Verizon's 'Tax Recovery Fee'The addition of 'unfees' continues ( old news - 10:03AM Friday Jan 21 2005) tags: prices · telcoTipped by Karl Bode  Verizon users received an e-mail this week alerting them they'd be forced to pay a new "Tax Recovery Fee" for their DSL lines. "This is not a tax charged directly to Verizon Online's customers," the e-mail informs users, "but the partial recovery of tax that Verizon Online must pay when they purchase the DSL circuit from the telephone company." ... Verizon Online and Verizon are technically separate entities, but the new fee smells foul all the same. Like the regulatory recovery fees we've frequently discussed, it appears Verizon is once again disguising rate hikes as "fees", and including the cost of doing business "below the line". The new fee will begin showing up on customer bills in February, and will be eliminated with the passage of the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act, which as we've discussed will bar the taxation of internet access. The amount users will pay varies from state to state, with some hikes (like Washington D.C.) as high as 11%. We include the e-mail below for your perusal: Dear Valued Verizon Online DSL Member,
Thank you for choosing Verizon Online DSL as your Internet service provider.
Please note, starting February 20, 2005, you will begin seeing a monthly Tax Recovery Fee on your DSL service bill. This is not a tax charged directly to Verizon Online's customers, but the partial recovery of tax that Verizon Online must pay when they purchase the DSL circuit from the telephone company.
This fee will be eliminated after the recently passed expansion of the Internet Tax Nondiscrimination Act becomes effective in November 2005 until November 2007. Since this is not a direct tax but is the recovery of a tax paid by Verizon Online, there are no applicable exemptions. More information is available online at www.verizon.net/myaccount.
We appreciate and value your business. Discussion of the new fee can be found in our Verizon forum. Also of note: Speakeasy users discuss how their ISP is raising their "Federal Regulatory Fee".
Related:- Verizon To Offer $5 Landline Service
- Tuesday Evening Links
- Windstream: 24Mbps FTTH For $45
- AT&T Announces U-Verse Enhancements
- Verizon Announces New FiOS Tiers, Promotions
- Qwest Latest To Offer Netbooks
- Real Consumer Group Takes Aim At Fake Ones
- Verizon's New Wireless Pricing Is An Insult
|
page: 1 · 2  |
 doppler
join:2003-03-31
Blue Point, NY | This one won't go away Verizon and other phone entities have very good lawyers.
This will not go away. Trust me | |
|  | audiog
join:2004-08-09
Detroit, MI | Re: This one won't go away Welcome to American corporate laws. The same thing that got MCI in to bankruptcy. One company can own different divisions and they will sell services to each other under the guise of we will also sell services to other companies. | |
| | 
dortress
Premium
join:2000-05-22
Port Chester, NY | whom do we write. Verizon is my telco, with this note it would seem I shouldn't have to pay....  | |
| | Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Encino, CA | Is their a foreign e-mail service fee/tax that users must pay to have their inboxes working like they should again? | |
| 
LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium
join:2002-08-03
Arlington, VA
| Only People Pay Taxes A tax on any company or corporation is always passed off to people. Since corporations are made up of people, it makes sense: only people pay taxes. The payment is either in the form of higher prices for the consumer, lower wages for the worker (fewer stock options for the eeevil management), or lower dividends to the investor. But only people pay taxes.
In this case, it makes perfect sense, like the myth that ½ of social security is paid by the employer, Verizon is only passing on all the cost of its tax burden. I know what people in this forum will say, since they love to bash eeevil corporations, but really they should be complaining to their congressman about the onerous taxes and regulation that ALL companies have to deal with these days.
--
"Those who want to take our money and gain power over us have discovered the magic formula: Get us envious or angry at others and we will surrender, in installments, not only our money but our freedom"—Thomas Sowell. | |
| | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Re: Only People Pay Taxes Feh!
So include it in the cost of the DSL line! | |
| | | Skippy25
join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
| Re: Only People Pay Taxes It is/was/always will be part of their cost to provide DSL. As pointed out in the article it is just another way they are milking more money out of their customer's without making it look like they are jacking up the price. They are attempting to separate themselves from this "tax" to make it appear it is something being forced on them (poor them) so they must force it on their customers though they don't want to (yeah right).
Just like what was discussed when SBC pulled this. If it is a direct cost to the having the line, it should be advertised as such. I could care less what it cost, just be honest and truthful upfront without misleading the public. None of this get unlimited DSL for $1.99/month with the small disclaimers of hidden fees making it $26.99/month.
I am just waiting for the "Our pensions are down recovery fee" to be added to my bill. | |
| | 
dddane
join:2002-01-10
Chicago, IL | well, duh. | |
| | 
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs: | Corporations are people.
There is an award being given to the first judge that gives a corporation the death penalty.
--
/sbin/shutdown -h now | |
| | | Facekhan
join:2002-05-01
Gaithersburg, MD
| Re: Only People Pay Taxes - True Corporations are people.
There is an award being given to the first judge that gives a corporation the death penalty. In the past corporations have been "imprisoned" mainly by having their assets frozen or by being liquidated and seized by the government. Courts can rule that a corporation or its officers/BOD who are supposedly responsible for the corporations actions can be imprisoned it just never happens because a corporation is basically trading an extra layer of taxation in exchange for getting a free pass. | |
| | 
Shamayim
I already have a Messiah.
Premium
join:2002-09-23
| Let's face it These fees are nothing but ripoffs. They're crafted by cunning corporate suits, arcanely labeled, petitioned for at the FCC or local municipality, granted permission by the FCC or local municipality, and then passed on to the poor schlub consumer with the explanation "the FCC mandates us to begin charging . . . "
--
"tick...tick...tick..." »www.jtf.org/ | |
| | 
Jim Gurd
Premium
join:2000-07-08
Plymouth, MI
 ·Comcast
| Re: Let's face it said by Shamayim :These fees are nothing but ripoffs. They're crafted by cunning corporate suits, arcanely labeled, petitioned for at the FCC or local municipality, granted permission by the FCC or local municipality, and then passed on to the poor schlub consumer with the explanation "the FCC mandates us to begin charging . . . " I have to disagree with you here. They are merely itemizing the cost of government. It is in fact a tax, though an indirect one for the consumer. The govt taxes the corp to provide subsidized internet for the masses and the corp passes it on to the end user. It's truth in advertising.
Now some people will argue that they could then start itemizing all taxes like corporate income and property taxes and that may have some validity. What's different about this FCC imposed fee is that it is directly tied to the product or service being sold thus driving up the cost of providing it. | |
| | | 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| Re: Let's face it Perhaps it's directly tied to the product or service, but it isn't a fee that they are being told to charge the customers. They are being charged it and they are passing the cost onto the consumer.
This, in and of itself, isn't unusual. Businesses do it all the time. It's how they do it that's underhanded. They don't announce that DSL prices will rise by X amount. Instead, DSL prices stay the same in all of their ads and a fine print fee is added to the bill.
The phone companies have realized that this is a perfect way to get away with what would otherwise be false advertising. They advertise a low price for a service and then load up on fees in the bills themselves to raise the price and get more profit.
For an example, check out this "Dirty Phone Bill":
»www.newnetworks.com/dirtyphonebill.htm
--
-Jason Levine
http://www.jasons-toolbox.com/
http://www.PCQandA.com/
http://www.urateit.com/ | |
| | | |
LegoPower77
Abecedarian
Premium
join:2002-08-03
Arlington, VA
| Re: Let's face it I, for one, would rather have an itemized description of why it costs so much. My phone line costs $29.95, but after the government gets done with it, it's upwards of $45. I'd rather know why I can't get cheap service rather than just paying a no-questions-asked $45/month.
By the same token, I'd rather us have to pay our taxes by writing a check every time we get our paychecks than to have it taken out in withholdings and not even feel it; it's BS. I'm just an idealist, but that would change things.
I agree, that dirty phone bill is outrageous, but I don't blame the company, I blame congress and the people who elect them.
--
"Those who want to take our money and gain power over us have discovered the magic formula: Get us envious or angry at others and we will surrender, in installments, not only our money but our freedom"—Thomas Sowell. | |
| | | | 
Madness
Like a flea circus at a dog show.
join:2000-01-05
Quincy, MA
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Yannow, I just got my bill yesterday and did some comparisons to your your "dirty phone bill." I'm in MA and have the Local Package (Local Unlimited + 3 option features) which is $24.95 by itself. All those taxes & fees add almost another $10 to that.
That's just the POTS side. Verizon 1500/128 @ 29.95 + the $2.40 FUSF they've been hitting w/ since early last year. Now I'm expected to see this new "recovery tax" starting next bill? Did receive that email and had to laugh at the opening. Like: "Dear Valued Customer, since you're *so* valued to us, we decided to add some more fees to your DSL bill!" Me: }:-þ | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
lady_mt
@client.bresna
| Since they want so badly for us consumers to pay a tax recovery fee for something that THEY have to pay for, then I say we turn the tables on them and let them know we want them to pay a tax recovery fee to US for the taxes we have to pay. | |
| 
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | Can't wait to see... ... what they(Verizon) decides to call these "unfees" when FIOS hits mainstream... or how many more they can think up. 
--
No Firefox here, move along! | |
| | | | 
verolom
join:2002-03-23
Eagleville, PA
·Comcast
| Re: We need a law to stop this mis-taxation. Isn't there a law or two already? I see this as misrepresentation or false advertisement and unfair business practice. What is this, DSL service of only $29.95/month + $15 in fees? Are there cases when a subscriber does not have to pay the fees to get the service? No. If one cannot get the service for $29.95/month then it is not only $29.95/month.
This should be like negotiating the price of a car. What is the price out the door or the bottom line? Don't care about bank fees, destination charges, etc. just give me the out-of-pocket figure. Or better yet, like buying gasoline, all taxes (there are plenty) are already included. What you see is what you pay.
The difference is there is no competition and frankly no regulation (enforcemnt of the law) of any useful kind on telecom. | |
| | Biskit
join:2003-02-07
Fenton, MO | So whats the difference? Either way your bill is going to be higher. Oh I get it , it's an ethics issue. It doesn't matter that your bill is going up as long as they call a spade a spade? | |
| | | 
xdeadhead
220, 221, Whatever It Takes.
Premium
join:2000-11-08
Mechanicsburg, PA
 ·Verizon FIOS
·Comcast
2 edits | crock of shit, i'll tell ya what..... VOL blows. customer "dis"-service and a painful voice response system reinforce the statement. im thinking it's more a recovery of fees that they have to pay the regular side of verizon for going out and fixing iw issues and such. those truck rolls are not cheap. even though there is no charge to the end-user,(until now with the recovery of fees) it seems VOL tries to prevent their customers who are having iw/setup issues from actually getting a tech to visit their home. i also find most of the time, the problem the customer reports to VOL is seldom the same problem listed on the trouble ticket. oh yes VZ has big problems with VOL and VOL has big problems with you. you meaning the customer, not whomevers post this post follows. "We appreciate and value your business." yeah right. | |
| 
Drex
Beer..It's What's For Dinner
Premium
join:2000-02-24
La Place, LA
·AT&T Southeast
| "Cost Recovery Fee" Bellsouth has been doing this for a number of months now. I don't recall when they started, but it was some time last year. It really pissed me off to the point I was willing to switch to cable, but that's another story.
Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee @ $2.97 per month
I have yet to get an explanation to exactly what this is. All they tell me is that it is NOT a tax.
--
Star Wars Galaxies -- The best form of birth control on the market. | |
| | 
aSic
application specific
Premium
join:2001-05-17
Wakulla, FL
clubs:
| Re: "Cost Recovery Fee" said by Drex :Regulatory Cost Recovery Fee @ $2.97 per month I have yet to get an explanation to exactly what this is. All they tell me is that it is NOT a tax. Then dont pay it. Plain and simple.
My previous employer was the same way.. if it wasnt listed as a tax, he'd pitch a fit. Eventually he got to the point where he'd only pay the base charges, and the taxes. Before I moved on to another job, he had close to $650 in "back fees". After a bit of yelling to someone high up the foodchain with this particular company, the $650 was agreed to be unfair, and was removed from his bill. From the last couple times I've visited the old shop, I've seen that he's done it on several occasions..
Then again, it all depends on how greedy Verizon/BellSouth or any of these other carriers are. Would they cut you off for having a past due balance of $2.97?
--
Teamwork is a lot of people doing what I say. | irc.removed.us #dslr | Starband SRS m360 GE4 C4/S69 | Win2003/DualNIC | 802.11b | |
| | 
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB | Do you think they'd tolerate you deducting a "Regulatory Appeal Fee" from your bill payments?
 | |
| 
OceanaJones
join:2004-10-18
Suffolk, VA
| Unfair corporation cheats It has been less than one year since I signed on to the Verizon DSL service. So far this is the second "tax" they have "passed" on to me. As far as I am concerned this is just another example of a corporation CHEATING its customers. The only way a business in America can survive is to "CHEAT" the customer. A little tax here... a fee there... misrepresentation of products, poor service, no quality, inflated prices,bait and switch. I challenge anyone to show me one business in America that is 100 percent honest, upfront and doesn't have a sneaky way to secretly CHEAT their customer. Now when I say cheat, I mean morally as well as legally because we all know these corporations and business owners use the lawyer politicians to make their lack of morals legal. The only right that has not been denied the consumer is the right to say "No thank you, there is not enough value in your product to interest me". | |
| Samwoo
join:2002-02-15
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA
3 edits | Let me get this straight "This is not a tax charged directly to Verizon Online's customers," the e-mail informs users, "but the partial recovery of tax that Verizon Online must pay when they purchase the DSL circuit from the telephone company."
WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Is the only words i can say,as well as the words below (you don' have to read them. its just a lot of logic in trying to un-twist this quote)
So this is a fee that they charge their customers so that they can reimburse themselves for the tax on their own capital (Wiring in this case).
So in part the customers will be paying for the capital that the company must spend to expand...
Hm isn't the company/investors the one who must pay for the capital (INCLUDING CAPITAL AND THE TAX FOR IT. I mean, i sure hope that Microsoft didn't charge me money so that they can pay off the taxes that they spent on their newest cd replicator, and then turn that tax into another fee on my receipt for windows. THE CAPITAL AND THE TAX FOR THE CAPITAL INVESTMENT ARE PART OF THE EXPENSES)... and isn't capital (and expenses) supposed to be payed for by profits... so if this was a charge for reimbursing capital... then by working in the reverse of
Profits pay for capital.
Then this capital reimbursement (as i will call it now) means that less of the profits have to be spent on capital and thus it is a profit increaser, or in proper terms a profit maker.
Since profits come from the charge for service. Then the only thing that this "tax"/profit maker is, is a charge for service, or a service fee... wich... isn't that the fee they charge your for using your internet?
So why are you now charging a service fee and a "tax/serviecefee"? I'm confused now...
Unless the truth is that they simply are increasing the service fee by using a very convoluted tax... then this just doesn't make any logical sence at all.
So i ask verizon to explain it to me better.
[sarcasm]This logic may be obvious to everyone else in the world...
But Verizon doesn't seem to be able to understand it.
So i hope they read this to learn.[/sarcasm] | |
| suzuki1
join:2003-01-22
Philadelphia, PA
| Verizon Tax recovery You know what, At 35.00 a month + now additional tax's = almost the cost of comcast HSI AT 42.00 a month! I cant even get an upgrade to 3 down because of my distance so I am stuck at 1.5. Comcast is at 4 down standard!
I guess I'm being forced to go with comcast.
I wish I could pass my tax on to someone else so I can recover the tax's I pay. | |
| | 
Paul928
join:2000-05-06
Haverhill, MA
·Comcast
| Re: Verizon Tax recovery I have to agree with you in one way. I've been thinking of switching to Comcast for a while too, but Comcast is still more expensive $42.95/month plus $3.00 a month for rental of modem... a total of $45.95 a month. Verizon is still a better deal right now. But once Verizon puts caps on it's downloads on it's newsgroups (like Comcast) that's when I'll make my switch! | |
| | | 
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD | Re: Verizon Tax recovery You can buy a third-party cable modem to get rid of the rental fee. Not that I'd recommend Comcast over Verizon, despite this BS. | |
| 
Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI
·AT&T U-Verse
| This article is very misleading..... I work for one of the big ILEC's doing programming on the billing system. I can tell you that this article really gives the wrong impression.
Most of the "fee's" that you see on your phone bill are in fact government mandated taxes. We are not allowed, by the government, to list them as taxes. Some are direct taxes like USF, some are indirect like the tax recovery fee noted in the article.
USF is a tax on everyone to subsidize phone service in rural areas. Without this tax, those of you that live 50 or more miles outside of a major metro area, would not have phone service. The infrastructure costs are more then any money made off of usage. Rural lines are money losers, so the government decides everybody gets to pay for them.
Your bill should have a 911 fee. This pays for your local E911 system. There are Transit fee's in some areas. This supports their bus and train systems. I pay stadium tax in my area to pay for a new baseball stadium.
The line
"but the partial recovery of tax that Verizon Online must pay when they purchase the DSL circuit from the telephone company."
is true and accurate. FCC regulations require that Verizon Online be a separate entity from the main phone company. They have to purchase services from the main phone company and that purchase is subject to sales tax. Verizon didn't set it up this way, the government did. Works the same way for Long Distance. I can't even talk to people in our long distance company because of FCC regs.
Some states have so many taxing authorities (State, County, Municipal, Transit, etc.) you would not believe it. Some of these taxes, we are not allowed to display on your bill and we have to roll them into the price of service. Your legislators don't want you to see that they put through a tax increase, so they force us to hide it. All of these taxes have to be approved by the local PUC (Public Utilities Commission), another government body.
Some ILECs do charge other fee's but most of the stuff (+90%) that you see on your phone bill is government mandated. Instead of getting P.O.ed at the company, start getting P.O.ed at your local, state and Federal legislature. Their the ones imposing most of these "Fee's".
Disclaimer: I don't work for Verizon, I work for another ILEC.
--
"Those who would give up their civil liberties for security deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin | |
| |
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
| Re: This article is very misleading..... BS.
I currently have Covad DSL (line-shared with Verizon POTS). You know how much I pay in "extra" fees? $0. POTS aside, I don't believe there's anything preventing Verizon Online from doing business the same way, except their own choice.
I'm not saying that you're intentionally lying. I don't doubt that the ILECs have indoctrinated their employees to believe the same thing they're trying to get their customers to believe: "It's not us, it's the gummint! Honest!"
Insofar as there's any substance to that claim: Guess who wrote those regulations in the first place? Guess who bought the legislators?
Yeah, I am pissed off at our so-called elected officials, for being so easily bought. But I'm more pissed off at the ILECs for buying them. | |
| | |
Alakar
Facts do not cease to exist when ignored
join:2001-03-23
Milwaukee, WI
·AT&T U-Verse
| Re: This article is very misleading..... You don't pay extra fees because Verizon has to resell your line to Covad. Covad gets access to Verizon CO's and Verizon equipment below cost because of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. It's suppose to encourage competition but it just impedes improvements to the infrastructure. Why should a company build out new RC's and upgrade systems if they have to resell them to their competitors?
--
"Those who would give up their civil liberties for security deserve neither." Benjamin Franklin | |
| | | |
wmcbrine
Touched by His Noodly Appendage
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD
| Re: This article is very misleading..... And that has what to do with extra fees? Nothing. Whatever Covad pays to Verizon, it manages to present me with a single-item bill, for the same amount as it advertises. Whatever Verizon pays to itself, it chooses not to present customers with an honest price, but rather to advertise one price and charge another.
Please take your ILEC propaganda and stuff it. | |
| |
lady_mt
@client.bresna
| Since they want so badly for us consumers to pay a tax recovery fee for something that THEY have to pay for, then I say we turn the tables on them and let them know we want them to pay a tax recovery fee to US for the taxes we have to pay.
If verizon is "required by law to remain a seperate entity from the telephone company", then why don't they get off their arses and do what someone with half a brain could figure out on their own and do so we wouldn't have to pay the tax? | |
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | let this be a lesson everybody is all excited about Verizon's FIOS,but the heady aroma of 15M/2M makes most people forget that even with cable competition, it's still a duopoly at best. Well, I can't get DSL anyway, so I don't give a crap if they're raising rates. | |
| suzuki1
join:2003-01-22
Philadelphia, PA
2 edits | Verizon You know this could be another way verizon rips people off again like they did the first time. And why would verizon do this again when they got caught the first time? Because they got away with it! I just dont trust them. Their a big powerful company, they know it and their cocky. | |
| | 
johnnylakis
join:2002-10-30
Brooklyn, NY
·Verizon Online DSL
| BS fees It's another BS fee. They hook us at 29.95. Then add 2.40 FUSF fee. Now 3.30 for this tax. That means Verizon DSL is over 35.00 and over $40 if you dont have a package with them. Cable is about $50 now and twice as fast as DSL. I was on hold 30 minutes with Verizon on Thu night cuz I couldnt connect. I asked for a level 3 tech and the operator said "For What?" When I did connect speed was 500kb down. Cable is looking better and better every day. | |
| Cuculain
join:2002-10-10
Beaverton, OR
2 edits | Unfee and Hellizon I've had Verizon DSL since October 2004, despite being promised 1.5 MBit when I signed up for the package. When I called and asked about it, they said I had to SPECIFICALLT ask for the 1.5mbit package.
So I did. It would take 4 to 5 working business days for the upgrade to take effect.
Few days later, another DSL modem arrives, only it's some crappy westell wireless router that didnt work well at all, even to begin setting it up, I had to call technical support to find out the #$!@$ admin password into the router. But thats a different story.
7 days later, i came home from work once agan and resetting the OLD dsl modem (the one they sent me in October), and find I'm still at 768k/128k dsl.
So I called them back up and asked what the deal was.
"Oh I'm sorry. Your area doesnt qualify for 1.5mbit/384k dsl services. So sorry."
"OK, so want this dsl wireless router back?"
"No. That comes with agreeing to the annual payment contract."
"What annual contract?"
"The one you agreed to last week when you called about the speed upgrade."
"The hell I did. I asked for 1.5mbit, they said 4 to 5 working business days. At no time did a discussion about an annual contract come up!"
"Very well sir. You're off the annual contract."
But I disgress.
If this "unfee" is to help hellizon pay for new wiring and lines, and if thats so, I'm going to tell them where they can shove their !@$!@$ unfee until my "AREA" qualifies for what they're advertising.
And no, we're not in some backwood way out of the way area.
This is Portland OR we're talking about there.
From what I see with DSLReport's compare speed and ISP page, most of the people here reported on dslreport similiar speeds, barely going over 768k with a few exemption.
Just my 2 cents which hellizon isnt seeing.
I'd sooner switch over to Comcast and get their 6mbit/768k Gold package than to pay hellizon for something we're not getting or seeing.
Cuculain | |
| acrufox
join:2004-07-14
Canada
| New fees Mmmm not defending anyone here but....I was on Comcast paying almost 70/mo after late fees on autopay My bill even after these new fees on Verizon is about 47/month for almost the same speeds.
In a cold cruel world of monopolies what more can you expect than Verizon putting a spin on new fees? As much as they are disguising the fact that it's another grab for money from you, they still aren't going to overall charge you more than the competition. I read this thread and see all this disgust for what Verizon has done, but it's nothing different from what Comcast does by placing unspecified limits on how much downloading is too much, or in my case $5 fees in late charges when I was on autopay. It's nothing more than smoke and mirrors, all companies do it. | |
|
Gem99bad
@verizon.n
| Verizon + Taxes + Additional Speed. Well, just like everyone here, I am quite aware of the 'sales pitch' I have done retail myself, so there is not much to hide from me.
But I wish to share something about the new speeds being offered, I finally investigated and inquired at VOL about it. They responded back, I can't get the 3mbps/768kbps, but was offered a 1.5mbps/768kbps, believe it, they said they have tested the line, and that is the current amount it can handle. But I have to use the $29.95, a one year commitment, and new equipment *which I don't need*, honestly, from that speel, I am being treated like a newbie customer, which I am not.
So, I have replied, that I will not get the new package, until they figured out, on how to give me, the new speed, without the frills...that simple, I am a old customer, I don't need the party toppings, but I will wait on what they will do next.
My current speed, is 728kpbs/142kbps...tweeted:) | |
|
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB
3 edits | Passing on Corporate Income Tax Next The title says it all.
When people lie down and take it (happily or otherwise), there will always be those prepared to put it to them.
You could legally deduct a "Postage Recovery Fee" from your Verizon bill payments, and wait and see if they want to battle it out, but you can bet they will. ("Legally" in the sense that you can interpret a legal contract pretty almost however you want, and let the other side request mediation or adjudication.)
Verizon is happy when you lie down and take it.
But they will not tolerate you giving it to them.
"Do unto others as you would have others do unto you" has no meaning to them.
This is what I think of Verizon:
»Verizon Promotes Ugly American Stereotype
»Same with a lot of ISP's
--
(Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
|
keith2468
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-03
Winnipeg, MB
| 1776 - Secret Taxes Bad For Democracy I'd actually like to see the genuine taxes itemized on the bills.
But I'd like to see this done up front, in a uniform manner, breaking out the existing fee, not as sneak rate hikes.
Otherwise we have taxation without voter knowledge or voter consent.
And taxation without consent was a significant part of what the US War of Independance was over.
Secret taxes are a bad thing for democracy.
That there are laws prohibiting the disclosure of taxes on account statements is unethical and anti-democractic.
--
(Virus&Hijacking FAQ + Submit suspected malware + Backups FAQ + Security FAQ TOC) | |
| | Facekhan
join:2002-05-01
Gaithersburg, MD
| Lobbying on your bill. I don't have a big problem with such taxes being revealed on your bill but I do have a problem with this nonsense of charging "tax recovery" fees. In some cases phone companies and cable companies have itemized tax recovery fees on their customer's bills in such a way to make it appear that it was a tax on the customer and not the company and in a few cases they passed on a tax that did not actually exist or that had expired decades ago or that was not based on anything that could be divided at a per customer rate without significant fudging.
Also I resent that a public telephone monopoly or an incumbent big bell provider should be lobbying for pro-industry legislation on the bottom of every bill. | |
| | | |
|
|
Bullcrap!
·
Rip Off: Verizon online paying Verizon parent