how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
|
| reply to hilsonmota
Re: [BroadVoice] BroadVoice SCAM Unlimited phone call Most VoIP Providers have a limit on unlimited residential whether it is published or not.
Furthermore most evry VoIP providers TOS that I have read through has had a statement to the effect that they reserve the right to change rate plans or deny services to any account the see deem as losing money (and they alone).
I know if I had a client that was using over 2000 minutes for three months consecutively, I would say that was clearly being used for business use, chatty teenagers or not!
What you call Unlimited is UNLIMITED RESIDENTIAL. If you want to use volume, they are right to protect their revenue and charge you for business service.
Let us assiume that they terminate at 1 cent per minute and you pay the, 20 dollars a month. By using 2000 minutes per month, you have taken them to a point of losing money, as they also have costs associated for instance with your incoming number.
If you dont like it, try using you local telephone service for the same calls and see what that costs you.
All you will do by using that kind of volume is increase the costs for all users.
I think you would find similar attitudes with every carrier such as Vonage, Lingo, or Packet 8. | |
| Re: [BroadVoice] BroadVoice SCAM Unlimited phone c said by markosjal:I know if I had a client that was using over 2000 minutes for three months consecutively, I would say that was clearly being used for business use, chatty teenagers or not! You might say that, but it doesn't mean its true!
said by markosjal:What you call Unlimited is UNLIMITED RESIDENTIAL. Exactly. It is UNLIMITED as long as the calls are RESIDENTIAL in nature!
Chatty teenagers is RESIDENTIAL use. Chatting with your boyfriend/girlfriend every evening for several hours is RESIDENTIAL use. Even being "retired", and thereby having the time to talk to friends/family all day is RESIDENTIAL use!
If a company selling service doesn't actually want to honor the "UNLIMITED" part of their marketing, then they need to change their marketing! For example, there is nothing preventing a business from setting a specific number of minutes, and advertising that fact (for example, selling a plan that allows up to 1500min/month for a fixed price). Cell companies do it all the time, for example.
But it is IMHO "false advertising" to market an "UNLIMITED residential" service, and then determine solely based upon the number of minutes used that the service wasn't used for "residential" purposes! Because there are many LEGITIMATE reasons why a RESIDENTIAL user might use that many minutes (or more)!
Now, if you want to set a "threshold" of of x minutes/month (for example 2000) setting off an internal "investigation" fine. I have no problem with a business cross-checking for "fraud" (in this case, checking for customers that buy residential service, and then use it to run a small business). But as long as the investigation shows that it was likely true "residential use", than the customer should continue to get that service AT THE AGREED UPON PRICE even if/when they are routinely using 5000+ minutes/month!
said by markosjal:If you want to use volume, they are right to protect their revenue and charge you for business service. ONLY IF they are upfront about the fact that residential users don't have UNLIMITED service (subject to the calls really being "residential" in nature).
But when they "protect their revenue" by blindly "back-billing" a customer for "business service" AFTER advertising "UNLIMITED residential" service (which most reasonable people would interpret as service they can use as much as they want, provided the calls are "residential" in nature), then they have stepped "over the line" IMHO.
NOTE: "Protecting your revenue" is not always legally permitted, when you have already made promises of specific service for an agreed upon price. As just one obvious example, an "insurance company" takes "losses" every time a major claim is filed. But if the claim is valid, than the insurance company has to "pay up" (take the loss of money), instead of "protecting their revenue" by denying a valid claim. Yes, the insurance company is allowed to "investigate" what is going on, and they are even allowed to deny the claim if/when there was fraud involved, but they can't just deny the claim to "protect their revenue"!
said by markosjal:Let us assiume that they terminate at 1 cent per minute and you pay the, 20 dollars a month. By using 2000 minutes per month, you have taken them to a point of losing money, as they also have costs associated for instance with your incoming number. Could be.
But if that's a problem, then they need to change their marketing so that they are no longer PROMISING something that is too costly to deliver. But to PROMISE one thing, and then not deliver, is not considered acceptable business behavior!
said by markosjal:If you dont like it, try using you local telephone service for the same calls and see what that costs you. My "unlimited local" service, is truly "unlimited" (as long as I use it in the agreed upon "local" manor). I have NEVER been hassled by my telco for the number of inbound calls I've been on the phone under that plan. If the call is inbound, I have it as part of my "unlimited" service. At the same time, if the call is outbound (within the "local region" that I'm allowed to make "unlimited" calls in), then the call is still free.
For that matter, I keep my "unlimited" DSL line up 24/7 (my router forces the line to stay active). Does that mean that I might be using more internet than someone who uses the "connect when needed" software that came with my BroadBand service? You bet! But I still haven't heard a "peep" out of CentryTel (both my POTS telco, and my ISP) about me using my "unlimited" DSL line as "unlimited". And you know why? Because I'm simply more of a "heavy user" of the service that they agreed to sell me for a specific price!
The point is, if you promise "unlimited", you need to prepare to deliver that. If that means that some users will be "heavy users", you need to factor that into your cost estimates (or change your marketing). But it is NOT OK to market "unlimited" and then harass "heavy users" that are legitimately using your "unlimited" service!
said by markosjal:I think you would find similar attitudes with every carrier such as Vonage, Lingo, or Packet 8. No.
That issue has been discussed in these forums in the past. And with most of the carriers that it came up with, they admitted that they had a specific (private) minute threshold where they would "investigate" (look at the call log pattern, call the customer and ask, etc) if the calls were still "residential" in nature. But as long as the investigation showed that the calls were "residential", they would "eat the loss" (on that specific customer), and continue to offer them their agreed upon "unlimited residential" service. | | |
|
 SliderNCMaster Of DisasterPremium
join:2002-12-12
Cornelius, NC | reply to markosjal
I think a lot of it depends on how you view unlimited residential calling and how they determine it. I'm sure their engineers run some queries to see when, where and how long you are calling. The point of the matter is, it is not that hard to use 2000 minutes these days of phone time, especially with teenagers, calling family and friends, and just general local use. I know last month on Sunrocket, I used close to 1500 minutes. My wife and I are both not home between the hours of 7:30am-6:30pm either. All of our calls happen from 7:00PM until 2:00AM most of the time, except for weekends when we call at various times.
Rizzo has the right idea with his first choice. Prove that he is not a residential customer, dispute the charges, leave Broadvoice and find another company to use. Broadvoice was probably losing money on him due to his family calling Brazil often and for long periods of time, whether during business hours or not.
The fact of the matter is, for those companies who advertise and sell an "Unlimited Residential Plan", and then in the ToS state that you are limited to "so many minutes" per month, it is false advertising and illegal. If it's a limited plan, come out and say it. I bet you no one would really care. If they said you get 2500 minutes for 19.99/month, I'm sure they'd still get people to sign up.
--
I'll believe that when my sh!t turns purple and smells like rainbow sherbet.
My LiveJournal | |
| reply to markosjal
said by markosjal:If you dont like it, try using you local telephone service for the same calls and see what that costs you. Back in my dial-up days, I had unlimited dial-up. The players:
1) My ISP. They marketed it as unlimited.
2) My Telco. I paid 5 cents per call, no matter the duration... 1 second or 2 months.
3) Me. Who was always doing "something" online.
The results:
1) They never complained. I paid them my $25 a month.
2) They never complained. I did indeed have a phone call last 2 months.
3) I never complained. I paid my telco and my ISP.
The point is, whenever you buy something, you weigh the plusses and minusses. Some things I have noticed:
Why do I not lease a car? I put on over 20,000 miles a year on it. By buying, I can say I get unlimited mileage. When you lease a car, they tell you the "limit".
My cell phone has unlimited nights and weekends. Peak minutes are "limited" to 450. I know the limit.
"Free refills" at a restaurant means "more than one" compared to a restaurant that says "Limit 1 refill"
All-U-Can eat restaurants. They have no limit, in theory. I ate at a sushi buffet for 3 hours and no one complained.
In the end, a business needs to weigh the people who will take advantage of the system offered to them implemented; and those that barely use it. For every one of me in all these circumstances, there are those who are on the other side of the spectrum -- outliers in statistical terms.
We as consumers didn't come up with their pricing scheme: They did, and they have a legal obligation to stick by it.
-m | |
| To reprise (and condense) some comments I made in a similar thread many months ago:
The thing to consider is, first, what does a company say in their advertising? If, for example, they have a residential plan and they use the word UNLIMITED in their advertising, then if they are not really offering UNLIMITED service it is false advertising and consumer fraud, and they are lying to potential customers in their advertising. We can always hope that companies that do this will soon be on the receiving end of actions instituted by the Federal Trade Commission and/or the attorney generals of the various states.
The word unlimited has a very specific meaning. If it were an ambiguous word or phrase, like "a real bargain compared to other services", then the company's terms of service could clarify the offer. But when a word with a very specific and clear meaning is used in advertising, then the fine print cannot take away what the large print promises.
As another poster pointed out in an earlier thread, when there is an ambiguity in a legal contract (and in a court, the advertising often IS considered part of the contract, especially in consumer matters), the ambiguity is usually resolved in such a way as to favor the person who did not participate in the creation of the contract (the consumer).
No one disputes that companies have a right to verify that a customer really is using a residential service for residential purposes. But, a provision buried in the Terms of Service may not necessarily override what is boldly proclaimed in advertising. A long time ago in this country, companies used to promise the moon in advertising and then take it all back in the fine print, and that is why various truth-in-advertising and other consumer protection laws were passed. This does NOT give a customer the right to screw the company by signing up for a residential plan and then using it to run a home-based telemarketing operation, but when the calls really are residential in nature then if the company has advertised "unlimited" service and then tries to pull the sort of things that have been described here, my advice would to be to contact your state's Attorney General post haste.
For those that like to skim messages and jump to conclusions, please note that I said "contact your state's Attorney General", NOT "contact an attorney." Realistically, no one is suggesting that an individual file a lawsuit, it simply would not be worth the time and expense, and in most cases you wouldn't need to because you can get the credit card charges reversed. However, STATE attorney generals will often file lawsuits on behalf of all the consumers in a state and these are very often complaint-driven. In other words, if you and 50 or 100 other people contact your state's AG about the same company, he or she may actually go after that company. If it were me, I would personally send my complaint to the AG's office with a copy to the Federal Trade Commission (the FTC complaint can be filed through a web-based complaint form).
On the rare occasion that I have had to contact my state's AG office regarding a consumer dispute, it has always generated some action. Normally the first thing that happens is that a letter is sent to the business in question outlining the complaint, and the business has the opportunity to correct the problem (and respond to the AG's office explaining how they corrected the problem). If they do correct the problem and the customer is happy, it goes into the file associated with that business at the AG's office but otherwise nothing is shouted from the rooftops. As long as the person who brought the complaint is satisfied, that is pretty much the end of it. If there's a serious violation of law and the company admits to it I think there is sometimes a small fine levied, but nothing near what would be levied if the company refuses to acknowledge or correct the problem.
Some folks try to say that a company can't offer truly unlimited service and survive. Well if they can't, then they shouldn't be advertising it, but the point is that they are playing the averages, just like an all-you-can-eat restaurant. My comments from earlier this year expand on those thoughts.
And yes, I did selectively cut and paste a high percentage of the text in this message from several other messages I had previously written a while back. Why re-type when you want to say the same thing you said months ago, particularly at 2:20 in the morning?  | |
iSEPIC
join:2001-04-17
Las Vegas, NV | reply to markosjal
BS - if its advertised as unlimited, then you should get that, doesn't matter if they are "banking" on most people will pay for unlimited and only make 200 mins worth of calls, then one customer does indeed go over what they were "banking" on... they need to sell 2500 min plans, and be done with it. Nuff said. | |
|
