Slashdot Mirror


Verizon Backtracks On $2 Convenience Fee

Velcroman1 writes with a followup to yesterday's news that Verizon would be implementing a $2 'convenience fee' for certain online and phone-based bill payments. In addition to dealing with outrage from customers, Verizon also felt resistance from the Federal Communications Commission, who decided they would investigate the matter. Today, in a brief press release, Verizon announced that they've canceled their plans for the new fee in response to customer feedback.

6 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Don't you love asshats by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Really it was just a thinly veiled attempt to force customers onto their auto-pay system because if you switched to auto-pay they waived the fee.

  2. And... by Pharmboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    ...they will no doubt try to make themselves looks a hero for not screwing us over by adding that charge. Yes, us. I was already looking at other carriers, only for the principle of charging us more for costing them less.

    This is as bad as when the phone company charged $4 a month for "touch tone service" when it actually costs them less to provide it than to deal with pulse dialing.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
    1. Re:And... by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Informative

      This is as bad as when the phone company charged $4 a month for "touch tone service" when it actually costs them less to provide it than to deal with pulse dialing.

      Back when this was a regular charge, it did cost more to provide touch tone dialing. They had to add the DTMF-to-pulse decoders to existing systems. About the time that the old step-by-step hardware was replaced by something more modern (crossbar) and the pulse decoding became the more expensive part, the special charge for DTMF was removed.

  3. Not the first time they've pulled this shit by ArchieBunker · · Score: 4, Informative

    Years ago when the FUSF telecom fee expired (to pay for the 1898 Spanish American War) Verizon decided to introduce a new fee that somehow just randomly was the same value as the old federal fee. They backed down pretty quick once the feds got involved but for christ sakes like John Stewart said "BE A PERSON".

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  4. Re:Don't you love asshats by mysidia · · Score: 4, Informative

    you are permitted to charge a fee for a credit transaction

    You can charge lots of fees, but you may not charge a fee for using a credit card, or you would be in violation of Visa and Mastercard guidelines, and subject to losing your privilege of processing MC/Visa, if your violation were reported by your customers:

    From Mastercard credit card acceptance guidelines

    Charges to cardholders. A merchant may not directly or indirectly require a cardholder to pay a surcharge or any part of the merchant processing fees charged in connection with a transaction. However, fees are allowable if they are charged regardless of the form of the payment, and merchants can provide a cash discount.

    Minimum/maximum transaction amount prohibited. A merchant may not require, or indicate that it requires, a minimum or maximum transaction amount in order to accept a valid and properly presented MasterCard.

  5. Re:Don't you love asshats by Fnord666 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It seems you're correct. If that's the case, there are literally hundreds of convenience stores and gas stations around here that are violating their merchant agreements. Maybe I ought to make a weekend event out of reporting as many of them as I can to VISA...

    I ask the merchant if they are allowed to charge a % fee for using a credit card. When they say that they can, get them to itemize it on the bill of sale. Once you have that, dispute the fee with your credit card company and get them to reverse that part of the transaction. Worked every time so far.

    --
    'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables