As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Ever wonder what "Service fee" or other phrases mean in your phone bill?
Henroid
Mexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
Mexican kicked from Immigration ThreadCentrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
It means you're probably being ripped off.
Places you give your phone number to are likely applying charges to it, and your actual phone company is showing it on your bill in super vague terms. This problem has grown so much that the FCC is finally springing into action.
I mostly wanted to give a heads up to people with this thread, because this is total shit. Question your bills when they arrive and you see vague terms show up.
So, the bottom line:Cramming, or placing bogus charges on phone bills, grows to epidemic proportions
It's time to check your phone bill for unauthorized charges. Only 1 in 20 victims of cramming realize it, according to an FCC study.
By Kathy M. Kristof Personal Finance
June 26, 2011
If you haven't done a line-by-line check of your phone bill lately, now is the time.
Cramming — the process of placing unauthorized charges on phone bills — has grown to epidemic proportions and affects 15 million to 20 million people each year, said Federal Communications Commission Chairman Julius Genachowski, who should know.
These charges are often so surreptitious that consumers never see them. Only 1 in about 20 victims of cramming realize it, according to an FCC study. The rest pay their bills never knowing that the total is inflated by unauthorized fees, Genachowski said. As a result, relatively minor charges add up to hundreds of dollars each year.
"We've seen people getting charged for yoga classes, cosmetics, diet products and even psychic hotline memberships," Genachowski said at a news conference last week. "But they're buried in bills that can run 20 pages or more and are labeled with hard-to-decipher descriptions."
Anyone can be a victim, he added. Unlike identity thieves, who need some bit of private information about you such as a Social Security or credit card number, crammers can rip you off with information from a phone directory.
One Missouri woman, for example, was charged for 25 months of long-distance services that she'd never ordered. When she finally discovered the charge and protested, the company said she'd authorized the service and provided her "authorization form" to prove it.
The only problem? This form included the wrong name, wrong address, wrong email and wrong birth date for the woman paying the bill. The only thing on the form that belonged to the victim was the phone number.
Over the course of those two years, this woman had paid hundreds of dollars for a service she didn't want and didn't buy. She was forced to file a complaint with the FCC to get her money back.
Cramming charges typically amount to between 99 cents and $19.99 a month. The reason such charges are commonly overlooked is that they're often described in generic language like "service fee" or "call plan" or "membership." This happens even though the FCC's truth-in-billing rule demands clear, plain-English disclosures.
For example, a long-distance company that was recently cited for cramming violations listed its charges next to the description "USBI." The company had supposedly sold this discount long-distance plan to thousands of consumers. But an FCC investigation found that fewer than 5% of the people who were billed for the plan used it, a telltale signal that they were unaware of the purchase.
The FCC said it intended to levy a $4.3-million fine against USBI's parent, Main Street Telephone of Blue Bell, Pa., as part of a crackdown on unauthorized charges that also swept up three other firms — VoiceNet Telephone and Cheap2Dial Telephone, both of Harrisburg, Pa., and Norristown Telephone, also of Blue Bell.
Collectively, these firms are expected to pay $11.7 million to settle alleged cramming violations.
Some activities can make you more vulnerable to cramming. For instance, if you answer an online survey that demands your phone number "to deliver your results," it's highly likely that buried somewhere in the "terms and conditions" there's an automatic sign-up for some form of "membership" that will get billed to your phone.
In addition, companies offering "free trials" are notorious for signing up consumers for stealth subscriptions and services that are later billed to their credit cards or phone numbers.
But the best way to determine whether you're a victim is to scrutinize your phone bill and ask questions about anything you don't recognize, Genachowski said.
Companies that place outside charges on your phone bill are supposed to list their phone number next to the line item, in case you have questions. Start there to determine whether the charge is something you've authorized. If not, ask to have it removed and insist that past charges be refunded.
If the vendor is reluctant, follow up with your phone provider. Phone companies make money by allowing outside vendors to bill through them, but they have a vested interest in keeping you as a customer. Many phone companies will agree to block all outside charges, but only if you request it.
If neither your phone company nor the vendor cooperates, contact the FCC. The agency offers an online complaint form at http://www.fcc.gov/guides/how-file-complaint or you can call (888) 225-5322.
business@latimes.com
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Places you give your phone number to are likely applying charges to it, and your actual phone company is showing it on your bill in super vague terms. This problem has grown so much that the FCC is finally springing into action.
I mostly wanted to give a heads up to people with this thread, because this is total shit. Question your bills when they arrive and you see vague terms show up.
Henroid on
0
Posts
Basically all someone needs in some cases is your phone number and name, which can be found in a phone book, to start charging you. And few people will notice something called MT universal service fee $0.99.
Did you have access to the details behind every charge applied to accounts? And were you sure the actual people who use the number were purposely adding those services to their lines?
I had to be able to explain every charge to the customers if they asked about them, yes. As far as features, I said that third party charges would get disputed by customers sometimes, but they are never just labeled "service fee". They are separated from the regular monthly charges and always have the name of the company that is charging you, along with a short description of the service charged and usually a contact number. Charges like that are usually very easy to get refunded if they are disputed, all it takes is a call to your service provider.
Features that are actually part of your phone plan though (like long distance) are pretty thoroughly documented. I could always see whether a feature was added in a store, over the phone, or through the customer's account online. All of those avenues require authentication of either photo ID, a password, or other personal information in order to make any changes.
Cell phone bills are not twenty pages long usually, and all the pertinent information is summarized on the main page. The most important thing is to make sure you are not entering in your phone number to shady websites, and it never hurts to give your bill a quick glance over each month.
I think the article's about how the industry is changing from when you were working in it.
Isn't this what people are supposed to be doing already?
It's entirely possible that your employer was particularly conscientious about billing practices.
I am currently dealing with a problem with inscrutable statements with AT&T. It's actually pretty ridiculous - we get bills for hundreds of dollars with no details at all. If I call to have them explained to me, I'm referred to our sales rep. Our sales rep is useless.
Naturally, we're transitioning off of AT&T for this reason (among others). But my point is that while your company's bills are clearly delineated, that isn't universally the case.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Yeah. But part of the growing problem is companies finding vague ways to notify customers, as well as the size of charges being relatively small.
How many people are going to call to have a 99 cent "Service Fee" explained to them?
Especially if it's tacked on after three years of phone service?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Third party charges on the other hand many people don't realize they incur. Basically every time somebody asks to text '55555 if you like puppies' you can safely assume it's to bill you down the road.
No, I'm saying that the OP is a little misleading in regards to random stuff showing up as "service fee" or whatever. If you actually read what the FCC spokesman says in the article, it basically boils down to "read your bill, don't just pay it without looking at it first. Also, don't give random web sites your phone number."
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/cramming-unauthorized-misleading-or-deceptive-charges-placed-your-telephone-bill
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Except one of the bolded points in the article notes some of the catch-all phrases you need to look out for? But Feral did a better job of pointing this out.
CD, I'll grant that maybe you worked for a company that's on the up and up. I'm not going to claim all companies practice this sort of bullshit. But you need to meet the argument half-way on this and recognize that some companies, an unknown quantity, do allow for this.
I am not kidding when i say that we are getting a bill at my company from AT&T with an account number and zero detail for roughly $250 a month.
Our rep "thinks" it is a summary account for our telecom services at a particular branch office.
But she's not sure!
It is as ridiculous as it sounds.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
PSN: Beltaine-77 | Steam: beltane77 | Battle.net BadHaggis#1433
The dialup internet one was my favorite though. I called and asked why the charge was on our bill, they said they provide services for things like credit card readers. I told them all of our credit cards were processed over our broadband connection, and we hadn't had a dialup reader in three years. I asked how long we'd been their customer, and they couldn't tell us. They quickly agreed to refund the charges.
This is a pretty wide spread online scam over here in Europe/Germany. I don't see the ads for it anymore, because I have an adblocker installed ... but usually you can find those ads all over the place.
Usually it is some ridiculous riddle or some optical illusion, you can have the results delivered to your phone, not reading the fine print you incur charges of 1.99€ or 2.99€ a month. And these "contracts" are a pain in the ass to get out of.
I don't get how people actually use that bullshit. Why on earth would I want to know if that swirling lady in the ad turns right or left? And why the fuck would I need the result delivered to my phone? But hey ... people, in general, are stupid.
So basically, it's a credit card, except with all the information for it rather publicly listed. Why does this seem like a giant honor system that should never have been greenlit, let alone gotten to the point of the FCC having to step in and warn people about invalid charges?
I've yet to see this with my verizon cel, but I have had a number of features that came with the phone as limited trials tell me that if I didn't sign up they'd stop working in a month.. only to find the actual system being an assumed opt-in, and I needed to go DISABLE them before the month was up to not get charged for stupid things.
Phone companies are so professional nowadays arent they.
If you don't call out of the US, hook a headset up to your computer and use google voice.
Like many things that end up fucking consumers over, it was done in the interests of "deregulation" and "competition."
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
This is the way it is for everything now.
They need to make a law that requires a specific opt-in to be required for any free trial, but that would violate the constitutional right to charge people repeatedly for things they don't use and aren't aware they're even signed up for.
Fixed.
Wasn't this a huge scandal? Weren't there a shitload of people affected? I seem to remember a class-action.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
EDIT: Wow, these people describe exactly what I went through. Except I seemed to get mine cleared up a few years before it really got out of control. I had no idea that it was this common, I thought it was a fluke. I still can't find a clear link to info on the class-action, though. I think I'm entitled to $75 but I can't see how to get it. It looks like this suit covered people affected between 2004 and 2007 or something, but I've found numerous accounts of it going for longer than that. Mine was all during 2000 - 2002. Exact same shit, though. I was no longer a customer and had long since cancelled and moved away from the place where I even had MCI, but they had the credit card I had used for billpay and started charging a monthly fee to it. The only difference for me was that whenever I called, they would credit it all back and assure me that it would never happen again. The only time it actually stopped, though, is when I sent letters to every mailing address I could find for them, including the legal department, threatening to sue for defamation of credit.
If your company has a business account with AT&T (i.e. they've signed what we call an AMB), then you have access to Enterprise support. Call 611 or 800-331-0500 and enter one of your numbers as the number you're calling about. Failing that, ask to speak to the AT&T area business rep. Is this just wired lines or wireless, as well? If you need any other contact numbers, PM me.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
Just wired lines.
Done all that. We get referred back to our company rep.
I haven't been able to find out who her supervisor is.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
"You have to talk to your representative..."
I don't think they understood what ARSM stood for. What does it stand for?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
I think this is going to turn into one of my most favoritest games in the world.
Play, "Lemme talk to your boss."
That game is awesome.
XBL : lJesse Custerl | MWO: Jesse Custer | Best vid ever. | 2nd best vid ever.
I once actually got the President of First Citizen's Bank to send me a personal check for $300 because the bank screwed me over, and everybody I'd talked to before him was basically like, "sorry, it's not my job to fix this sort of problem."