dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2012-01-27 12:13:15: Back in April of 2009, Canadian cable operator Cogeco foisted metered billing on the back of their customers, applying caps as low as 10GB per month and overages as high as $2.50 a gigabyte on top of existing tiers. ..

page: 1 · 2 · next

jono181

join:2004-06-05
Toronto, ON

This is absurd

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: This is absurd

said by jono181:

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

There is no $50 maximum on the 30 and 50Mbit plans. Cogeco announced this. It's a legitimate charge as far as Cogeco is concerned.

He needs to get the media involved. This kind of crap is insane.
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·KCH Cable

Re: This is absurd

I question the use of the word "legitimate" here
No reason for this. It most definitely doesn't cost the carrier that much to transport the data on the customer's behalf..

Less than 1TB/mo? Come on. How much harm is this in the grand scheme of things? Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth? Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

I hope the customer gets this sorted out. Totally insane to be charged this much for using their service as what will CERTAINLY (and already, quite obviously IS), 'ordinary use.'

ISPs need to wake up to this. It's not going backwards anytime soon, no matter how much they would like to wish for it.

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: This is absurd

said by amungus:

I question the use of the word "legitimate" here

It's legitimate in the sense that this isn't a billing error. They changed their terms as of October 1st to have no $50 maximum on Ultimate 30 and Ultimate 50, so Karl is a bit mixed up in how he worded the original article. My letter, as posted in the article, was for the 14Mbit package which increased from $30 to $50.

As for being legitimate as far as business practices go, fuck no. They're worse than even Bell Canada and Videotron, which would make them the worst ISP in all of Canada as far as UBB goes.

CableConvert
Premium
join:2003-12-05
Atlanta, GA

Re: This is absurd

I think the other question is the reliability of the meter itself. Who knows if it is correct. There is no independent 3rd party monitoring it

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: This is absurd

said by CableConvert:

I think the other question is the reliability of the meter itself. Who knows if it is correct. There is no independent 3rd party monitoring it

Exactly. I'm surprised this hasn't yet gone to court.
25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH
not a utility no 3rd party.
Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT
said by amungus:

Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth?

No, they're not. ISPs believe that you should only use the bandwidth they give you in short bursts, so that your connection is idle 75% of the time.

said by amungus:

Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

Because they can charge more for faster speeds. They sucker people in with the promise of fast speeds and then cap the usage to prevent people from truly using it. Or they tack on overage charges knowing that people will quickly burn through their monthly allowance and start racking up extra fees.
Warez_Zealot

join:2006-04-19
Vancouver

Re: This is absurd

said by Rekrul:

said by amungus:

Is the customer not supposed to use their bandwidth?

No, they're not. ISPs believe that you should only use the bandwidth they give you in short bursts, so that your connection is idle 75% of the time.

said by amungus:

Why have a "fast" internet that is practically neutered and unavailable to use?

Because they can charge more for faster speeds. They sucker people in with the promise of fast speeds and then cap the usage to prevent people from truly using it. Or they tack on overage charges knowing that people will quickly burn through their monthly allowance and start racking up extra fees.

Yeah, it's a huge conflict of interest. They can't be the a service provider and own the infrastructure... They want you to keep spending $200/mo on all your services, so it's in their interest to keep your inet bill as high as possible to make up for the lost revenue in all the cable services you don't have but are downloading instead. :/

Anyhow, Canadian ISP's are sketch... My uncle upgraded to Shaw/Mountain Cable Broadband 100. It was all honky-dory until they downgraded his modem to broadband 50.

Luckily I noticed, cause they were going to charge him for bb 100, for the bb50 speeds and bit cap. So that means it was manually provisioned improperly after the upgrade for no reason aside to save Shaw capacity at the bb 100 charge.

These guys are crooks, and it's time the CRTC bust up all these ISP's and make infrastructure and service providers two separate autonomous entities.
--
"You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who says it."-Malcolm X


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: This is absurd

said by Warez_Zealot:

Anyhow, Canadian ISP's are sketch... My uncle upgraded to Shaw/Mountain Cable Broadband 100. It was all honky-dory until they downgraded his modem to broadband 50.

It's worth noting that Shaw 50Mbit service, even at their 100Mbit prices, is still faster and more affordable than anything Cogeco even comes close to offering.

elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
no kidding it would only take 24 hours at 50Mbps to blow though 700GB not sure what the cap is in the frist place but if its about he same your looking at 48 hours a month at full speed to rack up a bill like that

that just under 2 hours a day of down loading EASY to hit if your streaming movies and TV

btw at 30Mbps 125GB only takes 11 hours of use you could kill that in a week with a netflix account
at 50 it only takes 6 hours
WTF is the point of speeds like that if your going to blow through it in one night
amungus
Premium
join:2004-11-26
America
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·KCH Cable

Re: This is absurd

EXACTLY the metrics that 'they' (any ISP with or considering caps) do NOT want YOU to consider at all.

When placed into a simple set of terms like this, anyone can so easily see how much crap this is that it just isn't funny.

This entire notion of capping needs to be more seriously addressed. Restricting one's use of internet in such a manner is flat out foul.

J E F F
Whatta Ya Think About Dat?
Premium
join:2004-04-01
Kitchener, ON
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Rogers Portable ..
Cogeco makes one appreciate Rogers. That's insane.

Cogeco either needs to cut people off or call them if they are going to far above.
--
If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough. - Albert Einstein
25139889

join:2011-10-25
Toledo, OH

Re: This is absurd

and then people would complain about having to call in to talk to someone about their usage.

urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
said by J E F F:

Cogeco either needs to cut people off or call them if they are going to far above.

Yea, they originally did that when they tested the waters for bandwidth... then they decided that charging people to download was a lucrative market, and instituted these excessive download fees.
Warez_Zealot

join:2006-04-19
Vancouver
said by jono181:

Let's get this charge reversed for him.

Man, I worked for this dirt bag company back in the early 2000's in the store front. They had much more class back then. I worked part time during college, and made a decent amount in commissions.

Now they're pulling this kind of crap like a second rate company.. How they have fallen... I bet they don't even pay the store front sales agents commissions anymore..

I wish their poor customers success, cause this is beyond absurd.
--
"You're not supposed to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who says it."-Malcolm X


Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Only a matter of time

When I got the letter back in the late summer and saw that they were eliminating the $50 fee, I knew it was only a matter of time before this happened. Now it has.
flycuban

join:2005-04-25
Homestead, FL

More money more money...

It’s all about making more money year after year. Seems that the new way of companies. With salaries not going anywhere, do they really expect people to keep paying for higher prices?

winsyrstrife
River City Bounce
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY

Who is responsible

If Cogeco says they sent the bill, but the users says they never received it?

On a side note, the first bill was $891, If I understand correctly. Did the user continue his service while the overage charge was still active? I'm trying to figure out why the service wasn't cancelled / suspended after an $891 charge was incurred on the auto-payment account.
--
"Suddenly everything is fainting, falling from a broken ladder's rung. There's a jolt exhilarating from the phone I'm holding...
I hear the words of what I'll become, how eager the hands that reach for love."
- Blind Melon - New Life

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: Who is responsible

I think the bigger question is why didn't Cogeco call him to tell him the metre had ran up so high. Cell phone companies do it for roaming fees and overages. If the metre has no upper limit, Cogeco should be obliged to do the same.

I really hope this guy calls up CTV (Citytv won't touched it - owned by Rogers after all) or the Toronto Star and gets them to run with it. This sort of stuff is insane.

winsyrstrife
River City Bounce
Premium
join:2002-04-30
Brooklyn, NY

Re: Who is responsible

Funny I was just about to mention similar situations with cell phone companies. I thought the problem was that cell phone companies DO NOT contact the customer when they are incurring high overages. Perhaps the situation is different in Canada?

It would be very courteous of Cogeco to have called the customer when his account showed highly irregular expenses incurred. Courtesy isn't so much a priority these days...it's all about legal responsibility now, which is why Cogeco is insisting they sent the customer a letter.

If this customer receives full/nearly full reversal of the costs incurred, does this mean everyone should receive similar treatment if they receive bill with similar costs? I realize it may seem like I'm in favor of Cogeco, when I am not whatsoever. I am trying to find a balance between both sides, if such a thing is possible.
--
"Suddenly everything is fainting, falling from a broken ladder's rung. There's a jolt exhilarating from the phone I'm holding...
I hear the words of what I'll become, how eager the hands that reach for love."
- Blind Melon - New Life

urbanriot
Premium
join:2004-10-18
Canada
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Cogeco Cable
said by Gone:

I think the bigger question is why didn't Cogeco call him to tell him the metre had ran up so high.

Cogeco would make less money if they warned innocent people that had no idea these charges were in effect.

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: Who is responsible

said by urbanriot:

Cogeco would make less money if they warned innocent people that had no idea these charges were in effect.

ding ding ding ding ding !!!

drjp81

join:2006-01-09
canada
said by Gone:

I think the bigger question is why didn't Cogeco call him to tell him the metre had ran up so high. Cell phone companies do it for roaming fees and overages. If the metre has no upper limit, Cogeco should be obliged to do the same.

I really hope this guy calls up CTV (Citytv won't touched it - owned by Rogers after all) or the Toronto Star and gets them to run with it. This sort of stuff is insane.

CTV is owned by bell. They surely have similar plans down the pipe...
--
Cheers!

Gone
Premium
join:2011-01-24
Fort Erie, ON
kudos:4

Re: Who is responsible

said by drjp81:

CTV is owned by bell. They surely have similar plans down the pipe...

Being owned by Bell would mean that they would love to make their competition look horrid.

TwiztedZero
Nine Zero Burp Nine Six
Premium
join:2011-03-31
Toronto, ON
kudos:5

Despicable!

An absolute needless despicable vitriolic abomination!
No ISP in Canada should be able to do this to a consumer EVER!

Chucks Truck

@teksavvy.com

The Prime Minister has to do something

Great news for people with unsecured wireless. It's almost like magic something that costs Cogeco next to nothing or less than a dime could cost someone $2,500.00. Something should also be done about completely ridding Canada of the CRTC and set up an independent body for the good of the public.

Noah Vail
Son made my Avatar
Premium
join:2004-12-10
Lorton, VA
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Bright House

The Regulator

What regulates Cogeco. Is it the CRTC?

and

America is portrayed by a few Canadians as being a nation corrupted by business. I guess the implied solution is a more powerful government.
The stories I read don't support that ideology.

Neither gov nor corp is a reliable friend to us.
Perhaps the best we can hope for is that they are at each others throat; and that we are free of them for a while.
--
Adopting other people's animosity is The New Stupid.

elwoodblues
Elwood Blues
Premium
join:2006-08-30
Somewhere in
kudos:2

Re: The Regulator

The CRTC allowed the telco's to implement economic ITMP's (Internet Traffic Management Programs) without any parameters and of course the Telco's took full advantage of this.

lester2

join:2005-09-01
London, ON

1 recommendation

Thanks to government regulation my ISP can exist and offer unlimited. That being said I'm still jealous of Americans with FIOS. Government and corporations are usually one in the same when it comes to telecom in any country. I hate most of the CRTC decisions but key decisions by them have given me the option for unlimited. Would our internet be better without regulation?... I'm really not sure. In Sweden it seems to work... North America not so much.
BiggA

join:2005-11-23
EARTH

Overages

Should always be capped out at 150% of the cost of unlimited. If AOL did it back in the day when people were trying up individual phone lines, why can't they do it now with networks 1000x as fast?

franknalco

join:2005-01-27
Littleton, CO

Monopolies seldom lose

It is this kind of nonsense that leads me to conclude that all the hoopla over "cord cutters" is dubious. In the final analysis, both Hollywood and these cable/broadband providers are going to get their money - either with ridiculous programming packages, or with ridiculous licensing and bandwidth fees. The notion that you can alter your delivery method but remain faithful to the two monopolies (Hollywood on the one hand and service delivery providers on the other) and somehow "win" is ludicrous. CableTV may one day seem cheap when compared to metered billing broadband + rising licensing fees at Netflix/Hulu/whomever. When you fight monopolies, monopolies seldom lose. On the contrary, they often roll with the punches and come out ahead in the end.

Rob
In Deo speramus.
Premium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Comcast

The answer to the problem..

Instead of using the word "socked", let's start using the word "raped". If the MSM and everyone used the term "raped", things would quickly change.

Example:

"AT&T socks customer on international data roaming charges"

"AT&T rapes customer on international data roaming charges"
--
CheckSite.us | YourIP.us | Reverseip.us

•••••••••••••••••••••
elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY

But not unusual

I just looked. If I happen to direct dial my inlaws in canada w/ my verizon cell they will charge me $.50/min, whereas if I do it through GV its $0. So in fact that is much more obnoxious than this charge. When I roam in Canada $69c/min.

What do I do: 1. I use GV 2. I use a prepaid SIM and redirect my GV to the phone while I travel there.

I will vouch that all of my family is scared to use the internet for video because they are not really sure how doing such will impact them, so they dont. I caught my father-in-laws tenant piggybacking on the unsecured Bhell 2wire and closed that down, after seeing 100GB of data streaming after he changed from Rogers, so that is real too. These yoys are not securing their WAP, and eventually--like europe--will make the end user responsible.

While I agree 700 GB probably cost them $7 in transit fees, this is what they setup to make money. Network subscription is their problem. If they went to docsis 3 and didnt upgrade the switches then they are just being cheap and laughing to the bank. (artificial scarcity) The margins while still fat in cable are being squeezed (or maintaining), while telecom/HSI costs are going down. So it is natural in a natural (or not) monopoly for them to take advantage of this situation.

Canada is even worse than the US (for now) because the biggies own not only the infrastructure, they own sports teams, sports channels, regular channels, wireless companies, newspapers, magazines, almost everything. It's a consolidated supply chain. Now I have made a killing on Rogers and BCE stock, so I am not complaining.

Natural monpolistic behavior is to raise rates on the most profitable items where there is minimal competition, especially when natural rates are going down. You can see this will At&T following Verizon to the top, and I'm sure Sprint will have to cave sooner or later. Tmobile will lag and may just go to LTE advanced after the pricing goes down, because HSPA+ is fast enough for now.

I know you guys dont fins this shocking. We have all seen the $5000 cell phone bills, however unlike the US in Canada they tell you to f**k off. It is a reminder in how bad the customer is treated over there....You can persist though.

The fact that the CRTC is a telecom rotation doesnt help, and the fact that UBB should come with some sort of ACCURATE meter sorta like petrol, if in fact consumption is even tied to cost which it is not.

Funnily enough UBB doesnt even portray actual carrier costs...Bandwidth and network switching do... You can see Teksavvy allowing unlimited during night hours.

swintec
Premium,VIP
join:2003-12-19
Alfred, ME
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·VoicePulse
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·RapidVPS

???

His first bill showed $800+ due and he didnt raise this issue then, only to get a bill for $2,000+? Wouldnt an $800 bill tip people off to something being screwy? If the first bill didnt grab his attention, I would think it would be pretty easy for him to overlook a simple notice stating no max overages anymore.
--
Usenet Block Accounts | Unlimited Accounts

•••••

Corehhi

join:2002-01-28
Bluffton, SC

Main reason I don't do auto withdrawal

I will not have things automatically deducted from my account for this reason. These guys can take every penny in your account before you know it and good luck getting it back.

••••••
Gruesome

join:2007-10-18
Milton, ON

You guys need to

cut them some slack, they're still trying to pay for their failed business venture in the acquisition of Cabovisão in Portugal
Their execs need a raise to inspire them to do better

05381257

join:2011-05-03

1 recommendation

Canada....

LOLz...

dillyhammer
START me up
Premium
join:2010-01-09
Scarborough, ON
kudos:10
Reviews:
·WIND Mobile
·Start Communicat..

Re: Canada....

said by 05381257:

LOLz...

We are painfully aware. A glimpse into your future perhaps? Bet on it.

Mike
--
Cogeco - The New UBB Devil
Doonz

join:2010-11-27
Beaumont, AB

Re: Canada....

I Honestly feel bad for you guys out east (Move to the west we need more workers!!!!)

Dec 2011 Download 1.41 TB Upload 138.34 GB Total 1.54 TB

All for 120 a month in Shaw land

ExMainttech

@cgocable.net

wow

Well when I worked there and we had a meeting on all of this and all of us in the one dept voiced our opinions on this and the upper hands more or less told us they didn't care and said they dropped the overage caps in Portugall because of competition and public rage. I am not totally against caps but this is rather pathetic....I bet Bell is smiling all over this latest article.

I think I am done supporting them anymore, I haven't been there in almost 2 years and a recent email I got from HR regarding a job posting, it upset me along with a nagging phone call from Billing over putting our payment on the wrong account number, they cleared it up with no major issues however the tone on the phone was uncalled for.
Rekrul

join:2007-04-21
Milford, CT

Impossible!

To be clear the user was consuming a lot of bandwidth, one month clocking in over 689 GB of overages

Clearly there has some kind of mistake here. We all know that the average user uses less than 250GB a month!

•••••••
fathamburger

join:2010-07-16
North York, ON

we'll also try and help

Wrote this up again aimed at more of an international audience (with DSLR mentions and credits) here.

»www.worldbroadbandfoundation.org/node/246

Agreed. We need to help kill this if we can

XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada

it suck

ouch...

Since they want to bill us like Hydro and the water, they should have the same lay apply to them...

I mean i am with TSI and thanks god they to do bother to much with the usage because their meter suck a lot when it work.

If an ISP want to bill customer by the usage they should have the tool used be certified like the gaz, hydro, water meter are. That apply to Bell who want to charge wholesaler by the usage.

•••••

Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

WTH?

Oh, I know I'd be calling my ISP and chewing some ass off if I received a bill like that. Hell, I'd even walk to the corporate office and chew it off in person.

How freakin' hard is it to implement an actual working meter? Not that hard, honestly. Everyone makes it sound so difficult.. IT'S NOT.

All you need is a Cacti (or whatever you'd like) server monitoring a specific CMTS port and/or CMMAC address and how much traffic that said CMMAC address is transferring. They can do 5min intervals to accurately graph how much said user is using and if the total goes above X amount transferred, they get an email telling them that they're about to go over their threshold.

For thousands of users, I'd suggest a rather high powered server (or servers) to keep up with the SNMP requests and graphs. Still, not that hard.
--
Bresnan 30M/5M | CenturyLink 5M/896K
MyWS[PnmIIX3@3.3G,8G RAM,500G+1.5T+2T HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[A64@2G,2G RAM,120G HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1G,1G RAM,18G HDD,Allied Telesyn AT2560FX,2xDigital QP DE504,Compaq DP NC3131,2xSun QP GigaSwift, SMC 8432BTA, Gentoo]

XoX

join:2003-08-19
Qc, Canada

2 edits

Re: WTH?

said by Simba7:

Oh, I know I'd be calling my ISP and chewing some ass off if I received a bill like that. Hell, I'd even walk to the corporate office and chew it off in person.

How freakin' hard is it to implement an actual working meter? Not that hard, honestly. Everyone makes it sound so difficult.. IT'S NOT.

All you need is a Cacti (or whatever you'd like) server monitoring a specific CMTS port and/or CMMAC address and how much traffic that said CMMAC address is transferring. They can do 5min intervals to accurately graph how much said user is using and if the total goes above X amount transferred, they get an email telling them that they're about to go over their threshold.

For thousands of users, I'd suggest a rather high powered server (or servers) to keep up with the SNMP requests and graphs. Still, not that hard.

The trouble is not really the meter by itself because Cogeco has one (when it work) but it's more about informing the customer.

Some company do not try very hard to inform their user of any change that might get their user billed for a lot more because they make money on that. I mean if they really wanted to inform their customer they would could lose lots of money because people would take better look at what they are doing to prevent going over the limit and they do not want that.

They also do not want to put in place a protection to prevent ridiculous bills because they make lots of money on it. I mean it's the same thing with cell phone... Geez the customer reached 400% of is normal bills, should we inform them... No let wait and see if the customer get mad about it because if not, more money for us...

My isp is one of them. With the incoming they are supposed to inform us the customer about it but they only used an email to warn us but i never got it. I found about the change because i read this forum but most of their customer do not come here. If i never came here, i would have never found out until i got hit by the new bill and i am pretty sure a lots of people will only be informed that way.

Why because they did not try that much to inform us...
I mean they could have posted a warning on the front page of their web site, add some info with the bill i got this month or into my account profile but no... Nothing, just a fucking email send to god only know where and the info they posted here... Wait i forgot about the link they posted on the web page that is describing their internet plan... Geez great help for current customer...