TELUS Forcing Customers Off Unlimited Plans 268
An anonymous reader writes "Canadian telco TELUS sold a bunch of (expensive) Unlimited EV-DO aircard accounts last winter and are now summarily canceling them or forcing people to switch to much less valuable plans. TELUS is citing 'Violations,' but their Terms Of Service (see #5) are utterly vague and self-contradictory. The TELUS plans were marketed as being unlimited, without the soft/hard caps that the other providers had at the time. They were purchased by a lot of rural Canadians who had no other choice except dialup. Now TELUS is forcing everyone to switch from a $75 Unlimited plan to a $65 1GB plan, and canceling those who won't switch. Have a look at the thread at Howardforums, a discussion of the TELUS ToS (in red at the bottom), an EV-DO blogger who's been a victim, a post at Electronista, and of course Verizon getting fined for doing the same thing! Michael Geist has taken an interest as well."
Marketing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Except on closer examination it's the legal version... GOD how I love living in Canada! On the plus side, at least they didn't introduce an "Unlimited system access fee", claim it to be some sort of vague government forced thing, and then charge more for the fee (that is mandatory) than the service plan costs.
Note to self: stop giving Telus more ideas on how to rape my ass!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Telus has a long history of changing / breaching contracts and having lawsuits filed against it.
Their CSRs will tell you that they can change bandwidth limits at any time and if you go over the new lower limit during your contract period, they will charge you overage. If you quit, they will bill you the ETF (which is abusive) and send you to collections if you don't pay.
They dropped the residential plan data transfer limit down to 20gb a month 2 years ago. Now it's back up to 60.
Oh, and the CRTC is a bunch
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Uh yea they do. My bill dated July 25 has the following fee:
System Access Fee - 6.95.
Sorry if you were being sarcastic.
It's the "we change anything in this contract" (Score:5, Insightful)
You agree that, to maintain or improve the service, or for other business reasons, TELUS can in its sole discretion, suspend, restrict, modify or terminate all or any part of the service or make changes to the network and other facilities without notice to you.
And that is why "agreements" like this are worthless. They should just say "Here's what you are required to do... we can do as we damn well please." But honestly, is there any point in signing a contract when one party retains all rights to completely change the contract without allowing you the ability to opt-out of the contract? Is this even legal? Probably... can we change it?
I am not real big on "consumer protections" but this type of stuff just seems ridiculous. At some point we have to realize that cell phones and internet access are pretty much not a privilege any more. All of us should have access to these shared resources (the tubes).
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
IANAL, nor am I Canadian, but I think we laymen can agree the quoted terms are unconscionable. If TELUS must change, then the customers who paid for something they're not getting should get something back.
I was with you up until you said:
Reasonable people can disagree over whether or not basic needs like health care are rights, but Internet access?!! That's nuts.
Re:It's the "we change anything in this contract" (Score:5, Insightful)
Not really. If the society moves to the stage where all essential services, government included, are on the Internet and inaccessible in a timely manner otherwise, Internet, like roads, become a necessity for living, only slightly less important then shelter or medical care. Telephones, for example, have long since crossed that line. In North America some means of long-range transportation (read: a car or some alternative) are pretty much a must in many cities if one wishes to obtain any employment at all, and thus sustenance and shelter.
Should these things be free/subsidized? That is an argument between Communism, Socialism, Capitalism and other socio-economic systems and far outside the scope of this disucssion. But irrespective of your take, it is pretty obvious that telecommunications/transportation are not in the same category as tourism or bar-hopping and are far closer to shelter/medical care, and getting closer every day.
Re:It's the "we change anything in this contract" (Score:5, Interesting)
At some point we have to realize that cell phones and internet access are pretty much not a privilege any more. All of us should have access to these shared resources (the tubes).
Disclaimer: American viewpoint.
I agree that these services are nearly necessitates in today's society. Communication is king. It is required. Broadcast TV has been made a free service based on government regulation. On the other hand, electricity and heat are more necessary than communication and they are in the same competitive mode to keep prices low.
Here's the difference that I see, though, between all these services... if the government was to start providing these as "free services" (like the majority of roads are) they are basically saying "this is as good as it gets". Competition for cheaper methods of delivering heat and electricity has historically kept these prices low, so these industries is well regulated. However, duopolistic behavior by Verizon and AT&T have caused the telephone companies to practice the same tricks that resulted in the original breakup of AT&T in 1984. Prices are what the phone companies want them to be and customers cannot elect fair "lower cost" options (pay-as-you-go is a joke at a quarter a minute and $30 for 450 minutes per month is excessive... and there is no middle ground).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
$30 for 450 minutes per month? You've got to come up here to Canada and see what excessive is all about.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Not only that, but man, when you guys buy a book published in the US, its always like
$20 US $24 CA
And the Cannadian Currency is worth more than the US dollar now!
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The U.S. dollar has been worth more than the Canadian dollar since July 21, 2008.
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=USDCAD [google.com]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:It's the "we change anything in this contract" (Score:4, Insightful)
Our income tax in Canada is actually less than 30% for the highest tier, and typically 15-22% [wikipedia.org], which isn't hugely different from that in the United States [wikipedia.org] (actually, we're taxed less if you consider the dollars are more or less on par at the moment).
Re: (Score:2)
Before someone says "When the pump says $20, that's what I owe, there's no GST." The GST is included in the base price.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The income taxes in my province (Alberta) are lower than in California and several other states. Some of the things you think you know actually aren't true.
And did you just say that unregulated telecoms are a bad thing about SOCIALIST societies??
Re:It's the "we change anything in this contract" (Score:4, Interesting)
Hate to doublepost, but to that end, I'm not sure our work schedules are any different from the United States, and our holidays work the same way, too. There are certain holidays that are considered federal, and businesses must give overtime for anyone working during a holiday, or a full day's pay for those who would have been scheduled in on that day.
As for our telecoms, I'd take a closer look at your own before saying ours is unregulated. The industry here in Canada borders on price-fixing and racketeering, but the industry in the USA is balanced solely by competition. While wireless is one point where American industry is ahead (ours has been battling between GSM (Rogers) and CDMA (Bell-Aliant/Telus) for some time - GSM won), I hear a lot of horror stories about American broadband and cable TV that border on the same kind of monopolistic behaviour as our Wireless providers.
That said, the only cable provider in this neck of the woods is Rogers, and the only traditional phone company is Bell-Aliant. Both offer a phone service (Rogers over the cable network, Bell-Aliant over traditional copper), both offer internet services (both high-speed and dial-up, Rogers by DOCSIS, Bell-Aliant by PPPoE), both offer wireless services (Rogers by GSM, Bell-Aliant by CDMA (going GSM)), and both offer TV services (Rogers by traditional analog and digital cable, Aliant by PPPoE/specialized modem (reduces high-speed transfer rates) and satellite). Both are nation-wide corporations, and they've got a nice duopoly going on in the Atlantic provinces. This isn't a failure of the government (though it would be nice if they could regulate this a little more), but rather a failure in the market; The same could be said of AT&T/Comcast (former co-owner of Rogers) and Bell/Verizon, though due to the market dynamics in the United States (and mostly, the population density), others have been able to squeeze in. Of course, that's just my observation.
Re: (Score:2)
In NC at least Duke Power (the power company) is required by law to provided the cheapest possible energy. They also need gov't approval to raise rates.
Unfair terms of contract legislation (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Mobile phones aren't a requirement. I don't have one, and I'm an Electrical Engineer. (EIT) I've had two kids, some emergencies, and I have never missed having a cell phone.
As for the legality of the contract, they can't change the terms legally. That's what a contract is. You do this, I do this, until the contract ends or we die. If either party changes the terms and then the other party goes along with it, then the contract is considered accepted by their action. So if they say "Hey, we're charging you fo
Re: (Score:2)
Mobile phones aren't a requirement.
RTFA. This isn't about mobile phones, this is about mobile data plans, and people in rural areas that probably don't have any other way of getting online.
You'd be foolish to spend millions to get back $150 in fees.
Why does a simple issue of unfair fees have to go to the nation's highest court? And why does each individual who got ripped off have to pursue the issue separately?
My lawyer has told me to "let go" of $2500 problems because they just aren't worth taking to court.
That is, sadly, true. But that logic doesn't apply to every situation where one person owes another a small amount. In particular, a large corporation that rips off small amounts from thousands
Re: (Score:2)
Mobile phones aren't a requirement.
RTFA. This isn't about mobile phones, this is about mobile data plans, and people in rural areas that probably don't have any other way of getting online.
Did you read the parent post? The guy is claiming that "cell phones and internet access are pretty much not a privilege any more."
That's a completely ridiculous statement. Mobile phones aren't a basic human right, no matter what Best Buy tells you.
Rural communication, and the ripping off of the customers who bought equipment based off the (apparently fraudulent) statements made by Telus, are a different matter.
You'd be foolish to spend millions to get back $150 in fees.
Why does a simple issue of unfair fees have to go to the nation's highest court? And why does each individual who got ripped off have to pursue the issue separately?
Telus would appeal any decision against it, and you bet your ass that any other company with simil
Re: (Score:2)
There's no small-claims court in Canada? I know that we have that here in the US, and it's great for smaller sums. It doesn't cost an arm and a leg to get a lawsuit started, and you can generally represent yourself fairly well.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, there's a small-claims court for claims up to 25k. Telus would appeal if you won.
If you lost, Telus would hand you a bill for their legal fees, which would be in the realm of thousands or tens of thousands.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, I'd have to check the Rules, but I believe legal fees in Small Claims Court are capped at 15% of the value of the issue up for decision.
(Also, the Rules are different from province to province- in... Alberta, BC, NWT, YT, and Nunavut, I believe, the max is 25,000 but in Ontario and Quebec, I think, it's $10,000.)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think it is legal. I was hoping Bell and Telus customers would test that theory en masse by declaring their contracts null and void when B&T decided to charge for incoming texts. Unfortunately it doesn't sound like anyone has.
If Fido ever sends me my iPhone, I'm looking forward to them pulling the no free incoming texts so I can enjoy my new contract-free iPhone.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They should just say "Here's what you are required to do... we can do as we damn well please."
They do say that. They just don't say it clearly. The whole point of most consumer agreements is to say exactly that, but at great length and using very technical language. If nobody understand what you're saying, nobody can give you a hard time for saying it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is this even legal? Probably... can we change it?
You could always try to, well negotiate. The companies put out crap terms because they know that most people will just take it or leave it and don't have the spine to actually try and haggle. If they don't want to negotiate and you don't like the deal then say 'NO' and walk away. Telling a sales person 'NO' and turning to walk out the door can sometimes break through their resistance to negotiations, but you have to be willing to walk away and play hardball to get what you want.
No Surprise (Score:2)
This is par for the course with Telus, a company that has had it knuckles rapped in the past for dreadful customer service.
Telus. That Explains Everything. (Score:3, Informative)
They're shady, unethical, and mostly incompetent. If it's at all possible to do so, just don't deal with them. Thankfully even rural areas are beginning to have better options.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I hear you! I switched from my Telus landline to Shaw VOIP after Telus started charging an extra $5 / month because I *didn't* have a long distance plan.
Before I was paying almost $30 / month for Telus with no features (no caller ID, VM, etc); now I am paying $20 on Shaw with some basic features, *plus* getting $8 off my broadband, for almost $20 / month savings.
Add to that the fact that Shaw has always been excellent with their customer service, and this is a real no-brainer!
Cheers
I got a full refund (Score:5, Informative)
That calls for a HUGE class action suit... (Score:4, Interesting)
...and possibly even some sort of charges brought against them by the government.
These Telecoms are making WAY more money than they deserve. I don't know which would be worse -- a government run telco/internet service or letting the abusive service providers keep on abusing.
I am really very fortunate where I live. T-Mobile is my wireless carrier and they didn't comply with US government requests for warrantless wiretaps, my cable internet is ridiculously faster than any other I have seen and nothing about my service is blocked. I'm afraid to move because I might get crappy service. I'm not sure how I would respond to some of the troubles other people experience or have reported here.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Well, this being Canada, the general course of action is to complain to the CRTC and then get the CRTC to fuck Telus up pretty good. At least that's been my experience. The CRTC generally doesn't tend to let the big telcos dick around any more than the regulations allow, with preference given to the customer when there's ambiguity.
Re: (Score:2)
I submit that when you set yourself up as the judge on how much money a company "deserves" to make that you've crossed a line.
I don't agree with what TELUS is doing here but I also cannot agree with judging how much money an entity deserves to make.
Re: (Score:2)
When utilities like a telco get radio frequencies, the rights to set up wired networks, power lines, cable TV infrastructure or just about anything that requires government approval, that is "the people" granting permission to the commercial entities to set up a business.
For them to take that permission and abuse customers in this and a multitude of other ways is simply the wrong thing to do... probably more than that since there are supposed to be regulations on what they can do with the resources and perm
Re:That calls for a HUGE class action suit... (Score:5, Interesting)
Telus used to be a government run telco. We never seemed to have any problems with the service and it was cheaper than it is now.
Re: (Score:2)
A much better solution is to sue them in small claims court. It's very easy and cheap to do, and almost always gets the company's attention. If your suit has any merit, 9 times out of 10 they're just pay you off to avoid having to pay a $300/hr. lawyer to spen
Re: (Score:2)
How about a hybrid system? Imaging a government owned infrastructure rented out to various different providers. The reason for a government owned infrastructure is that due to the population density in various parts of Canada, it is not economically feasible to provide service. But a government mandate to provide equal service at break-even cost would solve this problem.
Re: (Score:2)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=901153&cid=24757413 [slashdot.org] -- read here. I don't feel like repeating myself too often, but you need a wakeup call about who actually has the final say regarding their ability to continue doing business.
Its always been like this for Canadian Telcos (Score:3)
Its also surprising that people have been able to get online streaming or voice over ip working on their Telus cards, the ones we have in the office are pretty much just fast enough for email and very light web surfing.
Needed: Australia's TIO model (Score:4, Interesting)
In Australia, an ISP's customers can complain to the Telecommunications Ombudsman (TIO).
If the TIO considers that the complaint has merit (even -before- it is investigated & decided), the ISP must pay TIO a fee, upwards of Au$200.
The TIO may then propose a solution that costs the ISP additional money, eg, if it has to compensate the customer for some loss of service, etc.
An ISP would tend think twice, before dumping customers, with such fees hanging over their heads.
Perhaps USA (and other places) needs such a mechanism, to keep ISPs a bit more honest...
One thing to avoid: In Australia, an ISP is required to "join" TIO, but there have been some cases of ISP's failing to join; in these cases, the fees wouldn't apply, at least until the ISP is belatedly persuaded to join.
To make this work, a large fine for failure to join should be part of the enabling legislation.
Fraud (Score:2)
I lost an isp that way once a lONG time ago. I had a static IP on dial-up and they wanted it back so they made up a reason to dump me.
One evening my modem was connected but no data activity. They said that violated the "unlimited use" clause, since i wasnt actually using it.
Bastards.
Feeling Left Out (Score:2)
The Future is Friendly (Score:2)
...but what about the present????
db
No Telus for me, ever again. (Score:5, Interesting)
Here is an example of their borderline criminal conduct. I used to subscribe to their home phone service. I had it on automatic payment (big mistake) One day, I noticed that my bill had been steadily increased from $30/mo for a single line to $40, $60, and then as high $80/mo for the past few months.
I called them trying to sort it out. After several hours of navigating through the labyrinth of automated voice menu (no, 0 for operator did not work) I finally got put on hold for over an hour to speak with a human, and was cut off while waiting in the queue. After a few tries I finally got though, and got an explanation. Apparently, they had been taking the liberty to 'introduce new services' onto my account, without notifying me, and took my not noticing and canceling them a sign of agreement to adapt those service.
They of course, refused to refund the charges because I had been 'enjoying the additional services' so I requested to cancel them on the spot. Apparently I could not do that either because I don't have this password somehow set on my account.
While I was contemplating canceling the whole account and start over with a new number, with the hassle of informing all my contacts of a number change, Shaw called to promote their $25/mo digital line. So I switched. For the past year I have not paid over the $25/mo I agree to pay. There had not been additional features secretly added to my line.
However, Telus was not happy about my switching. They called about 3 times a week asking me to switch back. Their call usually started with a pompous voice asking me to identify myself to them. They even demanded that I explained to them why I switched, to which their representatives received some colourful words from me and a request to never calling back again.
Then they called again offering me ridiculous deals such as a comparatively lower 3-month INTRODUCTORY rate (and it would eventually go back up) if I switched my phone AND internet services to them. At this point, I started threatening with a harassment suit if they didn't stop calling. The call finally stopped.
And you wonder why telus spends so much on their 'the future is friendly' PR campaign to tell people how well they treat their customers.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a double win - you get your money back and the service provider/vendor feels the pinch.
ObVader (Score:5, Funny)
"I am altering the deal. Pray I don't alter it any further."
"Vague"? (Score:2)
"You agree that, to maintain or improve the service, or for other business reasons, TELUS can in its sole discretion, suspend, restrict, modify or terminate all or any part of the service or make changes to the network and other facilities without notice to you."
That looks pretty clear to me.
deja vu - haha! (Score:2)
(Data for broadband, and colocation, in Australia is still many times more expensive than it is in North America.)
Vote with your feet, people! (Score:5, Insightful)
Telus cust? Bilk them for a new phone/services (Score:5, Interesting)
OTOH, a friend of mine lost his cell phone so I suggest calling up Telus with the intent to leave because they don't offer the iPhone to see what they might do(let's be clear, he doesn't want an iPhone, but we know this particular phone is going to receive some sort of response from the Telus rep.). Not mentioning the lost phone to them at this point, he proceeds to tell them that he would like one of them new-fangled iPhones that everyone is talking about. Telus rep says sorry we don't have that phone. So he says oh okay, I'd like to cancel my service then. They proceed to go through the big laminated list of reasons the iPhone is crap, and he just simply says yeah, that's fine, I'll just cancel, how much is it to buy out my contract?
At this point they go ahead and offer him a new Blackberry Pearl at no charge, and he informs them that this wouldn't be sufficient and he'd still like to proceed with canceling his services. They step up to the plate again and offer him an unlimited data plan in addition to his current Telus package at no charge, for the balance of his contract (2 1/2 years).
Of course, he accepts this offer. So, although I hate Telus, sometimes they serve their purpose, such as situations like the one above.
Of course after he finishes talking with the Telus rep he proceeds to call them back immediately to report his lost phone so that it is deactivated.
This was approximately a month and a half ago and so far so good, Telus is honouring their offer of unlimited data, and he's still paying the same $48.xx a month he was paying prior to this escapade, and enjoying his new Blackberry phone.
Contracts (Score:3, Informative)
My favorite issue with Telus was in dealing with contracts and their "bundled" bills.
My grandparents signed up for internet with them, and supposedly for the first while the internet rates were lower than normal. After a while, they decided to cancel and move on to Shaw. When they called in to do so, Telus told them that they were locked in a (3 year I believe) contract.
Now keep in mind, this is not like a cellular service. There's no documentation, no terms of service provided. The box that came with the DSL modem had only the usage manual. Nothing signed, and nothing anywhere stating a contract.
According to the phone agent, the "contract" was presented in a click-through on the software used to setup the modem. However, in this case I was the one that setup the modem, and had done so through their webpage (not using the software CD, and not seeing any click-through contracts).
Telus - of course - could not provide anything to support their "contact", but the rep actually told me "if you don't like it, take it to court." When I asked for their legal contact info, I was told for that I'd have to "get a lawyer, and have him figure it out."
At the same time, Telus is also the local phone monopoly, so bills for ADSL and phone service are combined. I tried to get *those* separated so that I could at least deal with VISA about the DSL service without getting dinged for non-payment on the phone part. Telus will not separate the bills.
I've had plenty of issues with Telus on my own, but this case was the worst. Trying to trick senior citizens into believing their into a contract without any corroboration is just plani evil (and I did check the old advertising for the plain, no contract was mentioned).
Re:So? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
WTF? The plan jumps to 1 GB from 8 megabytes?! It's fucking absurd that telecoms are allowed to get away with completely fucking over everyone who wants reasonable service at a price point lower than the most expensive plan like this!
(And no, the 1GB plan is not a reasonable change from unlimited... but the "connect 25" and "connect 40" plans are even worse!)
Re:So? (Score:4, Interesting)
News flash: You don't have the right to cheap unlimited internet when you live out in the country.
Maybe not, but Telus should at least be held to it through the end of the contract.
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
If you bothered reading any of the articles (since this is /. and your ID is less than 10k you didn't) then you'd know that they sold UNLIMITED plans when the real cap was 5GB and that they are only forcing people off the plan who went over that cap.
It is a text-book case of deceptive practices (bait and switch).
Had the company disbanded its unlimited service altogether instead of kicking off people over the real limit, I'd have agreed with you 100%.
Re:So? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Par for the course. They already do that with their DSL service, so why not the expensive wireless one too?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If Telus sold underpriced plans, underestimated use, and lost money, how long are they obligated to maintain the service?
what if they were making money, but discovered that the margins were higher for per/GB service? Are they allowed to just cancel contracts with users in order to extract a higher profit margin from their product?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Of course they're not obligated to continue offering a service (at least probably not in this case - there are some services companies are required to offer in exchange for the right to do business - think 911, or whatever the emergency number in your area is).
On the other hand, if they're going to be jerks towards their customers, people are also not obligated to continue patronizing them.
Re: (Score:2)
But if they're the only service provider, then people are obligated to continue patronizing them. Contrapositively, they are then obligated not to be jerks. QED.
Re:So? (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm not familiar with this particular case, but in the US it is common for such plans to be sold with a contract. This contract typically specifies rates and services which will apply over a two year period. Both of us are expected to adhere to that during the contract period, after which we are both free to continue or to stop as we prefer. But you don't get to just stop following the contract just because you changed your mind and don't like it anymore.
So the answer to your question is, they are obligated to maintain the service for the period that their contracts specify.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that Telus (and all the other cell providers in Canada) have an explicit "We reserve the right to alter the contract without prior notice" or something to that effect.
Basically, you sign a contract with Telus and you HAVE to adhere to the document, but Telus is more or less free to be asshats.
Re:So? (Score:5, Interesting)
They are obligated to maintain the service for however long the contract says they need to maintain service. If they ask nicely, I might be willing to help them. But they have absolutely no right to just break any contract because they screwed up.
There's a question of what the contract says exactly, but that's what courts are for. I hope that someone with deep pockets gets this going as a class action lawsuit, and sues Telus into bankruptcy.
Newsflash: corporations can't just do whatever the hell they want.
Re: (Score:2)
Corrections: Small corporations can't do whatever they want. That's a privilege reserved to the giant companies that fill politicians pockets.
Re:So? (Score:5, Informative)
If Telus sold underpriced plans, underestimated use, and lost money, how long are they obligated to maintain the service? Forever?
For however long they promised they would! You don't just get to make promises and break them whenever you feel like it.
A lot of US car companies are going under because they have very generous pension plans and a lot of retired workers to pay. Short of declaring bankruptcy they have to keep paying.
This is the whole point of contracts - if Telus can't get it right then it's their own fault. It is also deceptive conduct which there should be consumer protection laws against - you can't just advertise something and lie about all its qualities and expect to get away with it.
PS Good troll - you've even been modded insightful.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of US car companies are going under because they have very generous pension plans and a lot of retired workers to pay.
Yeah right. More like, they haven't had an original idea in 20 years and are just now trying to make reliable cars with good mileage instead of optimizing repair shop revenue.
Re: (Score:2)
why if i get a cell phone plan that i can not afford, can i change the terms?
Re:What??? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking more:
Company changes the nature of its product?
Unless they have a contract, this is a fairly pointless story. My experience has been if a company does this they just finish out the contracts for existing customers and then tell them its not longer available.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Insightful)
This is slightly different. This is company has a contract with the customer, and is using it's "we reserve the right to change any term and any time and/or cancel the contract for any reason without penalty" option to extract themselves from a contract they no longer wish to honor.
The customers now have the option to sign a new contract to pay more money for less service or switch to another provide [Rogers, yaay].
I'm sure Roger's wants to this this for their 'special' data pricing plans 6 Gb per month/some amount of money, but they probably don't want a whole bunch of unlocked iPhones on shorter-term contracts ready to switch when the competition get their GSM network setup in the next 1 or 2.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is slightly different. This is company has a contract with the customer, and is using it's "we reserve the right to change any term and any time and/or cancel the contract for any reason without penalty" option to extract themselves from a contract they no longer wish to honor.
This is not valid. You cannot arbitrarily change a contract and force the other party to honor it, it just doesn't happen. Our legal system would not allow it, because it would open up options for me to agree to provide computer support to that cute girl in the next apartment and then suddenly turn her into my sex slave for all eternity.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Informative)
From
http://www.telusmobility.com/about/mike_pcs_pt_policy.shtml [telusmobility.com]
18.
Changes
These service terms (including any rates and charges) may be changed unilaterally by TELUS from time to time on at least thirty (30) days' notice to you, and such changes shall become effective once you use the service after such thirty (30) day period (which use shall be deemed conclusively to indicate acceptance of such changes.
So according to this, they could change the contract so you agree to provide computer support to that cute girl in the next apartment and then suddenly turn her into your sex slave for all eternity. And if you don't like it, you have to submit to arbitration instead of going to court [well, you could go to court, but they would generally say [at least here in Canada], you agreed to arbitrate [clause 15].
So there! I would be surprised if a similar clause is NOT most other cell phone contracts (in the Americas, Europe and Asia and everywhere else).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Whether the clause is legal is another question most probably related to the practical aspects of you as an individual being able to negotiate contract conditions with the much more powerful (legally speaking) service provider. Personally, I have always thought that it would not be considered equal under the eyes
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
we reserve the right to change any term and any time and/or cancel the contract for any reason without penalty
Funny how they can reserve a right that they never had in the first place.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Informative)
I have had nothing but problems with Telus. They cripple my phone, cripple the internet when viewed through the phone, and charge customers through the nose.
HERE IS A TIP TO GET FREE VOICEMAIL/SPARK 10/CALLER ID:
1)Call Telus (*611)
2)Yell AAAGGENT into the voice recognition system.
3)Yell AAAGEENT again.
4)AAAGEENT.
5)When you get a human say "When I connect to the mobile web, my phone takes me to the Telus homepage. I am then charged 2 cents. I didn't want to go to Telus' home page, I wanted to go to www.google.ca. Can you please block access to all websites hosted by telus.
6) They say "We can't do that."
7) You say "You guys are ripping off paying customers. I would love to change my homepage, but this crippled handset won't let me. Instead whenever I use my mobile browser, I get directed to Telus home, and charged 2 cents.
8) At this point they will do anything to get you off the phone, DON'T HANG UP!
9) Tell them that you are not hanging up the phone until this issue is resolved.
10) Eventually they will realize that they only solution is you give you a free spark 10 plan (so you don't get charged for viewing partner sites) which also includes VM and caller ID!
11) Save $10/month.
If you are a Telus customer (I feel your pain) please call them and do the above. It works, and you can screw telus out of some money.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Insightful)
HERE IS A TIP TO GET FREE VOICEMAIL/SPARK 10/CALLER ID:
You mean voicemail and CID isn't included by default? Fuck, you Canadians are getting shafted even more than I thought.
Re:What??? (Score:5, Informative)
The "Basic" VM is not free either...
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm an American, and I can say your telecommunications industry sucks. That's really saying something.
Re: (Score:2)
Wanna hear something even more crazy? The "Basic" Voicemail only allows you to have 3 messages for something like 48 hours. If you want more than 3 messages, you have to upgrade to another tier.
Its actually 3 messages for 3 days, but still pathetic: http://www.telusmobility.com/on/services/pcs/mini_voice_mail.shtml [telusmobility.com]
Re:What??? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:What??? (Score:5, Interesting)
Aliant (Bell) double billed me 11 months in a row. And they cut off my service, every month, for 'non-payment'. So at the end I had built up a credit of $950 on my account, and yet each month they still debited my account and then disconnected for non payment. When I said cancel the contract they argued over the cancellation fee. They finally relented though. I don't think they are stupid though, just pure incarnate evil.
Rogers on the hand were a lot nicer. Just stupid beyond belief. My father started calling them 'Rogers Clueless' instead of 'Rogers Wireless' because they screwed up his bill, my sisters bill, mine, and almost any Rogers customers I've talked to. My favorite screwup is when they simply don't take the money for weeks or months because of some 'issue' in their system. Morans!
So as of yesterday, based on the recommendations of two friends, I now have a Telus phone here on my desk and hope against hope they don't screw me too badly. The two friends have assured me Telus doesn't suck that match. I'll let you know when the two year contract runs out.
Re: (Score:2)
... have assured me Telus doesn't suck that match.
damn. ... doesn't suck that *much*.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I had to take Bell to court to get that cancellation fee back... they only agreed to se
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For cell phones maybe. I wouldn't trade our Internet access for your phone rates though.
... And your government is the the one spending hundreds of billions of dollars that you don't have to support a "war" with no discernable enemies.
It's a small shaft, I'll live with it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I was with Telus since mid-nineties til everyone was finally forced to introduce a way to switch carrier without losing the mobile phone number. I had to wait for that unfortunately before I could switch, but once it was here I ran from Telus as fast as I possibly could. I am with Rogers now, they suck too, but with Telus it was the figurative mobile hell, locked phones with no SIM cards, outrages charges, various catches (for example with Telus I had to call them before going to US to turn on the roaming
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What??? (Score:5, Informative)
They are not permitted to hang up on callers; as long as they remain on the line and are not abusive. This is standard across may call centers, as disconnecting the call constitutes refusing to help with the customers problem and not acting reasonably.
The agent will eventually try anything to get you to go away as their calls per minute rate is dropping all the time you stay on the line, and most are paid bonuses based on how many calls they handle in day/week/month.
Some call centers are allowed to put you on hold for a considerable length of time, in the hope that you hang up; don't hang up.
If you are cut off while complaining, write them a letter with the time and date of the call, tell them you were disconnected while attempting to sort out your problem, and give them a reasonable time to get back in touch with you to rectify the problem (say 14 days).
If you get to the next step of legal action, after the reasonable time has expired, they don't have a leg to stand on; all because they disconnected your call and don't respond well to letters.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I called Fido and asked them to match one of Koodo Mobile's plans with a better price and features. Telus has and is still pushing Koodo mobile strongly out there and they're stealing a shitload of customers because their plans are cheaper in average and there's no SAF (system access fee) so you can use them or Virgin Mobile (also no SAF) as a reference of what you are looking for at cheaper prices.
For $2
Comcast also (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Canadian wireless companies are the worst in the world.
I was looking into plans that would cover Canada and the US as if it was one big roaming/calling local area. US providers used to offer a $25 add-on to their national plans to cover Canada too, but they were getting raped by Rogers/Telus so they quit. Now the only way to cover both is to go with Rogers/Telus and take a Canadian number.
A plan with 1600 minutes costs on the order of $450 USD with unlimited data, and that's not "REAL" unlimited data. Th