 | | This is absurd Let's get this charge reversed for him. | |
|
 |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  amungusPremium join:2004-11-26 America Reviews:
·KCH Cable
·AT&T DSL Service
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | | 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 | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  | | not a utility no 3rd party. | |
|
 |  |  |  Rekrul join:2007-04-21 Milford, CT Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  | | 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
| |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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 | |
|
 |  |  |  amungusPremium join:2004-11-26 America Reviews:
·KCH Cable
·AT&T DSL Service
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  |
 |  |  |  | | Re: This is absurd and then people would complain about having to call in to talk to someone about their usage. | |
|
 |  |  |  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. | |
|
 |  | | 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
| |
|
 GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 | 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. | |
|
 | | More money more money... Its 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? | |
|
 winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium 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 | |
|
 |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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. | |
|
 |  |  winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium 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 | |
|
 |  |  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. | |
|
 |  |  |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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 !!! | |
|
 |  |  | | 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! | |
|
 |  |  |  GonePremium join:2011-01-24 Fort Erie, ON kudos:3 Reviews:
·Start Communicat..
| 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. | |
|
 TwiztedZeroNine Zero Burp Nine SixPremium join:2011-03-31 Toronto, ON kudos:3 | Despicable! An absolute needless despicable vitriolic abomination! No ISP in Canada should be able to do this to a consumer EVER! | |
|
 | | 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 VailSon made my AvatarPremium join:2004-12-10 Lorton, VA kudos:2 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. | |
|
 |  elwoodbluesElwood BluesPremium join:2006-08-30 HarperLand | 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. | |
|
 |  lester join:2005-09-01 London, ON | 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? | |
|
 | | 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. | |
|
 RobIn Deo speramus.Premium join:2001-08-25 Kendall, FL kudos:3 | 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 | |
|
 |  See 21 replies to this post |
|
 Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FiOS
·voip.ms
| 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. | |
|
 |
 |  KrKHeavy Artillery For The Little GuyPremium join:2000-01-17 Tulsa, OK | Re: ??? Probably with autopay had a pretty good chunk in his bank account and since he knew the total was the same every month didn't open the bill or check it promptly. Probably what happened is his account was missing a ton of money and then he saw the massive charges.... -- "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini
| |
|
 |  | | If you read his original post in the forum he tried to get this resolved the moment he got that $800 Bill.
He was a long time customer that was trying to give Cogeco the chance to fix it... and as you can see it didn't work. | |
|
 |  OhNo join:2012-01-17 Burlington, ON | I didn't receive a couple bills or the notification of the change. The first time I noticed something was up was when I checked my bank statement. My issue it detailed more clearly in the forum. Please check it out. | |
|
 |  |  | | Re: ??? Did you acknowledge the warning e-mails that are sent notifying that you are getting close to 100% of your usage? | |
|
 |  |  winsyrstrifeRiver City BouncePremium join:2002-04-30 Brooklyn, NY | Thanks for clearing that up, it was one of my lingering questions about the whole situation. I did read your post, but not all of it. Will read through it thoroughly now.
Had I received a $900 bill for Internet services, after I stopped laughing or recovered from the blackout, I would have cancelled the service unless a supervisor (in a voice recorded conversation) assured me the charges were being taken care of. -- "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 | |
|
 | | 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. | |
|
 |  See 6 replies to this post |
|
 | | 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  | |
|
 |
 |  |
 |  |  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 | |
|
 | | 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! | |
|
 |  See 7 replies to this post |
|
 | | 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 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| 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. | |
|
 |  | | Re: it suck There should not be any UBB for wireline at all certified or not, just AUP! Canada is quite alone queen in the world imposing this.
I am really amazed Canadians are voiceless about beefing up consumer protection laws. | |
|
 |  |  XoX join:2003-08-19 Qc, Canada Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
1 edit | Re: it suck said by chgo_man99:There should not be any UBB for wireline at all certified or not, just AUP! Canada is quite alone queen in the world imposing this.
I am really amazed Canadians are voiceless about beefing up consumer protection laws. No offence but you should not talk since at least us we are still allowed to sue them compared to some country where a certain supreme court ruled that company can put into their contract a clause to prevent lawsuit against them by their customer and forcing them into arbitration....
btw if you read a bit more about what was going up north you should know that what we have right now is much better in a way that what some incumbent wanted in the first place. For some tier it even lowered the base price. | |
|
 |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  XoX join:2003-08-19 Qc, Canada Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
| Re: it suck said by chgo_man99:P**s off. Yeah right and you probably heard DOJ in the States allowed AT&T-T-Mobile merger. Certainly things in States never go in favor of consumers !!(sarcasm). Typical Canadian jealousy.
Again, UBB on wired broadband is wrong, even if it is not enforced on wholesale to 3rd parties. Especially with caps below 150gb for higher tiers.
When time Warner cable experimented in tests with low cap UBB in Texas modeled on Rogers or Bell, it created customers uproar and it quickly stopped. Ok they did not exactly blocked it but they ruled that company can put in their contract a clause that force people to go trough arbitration... No. 09893... I know it does not apply to every thing but i still think it's worse than UBB...
btw : I do not want to live south even if it was the last @#%@5 country in the world... | |
|
 |  |  |  |  |  2 edits | Re: it suck maybe not until freezing climate change up north
P.S. Class actions are nothing but a way for lawyers to make millions while the victims get pennies. Just look at the tobacco lawsuit. | |
|
 Simba7I 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 Reviews:
·TekSavvy DSL
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... | |
|
 |
|