Slashdot Mirror
DSL Surcharge Plan Abandoned by Major Carriers
thedletterman writes to mention a USAToday article about the proposed surcharges on DSL lines. The FCC stepped in just as major carriers Verizon and BellSouth made moves to add a $1-$3 surcharge to their DSL services; they were coincidentally to add this charge just as the Universal Service Fund fee was being removed from all DSL services. From the article: "Verizon, in a statement, said it was dropping the new fee as a result of feedback from consumers: 'We have listened to our customers, and are eliminating the charge.' Gene Kimmelman of Consumers Union had another explanation: 'They got caught red-handed in a blatant consumer rip-off. Only under the pressure of regulators cracking down on them did they back off from this unwarranted charge.' The FCC last week sent Verizon a 'letter of inquiry,' the first step in a formal investigation."
Dear Valued Verizon Online Customer,
Effective August 14, 2006, Verizon Online will stop charging the FUSF (Federal Universal Service Fund) recovery fee. We will stop being assessed the fee by our DSL network suppliers. Therefore, we will no longer be recovering this fee from our customers. The impact of the FUSF fee is as follows: for customers of Verizon Online with service up to 768Kbps, the fee eliminated is $1.25 a month; for customers of Verizon Online with service up to 1.5 Mbps or 3Mbps, the fee eliminated is $2.83 a month (based on current FUSF surcharge amounts). On your bill that includes charges for August 14, 2006 you will see either a partial FUSF Recovery Fee or no FUSF line item at all, depending on your bill cycle.
Starting August 26, 2006, Verizon Online will begin charging a Supplier Surcharge for all new DSL customers, existing customers with a DSL monthly or bundle package, and existing DSL annual plan customers at the time their current annual plan expires. This surcharge is not a government imposed fee or a tax; however, it is intended to help offset costs we incur from our network supplier in providing Verizon Online DSL service. The Supplier Surcharge will initially be set at $1.20 a month for Verizon Online DSL customers with service up to 768Kbps and $2.70 per month for customers with DSL service at higher speeds.
On balance your total bill will remain about the same as it has been or slightly lower.
Or... just raise the base price of the service by $2.70.
Frankly these fees are ridiculous. Everytime I call a utility company for a quote on phone or broadband services, I specifically request they add all their random little fees and made-up taxes in any price they quote me. It usually takes a little bit of scrambling from the salesperson to get me that number, but they've always been able to tell me. I make my decision accordingly.
The best so far: Verizon Fios (fiber, if you're lucky enough to have it available in your area). It was $35/month, no fees, no taxes (not even sales taxes!) charged to my credit card monthly. But I moves to the other side of town about 8 months ago and there no Fios available on my street. I do understand that they started charging taxes and/or fees now. I guess it was good while it lasted.
These "service charges" should be illegal as they stand today. Many Canadian cellular carriers use this very same practise. There was some sort of meeting between the heads of the carrier families where they all agreed to introduce a "government licensing fee" or "federal satellite licensing fee" of $6.95 per month. This went on for years. The government finally perked up and said "Hey, we don't charge that licensing fee" and demanded the charge to be dropped (though not refunded, naturally). The carriers eagerly complied by renaming it a "system access fee", and it is still in place today.
These fees are nothing but a vehicle for false advertising and a covert way to increase prices unannounced. Carriers can legally advertise a plan to be $20 per month when in fact it is $26.95. Thus, no carrier can afford to be honest or they will appear to be the most expensive service.
Hello, legislation?
The American DSL monopolies are very unfortunate and entirely avoidable. In Toronto, Canada, there are over 160 ISPs in addition to the major ones, and 56 of those are DSL. The mom and pop DSL ISPs are just as fast as the big boys (at 3.0Mb, though we have a cable internet monopoly and that network offers at least 6.0Mb for a similar price) but the little guys are cheaper and more flexible. For instance, little ISPs tend to have no monthly transfer caps, allow you to buy your own modem instead of renting, allow you to run servers, don't throttle Usenet or common P2P ports, etc. Plus, due to all the competition, the little guys work their asses off to keep their fickle customers on board. Competition is a great thing!
Correct. Here's the cut and paste from my notice:
Effective August 14, 2006, Verizon Online will stop charging the FUSF (Federal Universal Ser vice Fund) recovery fee. We will stop being assessed the fee by our DSL network suppliers. Therefore, we will no longer be recovering this fee from our customers. The impact of the FUSF fee is as follows: for customers of Verizon Online with service up to 768Kbps, the fee eliminated is $1.25 a month; for customers of Verizon Online with service up to 1.5 Mbps or 3Mbps, the fee eliminated is $2.83 a month (based on current FUSF surcharge amounts). On your bill that includes charges for August 14, 2006 you will see either a partial FUSF Recovery Fee or no FUSF line item at all, depending on your bill cycle.
Starting August 26, 2006, Verizon Online will begin charging a Supplier Surcharge for all new DSL customers, existing customers with a DSL monthly or bundle package, and existing DSL annual plan customers at the time their current annual plan expires. This surcharge is not a government imposed fee or a tax; however, it is intended to help offset costs we incur from our network supplier in providing Verizon Online DSL service. The Supplier Surcharge will initially be set at $1.20 a month for Verizon Online DSL customers with service up to 768Kbps and $2.70 per month for customers with DSL service at higher speeds.
On balance your total bill will remain about the same as it has been or slightly lower.
It was their hope that the last line was all that anyone would really notice when the bill finally came. "Hey, my bill went down a nickel! Cool!". It was some Verizon exec's way of saying, "hmmmmm... people are willing to pay our prices, and here's a slick little way to add that dropped FUSF fee right into the Profit Margin. No one will be the wiser! We'll call it a 'cost offset'. AND, we'll let them know the 'initial price'. I bet later we can tweak it up a bit at a time, and still keep our advertised rates the same. W00t!"
Glad the pressure got to them.
I used to work at a phone company that billed collect calls from jails. We were a legitimate business, but we could make mistakes. We had billing agreements with phone companies that they would put our bills on their customers' phone bills. Here are a few suggestions from my days in that business:
Contact the shady operator and tell them you are gonna file a report with FCC if they don't cancel the bill.
If they don't, contact the FCC and file a report.
Tell Verizon that you won't pay the bogus bill -- go ahead and pay the non-contested part.
Most phone companies would back down on collecting 3rd party billings if you refused to pay that part of the bill. We never had a phone company "go to bat" for us and actually take any action beyond billing to collect a 3rd party bill. The bad debt on our legitimate collect billings was at leat 25%.
Verizon probably knows they are bogus, and will do whatever is easiest for themselves. They would much rather have your $40-80/month than turn your phone off to collect for another company.
I am not a crackpot.
I recently switched back from DSL to cable after initially falling for the "cable is slow because it shared" campaign. After the AT&T merger my DSL bill went from $29 to over $100 month for "pro" DSL with 1 static IP. When I called to see what was up they acted quite rude and firmly stated the "deal" I had was no longer avaialable and had the nerve to say I should be grateful that my rates stayed unchanged so long after the merger, so I hung up, called the cable company and ordered the all-in-once service. Digital Cable, Internet and Digital Phone and its about half what my bills were separately. When I called to cancel my phone service suddenly AT&T wanted to talk...evidently this is happening alot since I was bounced from a "customer retention specialist". They offered deal after deal and just didnt seem to want to accept "shut it off" as an answer.
IANAL, but:
n .cfm?doc_id=1168
Rather than ranting like a lunatic, don't pay it. Verizon cannot legally drop your phone service if you don't pay that 3rd-party charge. The 3rd party has to come after you to collect, which they won't do if the charge is fraudulent. Also, take 2 minutes and file a complaint with the FCC.
http://www.puco.ohio.gov/PUCO/Consumer/informatio
http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/news/080702fraudwk3.html
Do you have ESP?
Phone companies will quite frequently attempt to pass off certain charges to the consumer through "fees." For example, the Universal Service Fee is a payment from you that goes directly to the FCC for the Universal Service Fund, the fund that pays for eRate, the government subsidization program that helps fund schools' telecommunication access (POTS, internet, long-distance, equipment to keep it all in order). The same thing is done with 911 access. The government bills the providers, and the providers just pass the bill onto consumers.
When our school switched over from AT&T to a regional long-distance provider, the rep at the regional company gave me a little insight to AT&T's various "fees." Ever take a look at the "FCC Line Charge"? According to AT&T (requires flash, and you'll need to zoom in to read the thing), it is an "FCC-approved flat-rate monthly charge paid by consumers to their Local Telephone Company so that the Local Telephone Company can recover the costs, not recovered in local rates, that are associated with connecting customers to the long distance network." Now don't you love how that works? They can advertise that their phone line only costs $18 a month, then hit you up for another $11 to cover costs that are "not recovered in local rates." And how about the "Carrier Cost Recovery Fee?" AT&T just doesn't want to have to pay their own property taxes, so they pass the cost onto consumers. I was told by the rep that AT&T has been known to pass whatever fees it can to the consumer, whatever can be FCC and state approved. Even approved "expansion fees" can be funneled into paying for new office buildings that "house infrastructure."
Actually, i'm a bit more harsh than that. If there is collusion, just don't buy the product. If it is a necessity, start your own business and charge less. (I think that works at least theoretically, and should be pursued before jumping to regulation.)
In general I agree but not for landlines, whether copper or fiber. The local governments grant a natural monopoly to the companies that laydown the cable or fiber, I've never heard of someone else being able to laydown cable or fiber alongside what was already there, so there is no competition. You could go wireless but the FCC tightly controls the airwaves. And the standards they use date from 1934, hope I got the year right. But with the technology available now these regulations are wait out of date, and that's just how mass media wants to keep it. Check out those who want to operate their own radio stations, "pirate radio". If the FCC were to open up the airwaves there'd be much more competition.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Ivan Seidenberg, Chairman, CEO: ~ $19,400,000
Lawrence Babbio, Jr. Vice Chairman/President: ~ $8,600,000
Dennis Strigl EVP, Pres/CEO VZ Wireless: ~ $10,100,000
Willam Barr EVP/General Counsel: ~ $15,200,000
Doreen Tobin EVP/CFO: ~ $6,700,000
Source: SEC Def/14-A filing
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/732712/000
Hard to justify those salaries for a company operating at a loss, don't you think?
The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power. -- Daniel Webster
Verizon does not offer "naked DSL" in my area or at least they don't let the consumers know if they do. As a result I have a phone line that I do not need. One month a charge appeared on this line even though the line is not even connected to a phone. I called the "Fraud" hotline listed on the bill. Instead of taking me to a fraud department, it informed me that if I continued that I would be charged a fee. I gave up on that and complained via email. They said they could not remove the charge because it was from a third party company. So much for advocating for their own customers! I called the other company and the charge was removed. I asked Verizon to put a note or flag my account for fraud since I don't use my phone line. Therefore no charges should appear except for the monthly charges and fees that they are raping me for even though I don't use the phone. They refused to do anything and even said that they have no way of flagging for fraud. This is an obvious lie but I think it is because they refuse to train their call representatives.
In my area GTE used to service the phones. When Verizon bought them out is when everything went downhill. My uncle used to work for GTE and when Verizon took over they offered him an early retirement package. A lot of employees took this package. When Verizon was de-briefing these employees, they told them to file for unemployment. So of course my Uncle did. Then Verizon turned around and said that it was illegal for these employees to file and sued them! All of the employees had to give back any money that they had received. This bankrupted more then a few people. My uncle was fiscally responsible so he was fine but it was still an evil backstabbing thing to do!
So no, Verizon is not honorable. They are a poorly managed mess of a company that only looks out for profits at the expense of the consumer. They hold a monopoly and so are regulated yet they still get away with ripping off consumers on a daily basis. Did I mention that I hate Verizon? This DSL fee crap is just one more thing in a long list of reasons why I hate them. I would switch to cable Internet but that company is even more evil if you can believe it.