on the balcony outside to get the same coverage and they have no coverage in the halls at all. But I want a iPhone..So I ended up with a iTouch instead.
Isn't there some class action thing we can do about all these charges instead of each individual calling about a $3 charge?
My wife and I ditched our land line when we realized that, since we both had cell phones, no one we wanted to talk to ever called the land line. As a matter of fact, 99.9% of the time, incoming calls just pissed me off. My problem with land lines isn't questionable charges. It's that, somewhere along the line, they stopped being our personal devices for our own use and became public domain that anyone can use for whatever reason they see fit. It annoys me when some stranger uses a service I pay for to attempt to sell me something.
My question is: Usually when you have to give a phone number for ID, they want a land line phone. So how do you guys handle that?
I went w/o a land phone for a while, but was forced to get one when I wanted to job hunt. There are other situations too that want a land line ph#, like credit card accts and other things I cannot think of right now...
PS - I like Tracfone for cell svc. It is so much easier to go online to buy either minutes or months, whichever, in any quantity. Pay as you go so you don't get forced to buy minutes you don't use.
Land line co. is Qwest - there you can go online too and email with questions, or get someone live.
My question is: Usually when you have to give a phone number for ID, they want a land line phone.
I've never run into this. I've never had anyone so much as blink when I give them a cell phone number.
Some pizza places used to do this. Too many prank calls for cells ordering a triple anchovy and garlic to be delivered to the Math Teacher's house.
Killfile: How we avoided these problems was by signing up for the complete package from our broadband cable provider. Free long distance anywhere, cable TV, broadband connection, all at a fixed rate. The bill is the same every month with no hidden charges. I highly recommend it.
I would think having a fixed rate package, however, will make it easier to identify the cramming charges. Other folks may pay smaller charges without ever knowing they are paying extra due to the simple fact the bill fluctuates every month.
Good point. I have a fixed rate plan on my landline but am thinking about scaling back to help pay the iPhone bill. Unlike Calvin, I must be right next to a tower. My coverage is great. That might be because the Cingular network was big here in the DC area when it was still Cellular One.
And as for Verizon: the only thing they have innovated in the last decade has been billing. They are most definitely not a technology company or a utility, but a collections agency.
Has anyone documented the Verizon practice of over-billing such as charges for incalling and then suggesting (urging) a higher cost more-minutes plan as a result of the tripling of the monthly cost?
Within the last ninety days, Verizon has wrongly charged my account for several hundred dollars to prompt me to give up the plan style I entered their service with in 2000; one that is no longer offered.
I finally relented and agreed to a new contract having been given the promise to monitor and never allow these excessive charges again.
The fraud continues. I called to cancel the contract and of course I am offered that option for a large buy-back fee. The supervisor who gave me such strong, comforting support is no where to be found.
I'm reminded of something I read yesterday. It was the Washington Post or the
New York Times coverage of the court proceeding regarding the challenge of
the spying by the government. At one point a government lawyer said the law is very
complicated and a judge said it can't be any more complicated than my phone bill.
Another thing which I consider a scam -- the big charge for call blocking. Why shouldn't that be free, just like email blocking? Can anyone argue that somehow it actually costs $20/30 per month just to block a caller? I don't think so...
OK, from one with a little experience with these phone people!!!!
It takes several months and numerous calls to the FCC (Thats Federal Communications Commission, if you did not know) To finally get these phone creps off your back. Happened to me over a $6,500.00, that right $6,500.00 phone bill from MCI a couple of years back. Until the FCC ruled and I sent that ruling to MCI they hounded me every month over those charges, wich were made while I was living alone and most times while I was away from the house. I was "CLONED"
Have fun folks, the "Dirty Rotten Scoundrels" will how ever put a lock on your line(complete with password) if you request it. But you have to request it. They will not offer it.
Received ATT bill and it included the $7.45 for 10 15 15 800 director assistance. Called 800# listed by ATT for explanation, and spoke to call center operator. Complained about the charge, believing I was speaking to ATT, but I was not. Operator agreed to refund the money and block any further charges. Then called ATT and complained. ATT operator sounded like she had received numerous of these complaints and appeared to be apologetic. I received refund check for $7.45 in two days.
Google has a free directory assistance number. 1-800-GOOG-411 for looking up numbers of businesses. NO ads and no fee, will even connect you for free. I just found out about this, and have not even had a chance to try it out.
But I read about it on e-newsletter from Everyday Cheapskate.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |