said by lakino:
The only reason you're somewhat ok with this is because of the actual amount of $5.83. What if the FUSF fee was an additional $50.83/month, would you be ok with this then? So your monthly charge would be $44.95 + $50.83 FUSF, making the total $95 and change. Would you be ok with it then? I highly doubt it.
I dare you to quote where I said I was "ok" with the fee, whatever the price. In fact, if you look at my first post in this thread I said I didn't like it any more than the next guy! What I
have tried to do throughout this thread is to set the record straight and counter some of the emotional rhetoric.
said by lakino:
It doesn't matter what the amount, the price should have been included in the monthly fee.
So you're saying that you'd be ok with a bill for that $95 since it included the $50.83 FUSF instead of the $44.95+$5.83?
Would you be ok with a bill for $44.95 and a separate line item for $.05 for the FUSF?
This whole "it should be included IN the price of the service" argument baffles me. I truly don't see why it matters how it shows up on your bill. I don't see you and others up in arms because the FUSF fee for your phone service is not included in your phone line charge. What about the 911 Emergency Fee, the fee for the CA Relay Service and Communications Devices Fund, the number portability charge, the Universal Lifeline Telephone Service Surcharge, the State regulatory fee and the CA High Cost Fund Surcharge (both A and B)? These are all line items on your phone bill, but nobody seems to care that they are listed separately and not included in the amount listed for your phone line charge! Are the prices of those fees listed on the order page for new phone service?
said by lakino:
With all due respect Tony, you clearly are not informed enough about this subject matter to be posting all these definitive statements.
On the contrary, I've taken quite a bit of time to research this whole subject and I believe I am very well informed on it. If you think I have posted anything that isn't factual, please point it out and give me a reference to the true facts.
said by lakino:
As you admitted to d_l, you've not looked into this matter because you're not upgrading and couldn't due to being too far away from the CO/RT.
Actually, I said that to you first. I didn't look at the rate page every day and I asked you if there was ever a time when there wasn't the "*" to reference the FUSF footnote. Many people are claiming this information wasn't posted there. I still haven't seen anyone come back to say that this footnote was added after Feb 1st so I have to presume it's been there since the new rates went up on Feb 1.
said by lakino:
Where do you come off saying it's "clearly there now"? It's no where near being "clearly" there. If you go the order online route, NO WHERE on their order entry website does it state what the FUSF fee will be. It does say there will be a FUSF fee charged, but does NOT tell you how much the fee will be.
And I stand by that statement. You seem to read only what you want to read. Read the two sentences after the part you quoted. See where I said what was "clearly there" was the
reference to the fee, the "*" pointing to the FUSF footnote? I even acknowledged that while they told us that there was a fee, no amount is listed.