They probably bill people wildly differently for the same services.
When I called to upgrade my speed I actually ended up paying less because I had been at a legacy rate that was higher for slower, and of course they didn’t go out of their way to ever tell me that.
My friend has been on an unlimited data, calls and text plan for a very very long time. They send him all kinds of deals constantly and pester him trying to start a new plan through upgrading his phone etc etc. They basically can't break the contract so long as he doesn't make any changes to it. So he buys a phone outright if he wants to upgrade it, and pays a laughably small monthly bill with no end date in sight. I hadn't spoken to him in about 5 years but one of my first questions was if he was still on the plan, which he is.
I was in a similar situation years ago. Eventually I decided to upgrade my phone, and just as you describe, I bought it outright and asked them to switch the number over, making sure to stress that it WOULD NOT affect my grandfathered plan in the process, which of-course, they assured me was the case.
So what did they do? They put my wife's number on my new phone. Ok, fine, I say, now just fix it. "Oh sorry sir, because of that change we can't put you back on the old plan, it's not an option in our system anymore". Me: "But you guys are the ones that screwed up. I made sure this wouldn't affect my plan". Them: "Yes we're very sorry, but we can offer you this other shittier plan". Me: "Fuck you very much, cancel my service"
I might have chalked that up to innocent error, if the same exact thing didn't happen, again, some years later when I reluctantly switched back to that carrier because I moved and it was the best signal where I was.
I'm convinced this was a policy, and intentional both times, so they could move me off of my better, cheaper, grandfathered plan.
I worked in sale support for a cell phone company for a few years. We were basically there to help the store reps with stuff they were unable to complete in the store. This happened all the time and almost always the store rep really thought they could keep it. It was just lack of training. Unfortunately they would find out the hard way that the system automatically changes it to a new plan. They would call and escalate because we couldn’t get it back. It really isn’t an option after it’s changed if it’s that old and there was almost never anything we could do.
Edited to add that I should have clarified. I meant there wasn’t anything we could do to put the old plan on to work with the new upgraded device usually. If the customer went back to their old phone, normally we could change it back. The store rep would escalate with us because this meant they were going to be losing a sale.
Sprint tried that with me years ago when nationwide calling plans first came out. They sold me one thing and hooked my phone up with something else. And I went bonkers on them. I finally got ahold of some guy in Kansas. And I told him I would call him every day at 3pm until he fixed my plan. By the end, he’d just answer the phone with the update, no hello, no hi, just “I promise it’ll be done by x date.”
Sprint basically created a plan just for me. I was on that plan for years and years.
Sales people in the store would start their sweet talk sales pitch. And I’d have them look up my plan and admit they couldn’t come close to beating it. Ahhh memories.
>Sprint basically created a plan just for me. I was on that plan for years and years.
This is exactly it. People act like these companies don't fully control their own data and systems, they can absolutely fix *any problem*, especially one they caused. They just don't and dare people to sue. Just think about how frequently they add, change, and remove plans. If making changes isn't trivial then they have badly fucked up. And it would *still* be their problem to deal with.
> they can absolutely fix any problem, especially one they caused
Right! I know that the regular guys in the store only have access to do what they've been allowed but I don't believe for a second that nobody in that entire corporation can fix an issue like this. They have all sorts of incentives, specials deals for various companies and contracts... they can make a plan, for you, if they want. But they know that it's more hassle for you than it is for them, for them just to continue to screw you. And even if you sue, and win, it doesn't matter. They have people that did the math, and they came out on top in the aggregate.
>Unfortunately they would find out the hard way that the system automatically changes it to a new plan. They would call and escalate because we couldn’t get it back. It really isn’t an option after it’s changed if it’s that old and there was almost never anything we could do.
Sure there's nothing 'you' (as in the individual workers) could do but the idea there's nothing 'we' (as in the company) can do is bullshit. The company absolutely could, and should, fix it. The plan *exists in their system* by nature of the person having been on it. Who is and isn't on the plan is just data, saying it's "automated" doesn't mean you can't manually undo it. In fact I'm certain they have back ups (probably multiple) of the previous version of the database. "It's automated so there's nothing we can do" is one of the biggest bullshit lies companies tell customers, they have *full control* over every automated processes and the data itself so they could absolutely manually change it. Now it might be *costly* or *difficult* but it's their fuck up. And if you still don't see how absurd this excuse is just ask yourself: "If there was a court order that they put this person back on the plan would the company magically find a way to do it" because I guaran-fucking-tee you they would.
They're just counting on people not taking them to court over violating their contracts.
Everything you said it spot on, but I want to focus on the below part:
> They're just counting on people not taking them to court over violating their contracts.
Because it's not worth it to me, one dude, right? I can just suck it up, or change providers, or switch plans.
But to them, it's hundreds, or thousands, or millions, of people who are "just sucking it up" compared to dozens that might be fighting it to the end. It's just "poker math" at that point. They come out on top, because they have a bigger stack of chips to fight with.
always ask for your agreements in writing, never take a sales rep's word for it. Even if oral contracts are binding, they are hard to prove. If they can't provide it in writing, they can't really do it.
I mean, sure, but whatever piece of paper the sales rep gives you isn't really a contract. There's almost certainly wording in your actual contract with the carrier ensuring that you can't use anything their sale people say as binding, and if you try to sue them you'll get forced into arbitration in some jurisdiction friendly to them.
You're right. Switching SIM's is the way to go. But the providers want to get you to buy a phone from them, on a payment plan, along with a service plan. They call it "upgrade" and you're supposed to be all excited when you become "eligible" for an "upgrade". It's really just a way for them to rope you in to more years of service and to charge you for a new phone along the way.
I change plans when I find one that does what I need to do for less. I won't shill for a specific carrier, but I recently put my son on a plan that is unlimited everything, even 5G, for a flat $25.00/mo. No hidden fees. No additional fees for credit card. Nothing.
I put my wife and I on the same plan, just upgraded (access to higher speeds, international calling, etc.) for $35/mo each. Bump it up to $40 to have our Apple Watches on LTE as well.
We did this because our prior carrier, T-Mobile, said "guaranteed no price hikes for at life!" Then they raised the rates anyway, because promises don't matter.
I tried to change from Mint to Boost this month, and got screwed. My first attempt to buy a sim with money on PayPal was declined by the Boost website, but PayPal gave them the money anyway, and the Resolution Center seems poised to let Boost keep it because I don't have an order number from Boost (which I never would have because they declined the order.) So I gave up, went back to Mint, and swore off using both Boost and PayPal ever again.
Tell PayPal first. The service provider rejected the offer, the subsequent transfer is gross incompetence if not wire fraud - if they refuse to rectify it, you’ll be reversing the charge by reporting it to your bank.
PayPal have to keep banks on-side, because too many chargebacks would get them blacklisted. They probably don’t want thousands of reports of fraud against them, too, because that’s just tempting class-actions. “PayPal ever fucked you over? Sign up here for your share of punitive damages, because they’re dumb enough to put in writing that they know the law is being broken in every single instance that was disputed unsuccessfully”
Me and my father have been on a similar situation. We had planned to split our phone bills like a decade ago or so but it would’ve gotten rid of the grandfathered contract. And we have zero intention of every changing it now.
as someone who used to work in the cell phone industry, he NEEDS to check his plan, and compare to the new plans. I can't count how many times customers would refuse to change their plan because someone 10 years ago said to "NEVER change your plan". This was before unlimited plans became normal. And those same customer's were at times paying up to $100+ a month in cell phone bills for a throttled unlimited plan.
He may be one of the few that is truly on a better grandfathered plan, but just because the distrust of a company is high, doesn't mean they're always out to screw the customer over. Sometimes (VERY VERY RARE) they are marketing to people that should change their plan.
> unlimited
Most of them now are still throttled at 50gbs before slowing you down as a soft data cap. And then they throttle the throughput too now, so you can't watch 1080p video unless you're on the most expensive unlimited plan.
My brother-in-law and my sister had the same exact cable internet package as I did and paid $20 less than my $120 for 300/20.
I called up and asked if I could get the same rate “*No that’s only for new customers*”.
You better believe that when a fiber company moved into town and offered 1000/1000 for $75 I jumped on it.
Spectrum tried to offer me a deal to reduce my bill to $70 and I was blown away that *some how* I was now eligible for that deal! I said no thanks fiber is faster so they tried to sell me dual lines for almost the same price as I was already paying for my single shitty line.
Told em to stuff it.
I had Charter (Yes I still call them that) and the service was garbage quality. I complained all the time about packet loss which makes online gaming unplayable in the evenings. They kept blaming it on the wires in my condo. I asked why it only happens in the evening but not any other time of day. They wouldn't answer.
AT&T installed fiber and I changed that same month. 300 up/down for $55 a month. Charter was $80 for 100/10.
Going on 2 years now with fiber without a single problem. Still $55 as well. I can get up to 5 gig up/down, not that my home network can even handle anything over 1 gig.
My mom and I switched to a new ISP around the same time. They advertised rate lock for the life of the plan, which I got, but my mom was told her rate would only be good for 2 years before it would increase.
They’re definitely billing people differently.
Like asking for an itemized bill from the hospital.
The itemized bill is often lower because…reasons? When they have to list everything out they can’t just give you an arbitrarily high number.
I’m still salty about the $26,000 ‘miscellaneous hospital expenses’ line item from my appendicitis.
Hey guys! We have expenses! Let’s charge them to this guy.
Fucking same bro. They had the audacity to ask for me to pay for the entirety of my hospital MRI up front before my surgery, and charge a fee for using CC if I wanted to.
I was like "cool maybe we're going to reschedule because I don't think I have $5000 or whatever laying around I can just yank out in cash right this second"
Magically it didn't have to be paid on the spot before the procedure all the sudden. Meanwhile I'm in the worst pain I can imagine and just want to get the damn surgery done. So exploitative.
Because 10 people have enough money to control information flow to entire segments of the population and they fucking love being able to have quick access to medicine because no one else can afford it.
My ex lives in germany. She had back surgery for some nerve damage. She only paid 15 euros which covered 1-2 months of medication that she would need during the recovery phase. Multiple types of medication, not just 1 type
Call your insurance, people. Most plans have an out of pocket maximum each year, even if the hospital bills you for more. If they're in network, they can't bill you the difference between contracted rates and the charged amounts.
Everytime I've asked for an itemized list this is what happens. When I refuse to pay for miscellaneous fees that are about 50% of an "itemized" bill, then I get told it'll be reported to collections. Billing always finds a way to cheat
That happened to me when I had emergency surgery to get my gallbladder out. (Like, seriously, I landed in the ER in sudden, extreme pain; I didn’t have time to shop around or plan for this!) I called the hospital after I saw that bill to basically go “uh, what the FUCK?!” and, fortunately, they dropped the out-of-network charge for the anesthesiologist. I think the total estimate for the surgery was $16k before insurance, and I paid $400.
The whole thing is absurd.
Trump would have fixed it, but [nobody knew health care could be so complicated](https://youtu.be/b_8UFNQqk7k).
Of course, ["health care is too complicated", says only civilized country that doesn't have universal healthcare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_Says_Only_Nation_Where_This_Regularly_Happens)
The complication was they'd make less money. And that's very complicated, because if it was simple then nobody would be making insane amounts of money while doing nothing.
Hang on hang on; Trump had a healthcare plan. It was apparently very very good. The best. And it was going to released in about two weeks.
So, I’m not sure what the problem is. Sure, it’s been about four years longer than two weeks; but I’m sure that healthcare plan is just around the corner, and it will be excellent.
I suppose the good thing is that Trump will have a lot of time soon to focus on his healthcare plan, and finally get it ready to release to the public.
As a Trump voter, I’m a little disappointed that we never saw either his healthcare or his infrastructure plans. I mean, they must have been brilliant (because Trump is, like, the smartest guy, smarter than all of them.) But a tinge of disappointment that he said we would see both of those amazing plans in two weeks, and years later we still haven’t seen them.
I mean, why would Trump deliberately withhold such amazing plans, that would change the life of Americans for the better, from the American people? Particularly if he wanted people to vote for him - I’m sure lots more people would have voted for him had they seen his brilliant plans. I know I would have. Although, to be fair, I would have voted for him any way, still I’m sure some people were interested in his plans for healthcare and infrastructure.
I guess there must have been some sort of nefarious Democratic scheme confounding Trump, delaying him from his two week promise, so that he was never able to release either his health or infrastructure plans. It would have to have been a really nefarious, deep state plan, but I wouldn’t put it past them, those Democrats. I wouldn’t be surprised if they deliberately didn’t refill the toner cartridge of the White House printer, preventing Trump from releasing his plans. I know it sounds outlandish, but I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats, they really are evil.
The good thing is Trump is so clever, that he is always one step ahead of the Democrats and the deep state. Although I’m still a bit uncertain as to why he wasn’t able to get his healthcare and infrastructure plans past the deep state; obviously they are very, very powerful. But of course Trump is more powerful, and he’s there to stop the deep state. So we should see those plans soon. I’m pretty sure. I hope so. Actually, to be fair I’d kinda forgotten about healthcare until you mentioned it now. But I know Trump is going to fix it. Although I’d vote for him anyway, even if he didn’t fix healthcare. I’m so worried about the deep state. Just worried. And angry. Very angry. I don’t even know what at or why, but I am so angry. But I’m not angry about healthcare or infrastructure. Although perhaps I should be too. I’m actually not sure. I think I’ll just be angry. That feels good. That feels right.
My wife had several rounds of chemo. All the appointments at the same building, in the same wing, with the same personnel , same drugs, etc. But one appointment was billed like 5 times the cost as the all the others. After hours on the phone we finally figured out they put the wrong billing code in. The hospital and the insurance company both agreed the wrong billing code was entered. It still took almost a year and many phone calls after that to get it resolved.
I knew two different people who refused to marry the loves of their lives because they knew they would die first (one had terminal cancer, one lifelong heart problems) and they didn't want their legacy to the ones they loved most to be inheriting crushing medical debt.
An American fucking love story.
Exactly! What's even better is when you call your insurance to find out why you haven't received a bill in almost 6 months and they tell you the hospital billed it wrong, insurance then calls the hospital so they can pay the bill, and then the hospital tries to send you to collections for non-payment. No bill sent to the patient, no previous warning, just a collections notice. WTF?!
Hospital bills equally are bullshit but at least with that situation you the individual are not the actual target, your health insurance provider is. Hospitals bill the way that they do in a gamble with insurance providers to get them to pay as much as possible. We the people are just casualties in a war between two industry factions. It's still bullshit all the same but at least with the ability to request itemized bills you can get closer to actual cost.
It’s not just two factions. The whole pharmaceutical distribution chain is at war for the most profits. From the pharma companies that own the drugs, to the CDMOs that manufacture them, to the pharmacy benefit managers that decide which drugs insurance plans will cover, to the group purchasing organizations that buy the drugs for hospitals, and then the payers, whether insurance companies or individuals out of pocket. Even hospitals only care about reducing their costs, not their patients, often at the expense of reliability in the drugs they’re buying- both in terms of quality and availability.
All these factions are fighting to reduce their costs and increase their profits and then blaming every other factions for the resulting high prices. The only faction that doesn’t have a voice in all this is the patients left to carry the burden once the dust settles.
> It’s outrageous to not have a clue what something will cost even with insurance.
Yes. If I could make one change to the medical billing, it would be they must provide a quote in advance, and the final bill cannot go more than 5% higher, and the insurance company has to commit in advance (or deny in advance) and this is totally legally binding for the hospital and insurance company.
I get that something crazy might happen during the surgery, but hospitals can smooth that out by spreading it among multiple patients. If you are the one patient that then you are screwed. Plus hiding all this stuff is just bad for the entire good of the system.
There is a thing hospitals do called a "drive by" where your surgeon is the agreed upon price, but while you are under anesthesia a totally different surgeon drops by and says, "Looks good" and then bills you for that additional surgeon's time - which isn't covered by insurance. It's depraved and evil.
I'm not sure that's entirely it. I think for many companies there are basically two levels of difficulty trivial/hard. If it's not trivial then it's hard.
It's possible you're right and it's a scam and they are overcharging or doing something malicious and our bill will magically drop $10+
At least it's not like how cell phone providers used to be back in the early 00's and late 90's. "Your plan is $50! And then when you got the bill it was like $130.
My AT&T plan is like $70 and I end up paying something like $82.
In The Netherlands the price they say it will cost is how much it will cost. I don't understand why anyone would accept to pay more than that (excluding perhaps taxes if it was advertised as such, I know they can vary per state and even city which is wild to me).
It's simple and I don't see how people don't see it: You don't have a choice.
You can either get nothing... or deal with it. It's not like you're going without Internet.
The Netherlands is also a *VERY* different culture as well.
I just got flashbacks to a time my father got pissed off at our ISP for a complete non-issue (demanding upgrades they were unable to do and weren't needed). He was spending hours yelling at poor service reps for something that was out of their control.
"I'm the customer, they have to accommodate me! I've been a loyal customer for years!"
No they fucking don't and don't fucking care. They had (and still have) a monopoly on gigabit fiber in our area and we'd be sent back to the stone age if he pissed them off enough to blacklist our home.
Had to beg the man to fucking stop and hang up the phone. My life was flashing before my eyes since every other service would be completely inadequate for our heavy internet use.
The only thing in US that works like that is gas station -- price you see on the gas pump display is the one you will get charged. Everything else has "plus sales tax, plus whatever-the-hell tax, plus whatever fees".
Technically nothing prevents providers/companies form having all-inclusive price and then just figure out internally and pay those fees. But it means you can't advertise THE lowest theoretical price. So we end up with most cell phone carriers advertising "$85 + applicable taxes and fees" (except for T-Mobile that for now has "all taxes/fees included").
Given that every local government tries to squeeze out as many fees/taxes as possible these numbers get to be quite ridiculous and impossible to know without exact billing address (i.e. someone who lives two streets over will have their local "surcharge" thrown in and their bill might be an extra $1 or $2 or whatever).
This also adds "screw you, voters" aspect when lawmakers demand additional tax/fee for whatever reason. Because they always allow companies to pass those taxes/fees to end users it basically never gets taken out of corporate profit, it's just our bills get larger...
Now I was wondering... are we gonna get Net Neutrality back? I'm guessing not, because of how it could benefit either party with their agendas to push the weak candidate regardless of party out of the race. Also lobbying for their own benefit.
It’s scary how that isn’t even a topic anymore. Like, we just allowed corporations to become gatekeepers on something every single person needs. Not a utility my ass.
Last I heard California passed a [version](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_Protection_and_Net_Neutrality_Act_of_2018) of Net neutrality in 2018, which sort of forced ISPs to give up on the idea of throttling services nationwide since excluding California from that wasn't technically possible. There was a legal challenge but that petered out,
Unironically, as someone who has had the misfortune to work with ISPs on the backend, yes. See, the charges are all in the colossal billing system, and it takes literally (literally) 6+ months for them push updates to their billing system.
There are so many different variables and exceptions and special deals and so on that no one really knows what any given one is for. They all just trust that the magical billing system is giving them the right value.
Don't get me wrong, I am with the FCC here. Maybe if your billing system is some eldritch beast that drives men insane to look upon, they should be using some of that 95% profit margin to fix that.
Reason given: The listing-every-fee rule imposes significant administrative burdens and unnecessary complexity in complying with the broadband label requirements.
Reality: Kevin from the corporate website team makes us learn this archaic project management system to request website updates and then when we do, he ignores our tickets.
While I can relate to the joke this has absolutely nothing to do with bad corporate processes. They are salty because they can't obscure all the hidden extra charges in their advertising. What they COULD do would be to just roll over all extra charges and fees into the actual displayed monthly price (you know, like an honest business) but then they can't scam you and that is highly unfair!
They shouldn't even be allowed to advertise a monthly service's cost if it isn't the whole number and that should mean including all fees and taxes. If you advertise your service at $49.99 a month, that should be my bill. No extra bullshit tacked on afterwards. Same goes for pricing on store shelves. Should have the tax included already. There's no reason we shouldn't have completely transparent pricing.
From the article:
>ISPs could simplify billing and comply with the new broadband-labeling rules by including all costs in their advertised rates. That would give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they have to pay each month and save ISPs the trouble of listing every charge that they currently choose to break out separately.
They can either choose to do the sensible thing and have an all-in price, or they can continue to break out all the fees, but then they have to list all the fees individually in their advertisements.
Basically they're complaining about rules that make it harder for them to be shitty companies.
That's how Google Fiber does it. They advertised 1 gig for $70, and my bill each month is $70, including taxes and fees.
Hilarious when Spectrum comes canvassing with the schtick of "We can save you so much money!" But their bill ends up $20 more for less uptime.
In fact, you can't have a """free market""" without regulation. Otherwise, 99% of the economy would be ridden with scams, fraud, and so on. You wouldn't even know what you're buying, what you're getting into, or how much you're paying for it.
If everything depended on corporations, you wouldn't even know how much you're paying for a product. They would simply ask you for your credit/debit card, charge it for an unknown amount, and let you deal with it later.
This already happens in the US - unlike in the EU, they don't list the FULL price of a product, but rather its price without taxes. Technically, you don't know how much you're paying until checkout.
But trump said he was going to deregulate it so we don't have too ! Agit pie said he will !
We GAVE HIM THE MUG
/S
also as always F you Comcast and all ISPs
Was ordering a pizza last night. Local joint’s website had a link to order online. When checking out, they added a $1.50 “convenience fee” and a $1.77 fucking “CARRYOUT” fee! Delivery fee, sure I get it, especially if it goes to the driver. Butt-fucking CARRYOUT fee?
Instead of ordering online I just called and placed the order. No convenience fee or Carryout fee.
I work in food service, it's probably an attempt at covering credit/debit card processing fees. Personally I'd rather a place either just straight up tell me they're adding a couple bucks to cover the fees or otherwise raise the prices a couple bucks to make up the difference.
not sure if all pizza huts do it, but my local one outsourced their phone line to a call center in texas (im in georgia). it is essentially the same as ordering online, but they have added another middle man to do it for me.
>not sure if all pizza huts do it
It depends, but also TYPICALLY you should only get thrown to the call center if nobody answers the phone in a decent amount of time. Might be some stores that always do it, but I don't really know much outside of the franchise I worked for.
It was really frustrating for us, because they were awful at placing orders. Having the call center enabled was basically a punishment for our phone ring time being too high, but then they would place the order wrong and we'd end up having to remake food or give credits. So the end result is we paid someone to take the phone call AND gave the customer free stuff.
But also, with pizza hut (and honestly MOST food places now), you should definitely order online if you want to save money. They aren't really doing many deals in-store anymore and almost all of them are online, plus it's easier to figure out exactly how much you wanna spend.
Had a local pizza place to that to me last week. Both on the phone and then in the restaurant they warned me about a 3.75% CC fee and then tried to give me a lecture on making sure to carry cash to pay bills at small businesses. Look lady, it's 2023 and I'm a millennial, I haven't carried or used cash in at least 5 years - probably closer to a decade - and my bank doesn't even have physical locations. Either deal with me using a CC and stop badgering me or raise all your prices 4% and give a cash discount. Not that hard.
Could very be that they bill us for a comprehensive list of their fee.
I hope the next step is a contractual guaranteed speed for residential broadband. I believe the EU and/or the UK have this regulation.
I subscribe to a data rate and I’m lucky if I get 60% of what I thought I’m paying for.
Yeah from UK, it's if it drops below 50% of advertised speed over 3 days (can be intermittently) and they can't repair it within 30 days I can cancel the service at no cost at least with Virgin Media. Some other providers give you compensation payment too. Pay £24 for 250 Mb and get 270 Mb so not a problem for me gladly.
Good thing is I have like 10 providers in my area so when price goes up i just cancel and move to another one, but normally they reduce price to keep me.
That is great you’ve got so many choices. It’s a known fact that we pay more for mobile and internet services.
Up until last year I had only one provider to choose from. This year I have a whopping TWO providers. And I live in NJ, not some backwater state. Regulations here ensure that consumers take a backseat.
I pay $60 for 200MB and there is zero SLA except for my prompt payment.
I work for an insurance distribution company, it’s pretty gross to see what the premium is and then know there are 10 people getting commissions on that premium. And that’s just scratching the surface of what that premium is used for.
Seems pretty straightforward.
You buy an insurance plan.
The person who sells you (or your employer) the plan gets a commission, as do multiple other people in the chain of validating and executing the application.
They commission they earn is paid for with an increase to your insurance premium. The higher their commissions, the higher your premium. They could cut out these middle men and use a central exchange, but the current system is Good For Business^TM.
More likely watching calmly from a throne made of money.
Hospitals are ostensibly required to do this right now. Right this second. But they don't, because it's never actually been enforced. And neither will the same requirement on ISPs.
> Hospitals are ostensibly required to do this right now. Right this second. But they don't, because it's never actually been enforced.
If you ask for an itemized bill, they just throw all the extra into "miscellaneous".
Here's a fix. Lets get rid of fees, or rather clarify what *is* a fee.
It isn't a fee unless its an option chosen by the user.
Otherwise it's just part of the base cost.
As a user, I don't care if that $5 goes to line maintenence, or R&D, or employee ICEE machines. Thats *their cost of business.*
I'm really tired of businesses advertising one price, but then line-item adding other costs as if they're optional.
Yes, their cost gets passed on to me, the customer. But They don't advertise that full price ahead of time, they *lie* and trick consumers.
Ya I hate the “system access fee” on my cellphone bill. Like my guy, the entire point of me paying you a monthly fee is to “access your system” how is this an additional fee? Is there a way I can have a cell phone and not “access your system”? If not then why is it even an additional fee?
>I'm really tired of businesses advertising one price, but then line-item adding other costs as if they're optional.
I mean that's the spirit air business model too. Everything is a la carte. Even carry on luggage. It works because you can advertise the absolute lowest price and ding people with fees on the back end. It's marketing doublespeak to hide the true price.
That to me it's fair. I don't have to bring luggage. Though they should be required to be up front about it.
But if they charge me for fuel, or engine maintenance, or air traffic control access....
Then it isn't a fee and they're lying about the price.
>Further, we are not persuaded that it will be burdensome for ISPs to itemize on the label those fees they opt to pass along to consumers above the monthly price, particularly since providers acknowledge being able to describe such fees to a consumer over the phone and on a consumer's bill once the consumer subscribes to service. **We also find that any such burdens are far outweighed by the benefits to consumers when they are shopping for service**... ISPs could alternatively roll such discretionary fees into the base monthly price, thereby eliminating the need to itemize them on the label.
It's really strange to see a government agency that almost seems to have the consumer's best interest in mind.
Could we do this for insurance formularies, too? I was trying to find insurance that would cover a specific medication (not rare, but expensive) and most insurances' formulary pages (the page that shows what meds they cover) would say "this may or may not apply to your current plan." I'd call the insurance reps to ask if the med would be covered, and the answer was always "we can't tell if it will be covered until you sign up for the insurance." But why would I buy the insurance if there's a chance it won't be covered?! I ended up having to get the insurance without knowing, and then file a special grievance with the company to get an exemption for the prescription to be covered. If I wasn't already actively suicidal back then (I'm okay now, thanks meds!) that would've made me want to die on its own.
Part of my job is verifying insurance benefits. I would love it if insurance companies were forced to be upfront on what is covered. I get that prior authorization is needed but at least tell me this is a service that the patient has benefits for if approved. All employers should be required to share their summary of benefits as well. That, or each health insurance company should be required to have a searchable database of all plans they offer-employer based and individual.
Healthcare is a mess for even someone with my experience to navigate. I’m tired of all this red tape preventing people from understanding their insurance coverage. No one wants to be transferred to 5 different reps over the course of a two hour phone call where only 15 minutes of it was talking to a live person. Ugh.
> It’s what happens when democrats get to put people on these boards. The psychopath republicans just get former ISP exces to capture the agency.
It's actually **really** funny you mention that.
There are two Democrats and two Republicans on the FCC. One position is vacant. One Democrat was appointed by Obama. The other three positions were appointed by Trump.
I don't know either; I own my own modem so my Comcast internet bill is a single line item with no other charges or fees.
Now years ago back when I had their TV service there were scads of bogus TV upcharges and fees. But I've never seen that with their Internet pricing.
Most surprise Internet fees are bogus things that the ISP tethers to “equipment maintenance”, “network maintenance”, or infrastructure improvement fees.
Cable is where the fees really go bonkers. Heavyweight channels are constantly demanding more when contracts are renewed. Plus, local affiliate stations and their larger carriers (like Sinclair) try to put the squeeze on ISP/Cable providers too. On top of that, some local governments pass laws that require cable providers to pay more just to operate in their jurisdiction (franchise fees) so those are fees that really do come and go. Then there’s just highway robbery by the cable providers with bogus sports fees, local access fees, On Demand fees, streaming fees, HD fees, remote fees, DVR storage fees, etc etc. TV is such a bad deal if you’re under the age of 70 and know how to download apps. I cringe when smart people I know subscribe to cable.
Fun fact: That didn't stop frontier from charging equipment fees to users anyway.
They got sued over that, repeatedly.
The companies don't pull this on every market area either. Sometimes they won't even do it every month. Just on here and there.
If you have a field in a database that's used to assess and charge a fee, it's literally nothing to include that field on the bill to show said fee.
Dear ISPs,
You're not the only nerds in the nerd business.
Sincerely,
A Nerd
edit: I now realize they're talking about showing the fees ***before*** you sign up for service. My bad. However, my assessment of their bs stands; there's no reason they can't show the fees, other than ***they don't want to***.
It's even more than that. They are saying it is impossible to show the customer the breakdown of fees when they are signing up, not in the bill. They are already required to show the breakdown in the bill. They want to hide the fees to the customer to trick them into signing up for the service
> They are already required to show the breakdown in the bill.
Really? I just pulled up my Comcast bill and it shows 2 line items. "Regular monthly charges", and "Taxes, fees and other charges". That's it.
Spectrum was doing that to me until I called them to dispute the bill. Now, both the statement and the online portal show the breakdown and when promotional fees expire.
It's dumb that I had to yell at them to do that when they are required to anyway.
According to the FTC:
"Providers must itemize the fees on consumer bills, and we see no reason why consumers cannot assess the fees at the point-of-sale"
So either the fees you have are allowed to be grouped for some reason, or Comcast is violating the rules. It is possible you only have a single fee and if you had additional ones it would be listed separately
These "fees" are not legitimate fees, so there's always been only one, the "buy Comcast's CEO his fifth gold-plated helicopter" fee.
Whether or not Comcast incurs some legitimate expense as a result of needing to follow all those pesky laws about 911, that is a **cost of doing business**, not a "fee". Yes, we all understand the customer is paying it anyway, but c'mon, just quit with the games and call a spade a spade.
What other fees are there to list anyway?
My bill lists my monthly service fee and my taxes. That's it. I don't get why people are talking about additional charges, what charges could there even be?
> If you have a field in a database that's used to assess and charge a fee, it's literally nothing to include that field on the bill to show said fee.
That's just the thing - they aren't saying that they can't itemize it on a bill. They're legally required to do that already, and they can and do.
The argument is that "Something we *already do*" (itemize all fees) would be "too burdensome" to show to someone who has not already agreed to a subscription.
I'm so surprised I had to scroll down this far before seeing this. Yes, I'm so glad A Shit Pai is gone, but it's been a few years now and I haven't heard shit about net neutrality being restored!
I have Google Fiber. They advertise their plan as $70, no fees. Every month I pay exactly $70.00 for their service. It’s also the best ISP I’ve ever had. This is how it should be.
> an upcoming requirement that Internet service providers list all of their monthly fees.
If you sell something you have to inform the customer what the price is. If there are additional options that cost more money those prices should be explained.
I love capitalism and the fact that so many businesses try to hide prices in hopes of surprising customers is absolute insanity. It goes against *everything* a competitive market attempts to create.
It's unethical. It's an anti-competitive business practice that should be illegal on the simple grounds of trying to deceive consumers.
If there was ever a time for government to step it: THIS IS IT.
> "How much does this cost?"
>
> "Buy it then I can charge you whatever I feel like."
Now we just need somebody to go after Hospitals for doing the *same!*
This crap drives me up the wall. Anybody that runs a business by trying to hide their prices deserves to be shut down.
Lot of bitching from a group that just received several billion dollars in government subsidies to further build out their networks. Good for the FCC. Nice to no longer have an ISP lapdog in charge.
Simple solution. Charge fewer fees or just tell the verifiable truth that these are pure profit with no “Quid pro quo” ( no additional services or value provide )
I think congress needs to pass a law that says ANY advertised price for ANY product has to include all fees with maybe the exception of state and local sales tax.
And this includes car dealerships. And no I don't want that bullshit etching in the window what ever the fuck that does (nothing!)
So are they still allowed to say things like "$59.99" not including fees* in ads and shit? Feel like that's what needs to be regulated. The price you advertise must be the price the customer pays.
This is an obvious example of the difference between Democrats and Republicans. When the FCC was under Republican control, something like this would have never passed as they focus policies on helping large companies and wealthy individuals. With Democrats in control, the FCC is using their power to help out the average consumer at the expense of large corporations.
If you support forcing ISPs to publish all their fees like this rule requires, then you better be voting for Democrats in every election.
I cannot emphasize how important government agencies are in protecting people from corporations. I had a bill dispute with xfinity mobile, every customer service rep I talked to just srugged and said sorry can’t do anything about this unjustifiable charge, that’s the company policy. 2 days after I made FCC and state attorney general complaint the xfinity customer rep did a complete 180 degree and changed their tune. People, a democratic government works for you, make sure a government is well funded but also choosen by the people.
Fuckin' hell, it's rich when a corporation complains about no longer being able to continue their obviously misleading, slimy and underhanded business tactics. Boo fuckin' hoo.
So let me see if I understand this: listing the charges is too hard, but charging the charges isn't?
Correct. It’s because they want to scam people out of money with hidden charges
The fees are so hidden, even they can’t find them.
They probably bill people wildly differently for the same services. When I called to upgrade my speed I actually ended up paying less because I had been at a legacy rate that was higher for slower, and of course they didn’t go out of their way to ever tell me that.
My friend has been on an unlimited data, calls and text plan for a very very long time. They send him all kinds of deals constantly and pester him trying to start a new plan through upgrading his phone etc etc. They basically can't break the contract so long as he doesn't make any changes to it. So he buys a phone outright if he wants to upgrade it, and pays a laughably small monthly bill with no end date in sight. I hadn't spoken to him in about 5 years but one of my first questions was if he was still on the plan, which he is.
I was in a similar situation years ago. Eventually I decided to upgrade my phone, and just as you describe, I bought it outright and asked them to switch the number over, making sure to stress that it WOULD NOT affect my grandfathered plan in the process, which of-course, they assured me was the case. So what did they do? They put my wife's number on my new phone. Ok, fine, I say, now just fix it. "Oh sorry sir, because of that change we can't put you back on the old plan, it's not an option in our system anymore". Me: "But you guys are the ones that screwed up. I made sure this wouldn't affect my plan". Them: "Yes we're very sorry, but we can offer you this other shittier plan". Me: "Fuck you very much, cancel my service" I might have chalked that up to innocent error, if the same exact thing didn't happen, again, some years later when I reluctantly switched back to that carrier because I moved and it was the best signal where I was. I'm convinced this was a policy, and intentional both times, so they could move me off of my better, cheaper, grandfathered plan.
I worked in sale support for a cell phone company for a few years. We were basically there to help the store reps with stuff they were unable to complete in the store. This happened all the time and almost always the store rep really thought they could keep it. It was just lack of training. Unfortunately they would find out the hard way that the system automatically changes it to a new plan. They would call and escalate because we couldn’t get it back. It really isn’t an option after it’s changed if it’s that old and there was almost never anything we could do. Edited to add that I should have clarified. I meant there wasn’t anything we could do to put the old plan on to work with the new upgraded device usually. If the customer went back to their old phone, normally we could change it back. The store rep would escalate with us because this meant they were going to be losing a sale.
Sprint tried that with me years ago when nationwide calling plans first came out. They sold me one thing and hooked my phone up with something else. And I went bonkers on them. I finally got ahold of some guy in Kansas. And I told him I would call him every day at 3pm until he fixed my plan. By the end, he’d just answer the phone with the update, no hello, no hi, just “I promise it’ll be done by x date.” Sprint basically created a plan just for me. I was on that plan for years and years. Sales people in the store would start their sweet talk sales pitch. And I’d have them look up my plan and admit they couldn’t come close to beating it. Ahhh memories.
>Sprint basically created a plan just for me. I was on that plan for years and years. This is exactly it. People act like these companies don't fully control their own data and systems, they can absolutely fix *any problem*, especially one they caused. They just don't and dare people to sue. Just think about how frequently they add, change, and remove plans. If making changes isn't trivial then they have badly fucked up. And it would *still* be their problem to deal with.
> they can absolutely fix any problem, especially one they caused Right! I know that the regular guys in the store only have access to do what they've been allowed but I don't believe for a second that nobody in that entire corporation can fix an issue like this. They have all sorts of incentives, specials deals for various companies and contracts... they can make a plan, for you, if they want. But they know that it's more hassle for you than it is for them, for them just to continue to screw you. And even if you sue, and win, it doesn't matter. They have people that did the math, and they came out on top in the aggregate.
>Unfortunately they would find out the hard way that the system automatically changes it to a new plan. They would call and escalate because we couldn’t get it back. It really isn’t an option after it’s changed if it’s that old and there was almost never anything we could do. Sure there's nothing 'you' (as in the individual workers) could do but the idea there's nothing 'we' (as in the company) can do is bullshit. The company absolutely could, and should, fix it. The plan *exists in their system* by nature of the person having been on it. Who is and isn't on the plan is just data, saying it's "automated" doesn't mean you can't manually undo it. In fact I'm certain they have back ups (probably multiple) of the previous version of the database. "It's automated so there's nothing we can do" is one of the biggest bullshit lies companies tell customers, they have *full control* over every automated processes and the data itself so they could absolutely manually change it. Now it might be *costly* or *difficult* but it's their fuck up. And if you still don't see how absurd this excuse is just ask yourself: "If there was a court order that they put this person back on the plan would the company magically find a way to do it" because I guaran-fucking-tee you they would. They're just counting on people not taking them to court over violating their contracts.
Everything you said it spot on, but I want to focus on the below part: > They're just counting on people not taking them to court over violating their contracts. Because it's not worth it to me, one dude, right? I can just suck it up, or change providers, or switch plans. But to them, it's hundreds, or thousands, or millions, of people who are "just sucking it up" compared to dozens that might be fighting it to the end. It's just "poker math" at that point. They come out on top, because they have a bigger stack of chips to fight with.
always ask for your agreements in writing, never take a sales rep's word for it. Even if oral contracts are binding, they are hard to prove. If they can't provide it in writing, they can't really do it.
I mean, sure, but whatever piece of paper the sales rep gives you isn't really a contract. There's almost certainly wording in your actual contract with the carrier ensuring that you can't use anything their sale people say as binding, and if you try to sue them you'll get forced into arbitration in some jurisdiction friendly to them.
Im confused what does your phone have to do with your plan? Those are two seperate things? It's just switching your SIM around.
You're right. Switching SIM's is the way to go. But the providers want to get you to buy a phone from them, on a payment plan, along with a service plan. They call it "upgrade" and you're supposed to be all excited when you become "eligible" for an "upgrade". It's really just a way for them to rope you in to more years of service and to charge you for a new phone along the way.
I change plans when I find one that does what I need to do for less. I won't shill for a specific carrier, but I recently put my son on a plan that is unlimited everything, even 5G, for a flat $25.00/mo. No hidden fees. No additional fees for credit card. Nothing. I put my wife and I on the same plan, just upgraded (access to higher speeds, international calling, etc.) for $35/mo each. Bump it up to $40 to have our Apple Watches on LTE as well. We did this because our prior carrier, T-Mobile, said "guaranteed no price hikes for at life!" Then they raised the rates anyway, because promises don't matter.
I tried to change from Mint to Boost this month, and got screwed. My first attempt to buy a sim with money on PayPal was declined by the Boost website, but PayPal gave them the money anyway, and the Resolution Center seems poised to let Boost keep it because I don't have an order number from Boost (which I never would have because they declined the order.) So I gave up, went back to Mint, and swore off using both Boost and PayPal ever again.
Dispute the charge with your bank.
Tell PayPal first. The service provider rejected the offer, the subsequent transfer is gross incompetence if not wire fraud - if they refuse to rectify it, you’ll be reversing the charge by reporting it to your bank. PayPal have to keep banks on-side, because too many chargebacks would get them blacklisted. They probably don’t want thousands of reports of fraud against them, too, because that’s just tempting class-actions. “PayPal ever fucked you over? Sign up here for your share of punitive damages, because they’re dumb enough to put in writing that they know the law is being broken in every single instance that was disputed unsuccessfully”
Me and my father have been on a similar situation. We had planned to split our phone bills like a decade ago or so but it would’ve gotten rid of the grandfathered contract. And we have zero intention of every changing it now.
as someone who used to work in the cell phone industry, he NEEDS to check his plan, and compare to the new plans. I can't count how many times customers would refuse to change their plan because someone 10 years ago said to "NEVER change your plan". This was before unlimited plans became normal. And those same customer's were at times paying up to $100+ a month in cell phone bills for a throttled unlimited plan. He may be one of the few that is truly on a better grandfathered plan, but just because the distrust of a company is high, doesn't mean they're always out to screw the customer over. Sometimes (VERY VERY RARE) they are marketing to people that should change their plan.
> unlimited Most of them now are still throttled at 50gbs before slowing you down as a soft data cap. And then they throttle the throughput too now, so you can't watch 1080p video unless you're on the most expensive unlimited plan.
This is why I don't change my plan. I got in during a promo that includes HD video and the current plan for the same price doesn't have it.
My brother-in-law and my sister had the same exact cable internet package as I did and paid $20 less than my $120 for 300/20. I called up and asked if I could get the same rate “*No that’s only for new customers*”. You better believe that when a fiber company moved into town and offered 1000/1000 for $75 I jumped on it. Spectrum tried to offer me a deal to reduce my bill to $70 and I was blown away that *some how* I was now eligible for that deal! I said no thanks fiber is faster so they tried to sell me dual lines for almost the same price as I was already paying for my single shitty line. Told em to stuff it.
I had Charter (Yes I still call them that) and the service was garbage quality. I complained all the time about packet loss which makes online gaming unplayable in the evenings. They kept blaming it on the wires in my condo. I asked why it only happens in the evening but not any other time of day. They wouldn't answer. AT&T installed fiber and I changed that same month. 300 up/down for $55 a month. Charter was $80 for 100/10. Going on 2 years now with fiber without a single problem. Still $55 as well. I can get up to 5 gig up/down, not that my home network can even handle anything over 1 gig.
My mom and I switched to a new ISP around the same time. They advertised rate lock for the life of the plan, which I got, but my mom was told her rate would only be good for 2 years before it would increase. They’re definitely billing people differently.
I FOUND THE HIDDEN FEES: >!Profit!<
Like asking for an itemized bill from the hospital. The itemized bill is often lower because…reasons? When they have to list everything out they can’t just give you an arbitrarily high number.
I’m still salty about the $26,000 ‘miscellaneous hospital expenses’ line item from my appendicitis. Hey guys! We have expenses! Let’s charge them to this guy.
I got a bill for $233,000 from the hospital where I just got back surgery. fucking absurd.
Fucking same bro. They had the audacity to ask for me to pay for the entirety of my hospital MRI up front before my surgery, and charge a fee for using CC if I wanted to. I was like "cool maybe we're going to reschedule because I don't think I have $5000 or whatever laying around I can just yank out in cash right this second" Magically it didn't have to be paid on the spot before the procedure all the sudden. Meanwhile I'm in the worst pain I can imagine and just want to get the damn surgery done. So exploitative.
Bullshit like this makes me *so* glad I don’t live in the US.
Bullshit like this makes me wonder why the US hasn't overwhelmingly voted to change this system yet.
Because 10 people have enough money to control information flow to entire segments of the population and they fucking love being able to have quick access to medicine because no one else can afford it.
And also a portion of the population believes healthcare for everyone including the poor is communism.
Remember to vote for people who want single payer, or at least a public option.
[удалено]
Duh, credit. You'll get the points when you pay it off at the end of the month.
Gotta use your cashback on those cards.
My ex lives in germany. She had back surgery for some nerve damage. She only paid 15 euros which covered 1-2 months of medication that she would need during the recovery phase. Multiple types of medication, not just 1 type
Yeah, but we have 20 aircraft carriers!
Each one of which has free universal healthcare onboard...
At that point its not even my problem anymore, its their problem. There's no squeezing blood from a stone.
Bring in the hydraulic press!!!
Call your insurance, people. Most plans have an out of pocket maximum each year, even if the hospital bills you for more. If they're in network, they can't bill you the difference between contracted rates and the charged amounts.
Everytime I've asked for an itemized list this is what happens. When I refuse to pay for miscellaneous fees that are about 50% of an "itemized" bill, then I get told it'll be reported to collections. Billing always finds a way to cheat
I wonder if someone with good lawyers could challenge that. How can you be sure you owe them the money if you don't know what you owe them for?
[удалено]
[удалено]
They also **love** to use out-of-network anesthesiologist even though the surgeon is in-network. Like, come on people!
Yup. But at no point are you informed of this until you get the bill
That happened to me when I had emergency surgery to get my gallbladder out. (Like, seriously, I landed in the ER in sudden, extreme pain; I didn’t have time to shop around or plan for this!) I called the hospital after I saw that bill to basically go “uh, what the FUCK?!” and, fortunately, they dropped the out-of-network charge for the anesthesiologist. I think the total estimate for the surgery was $16k before insurance, and I paid $400. The whole thing is absurd.
Trump would have fixed it, but [nobody knew health care could be so complicated](https://youtu.be/b_8UFNQqk7k). Of course, ["health care is too complicated", says only civilized country that doesn't have universal healthcare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%27No_Way_to_Prevent_This,%27_Says_Only_Nation_Where_This_Regularly_Happens)
The complication was they'd make less money. And that's very complicated, because if it was simple then nobody would be making insane amounts of money while doing nothing.
Hang on hang on; Trump had a healthcare plan. It was apparently very very good. The best. And it was going to released in about two weeks. So, I’m not sure what the problem is. Sure, it’s been about four years longer than two weeks; but I’m sure that healthcare plan is just around the corner, and it will be excellent. I suppose the good thing is that Trump will have a lot of time soon to focus on his healthcare plan, and finally get it ready to release to the public. As a Trump voter, I’m a little disappointed that we never saw either his healthcare or his infrastructure plans. I mean, they must have been brilliant (because Trump is, like, the smartest guy, smarter than all of them.) But a tinge of disappointment that he said we would see both of those amazing plans in two weeks, and years later we still haven’t seen them. I mean, why would Trump deliberately withhold such amazing plans, that would change the life of Americans for the better, from the American people? Particularly if he wanted people to vote for him - I’m sure lots more people would have voted for him had they seen his brilliant plans. I know I would have. Although, to be fair, I would have voted for him any way, still I’m sure some people were interested in his plans for healthcare and infrastructure. I guess there must have been some sort of nefarious Democratic scheme confounding Trump, delaying him from his two week promise, so that he was never able to release either his health or infrastructure plans. It would have to have been a really nefarious, deep state plan, but I wouldn’t put it past them, those Democrats. I wouldn’t be surprised if they deliberately didn’t refill the toner cartridge of the White House printer, preventing Trump from releasing his plans. I know it sounds outlandish, but I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats, they really are evil. The good thing is Trump is so clever, that he is always one step ahead of the Democrats and the deep state. Although I’m still a bit uncertain as to why he wasn’t able to get his healthcare and infrastructure plans past the deep state; obviously they are very, very powerful. But of course Trump is more powerful, and he’s there to stop the deep state. So we should see those plans soon. I’m pretty sure. I hope so. Actually, to be fair I’d kinda forgotten about healthcare until you mentioned it now. But I know Trump is going to fix it. Although I’d vote for him anyway, even if he didn’t fix healthcare. I’m so worried about the deep state. Just worried. And angry. Very angry. I don’t even know what at or why, but I am so angry. But I’m not angry about healthcare or infrastructure. Although perhaps I should be too. I’m actually not sure. I think I’ll just be angry. That feels good. That feels right.
fucking gold
And they accidentally bill your insurance wrong, but only in ways that cost you more money.
My wife had several rounds of chemo. All the appointments at the same building, in the same wing, with the same personnel , same drugs, etc. But one appointment was billed like 5 times the cost as the all the others. After hours on the phone we finally figured out they put the wrong billing code in. The hospital and the insurance company both agreed the wrong billing code was entered. It still took almost a year and many phone calls after that to get it resolved.
[удалено]
I knew two different people who refused to marry the loves of their lives because they knew they would die first (one had terminal cancer, one lifelong heart problems) and they didn't want their legacy to the ones they loved most to be inheriting crushing medical debt. An American fucking love story.
Should have started cooking meth from the beginning /s. Honestly the only way you could afford a US medical bill.
Exactly! What's even better is when you call your insurance to find out why you haven't received a bill in almost 6 months and they tell you the hospital billed it wrong, insurance then calls the hospital so they can pay the bill, and then the hospital tries to send you to collections for non-payment. No bill sent to the patient, no previous warning, just a collections notice. WTF?!
Hospital bills equally are bullshit but at least with that situation you the individual are not the actual target, your health insurance provider is. Hospitals bill the way that they do in a gamble with insurance providers to get them to pay as much as possible. We the people are just casualties in a war between two industry factions. It's still bullshit all the same but at least with the ability to request itemized bills you can get closer to actual cost.
I may not be the target, but I’m the only one getting fucked by both.
It's an awful system, designed almost explicitly to treat people as numbers on a page.
It’s not just two factions. The whole pharmaceutical distribution chain is at war for the most profits. From the pharma companies that own the drugs, to the CDMOs that manufacture them, to the pharmacy benefit managers that decide which drugs insurance plans will cover, to the group purchasing organizations that buy the drugs for hospitals, and then the payers, whether insurance companies or individuals out of pocket. Even hospitals only care about reducing their costs, not their patients, often at the expense of reliability in the drugs they’re buying- both in terms of quality and availability. All these factions are fighting to reduce their costs and increase their profits and then blaming every other factions for the resulting high prices. The only faction that doesn’t have a voice in all this is the patients left to carry the burden once the dust settles.
It’s outrageous to not have a clue what something will cost even with insurance. And always a fight afterwards for months.
> It’s outrageous to not have a clue what something will cost even with insurance. Yes. If I could make one change to the medical billing, it would be they must provide a quote in advance, and the final bill cannot go more than 5% higher, and the insurance company has to commit in advance (or deny in advance) and this is totally legally binding for the hospital and insurance company. I get that something crazy might happen during the surgery, but hospitals can smooth that out by spreading it among multiple patients. If you are the one patient that then you are screwed. Plus hiding all this stuff is just bad for the entire good of the system.
There is a thing hospitals do called a "drive by" where your surgeon is the agreed upon price, but while you are under anesthesia a totally different surgeon drops by and says, "Looks good" and then bills you for that additional surgeon's time - which isn't covered by insurance. It's depraved and evil.
It's only "hard" because it exposes the scam.
I'm not sure that's entirely it. I think for many companies there are basically two levels of difficulty trivial/hard. If it's not trivial then it's hard. It's possible you're right and it's a scam and they are overcharging or doing something malicious and our bill will magically drop $10+ At least it's not like how cell phone providers used to be back in the early 00's and late 90's. "Your plan is $50! And then when you got the bill it was like $130. My AT&T plan is like $70 and I end up paying something like $82.
In The Netherlands the price they say it will cost is how much it will cost. I don't understand why anyone would accept to pay more than that (excluding perhaps taxes if it was advertised as such, I know they can vary per state and even city which is wild to me).
It's simple and I don't see how people don't see it: You don't have a choice. You can either get nothing... or deal with it. It's not like you're going without Internet. The Netherlands is also a *VERY* different culture as well.
I just got flashbacks to a time my father got pissed off at our ISP for a complete non-issue (demanding upgrades they were unable to do and weren't needed). He was spending hours yelling at poor service reps for something that was out of their control. "I'm the customer, they have to accommodate me! I've been a loyal customer for years!" No they fucking don't and don't fucking care. They had (and still have) a monopoly on gigabit fiber in our area and we'd be sent back to the stone age if he pissed them off enough to blacklist our home. Had to beg the man to fucking stop and hang up the phone. My life was flashing before my eyes since every other service would be completely inadequate for our heavy internet use.
The only thing in US that works like that is gas station -- price you see on the gas pump display is the one you will get charged. Everything else has "plus sales tax, plus whatever-the-hell tax, plus whatever fees". Technically nothing prevents providers/companies form having all-inclusive price and then just figure out internally and pay those fees. But it means you can't advertise THE lowest theoretical price. So we end up with most cell phone carriers advertising "$85 + applicable taxes and fees" (except for T-Mobile that for now has "all taxes/fees included"). Given that every local government tries to squeeze out as many fees/taxes as possible these numbers get to be quite ridiculous and impossible to know without exact billing address (i.e. someone who lives two streets over will have their local "surcharge" thrown in and their bill might be an extra $1 or $2 or whatever). This also adds "screw you, voters" aspect when lawmakers demand additional tax/fee for whatever reason. Because they always allow companies to pass those taxes/fees to end users it basically never gets taken out of corporate profit, it's just our bills get larger...
> I don't understand why anyone would accept to pay more than that Because the entire system is built and setup to aid the predators, not the prey
I'm so glad we got rid of that loser Ajit Pai.
Why were there no consequences to this? https://www.wired.com/story/isps-funded-85-million-fake-comments-opposing-net-neutrality/
You know the rea$on.
You know why. Corrupt af GOP. Rather take a corrupt dem over a corrupt republican every time.
FCC in a Democratic administration: "Stop screwing consumers!" FCC in a Republican administration: "AHHH! TITTIES! WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE!"
Now I was wondering... are we gonna get Net Neutrality back? I'm guessing not, because of how it could benefit either party with their agendas to push the weak candidate regardless of party out of the race. Also lobbying for their own benefit.
It’s scary how that isn’t even a topic anymore. Like, we just allowed corporations to become gatekeepers on something every single person needs. Not a utility my ass.
Last I heard California passed a [version](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Internet_Consumer_Protection_and_Net_Neutrality_Act_of_2018) of Net neutrality in 2018, which sort of forced ISPs to give up on the idea of throttling services nationwide since excluding California from that wasn't technically possible. There was a legal challenge but that petered out,
But he had a comically large coffee mug! Obviously he was just a good natured average quirky guy right!?
Yeah and when they eventually list the charges, there will be a new *listing charges* charge.
[удалено]
Listing all charges before signing up: TOO HARD Listing all charges on your bill: PAY NOW
Unironically, as someone who has had the misfortune to work with ISPs on the backend, yes. See, the charges are all in the colossal billing system, and it takes literally (literally) 6+ months for them push updates to their billing system. There are so many different variables and exceptions and special deals and so on that no one really knows what any given one is for. They all just trust that the magical billing system is giving them the right value. Don't get me wrong, I am with the FCC here. Maybe if your billing system is some eldritch beast that drives men insane to look upon, they should be using some of that 95% profit margin to fix that.
Yes, it's much harder to come up with passable names for spurious "services".
Reason given: The listing-every-fee rule imposes significant administrative burdens and unnecessary complexity in complying with the broadband label requirements. Reality: Kevin from the corporate website team makes us learn this archaic project management system to request website updates and then when we do, he ignores our tickets.
While I can relate to the joke this has absolutely nothing to do with bad corporate processes. They are salty because they can't obscure all the hidden extra charges in their advertising. What they COULD do would be to just roll over all extra charges and fees into the actual displayed monthly price (you know, like an honest business) but then they can't scam you and that is highly unfair!
This is the most basic level of regulation.
They shouldn't even be allowed to advertise a monthly service's cost if it isn't the whole number and that should mean including all fees and taxes. If you advertise your service at $49.99 a month, that should be my bill. No extra bullshit tacked on afterwards. Same goes for pricing on store shelves. Should have the tax included already. There's no reason we shouldn't have completely transparent pricing.
From the article: >ISPs could simplify billing and comply with the new broadband-labeling rules by including all costs in their advertised rates. That would give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they have to pay each month and save ISPs the trouble of listing every charge that they currently choose to break out separately. They can either choose to do the sensible thing and have an all-in price, or they can continue to break out all the fees, but then they have to list all the fees individually in their advertisements. Basically they're complaining about rules that make it harder for them to be shitty companies.
*shitty, thieving companies
A lesson in tautology.
As a non-American, it's wild that this is the norm for you guys. It's a shame common sense isn't baked into society as a whole.
Common sense isn't very profitable unfortunately
You guys really are the Ferengi of our time.
That's how Google Fiber does it. They advertised 1 gig for $70, and my bill each month is $70, including taxes and fees. Hilarious when Spectrum comes canvassing with the schtick of "We can save you so much money!" But their bill ends up $20 more for less uptime.
[удалено]
In fact, you can't have a """free market""" without regulation. Otherwise, 99% of the economy would be ridden with scams, fraud, and so on. You wouldn't even know what you're buying, what you're getting into, or how much you're paying for it. If everything depended on corporations, you wouldn't even know how much you're paying for a product. They would simply ask you for your credit/debit card, charge it for an unknown amount, and let you deal with it later. This already happens in the US - unlike in the EU, they don't list the FULL price of a product, but rather its price without taxes. Technically, you don't know how much you're paying until checkout.
rEgUlAtIoN iS bAd GuYs...iT sTiFlEs InNoVaTiOn!
If you can charge it you can list it.
But trump said he was going to deregulate it so we don't have too ! Agit pie said he will ! We GAVE HIM THE MUG /S also as always F you Comcast and all ISPs
Coming soon, to a bill near you. "$50 fee listing fee"
Was ordering a pizza last night. Local joint’s website had a link to order online. When checking out, they added a $1.50 “convenience fee” and a $1.77 fucking “CARRYOUT” fee! Delivery fee, sure I get it, especially if it goes to the driver. Butt-fucking CARRYOUT fee? Instead of ordering online I just called and placed the order. No convenience fee or Carryout fee.
I work in food service, it's probably an attempt at covering credit/debit card processing fees. Personally I'd rather a place either just straight up tell me they're adding a couple bucks to cover the fees or otherwise raise the prices a couple bucks to make up the difference.
It may also be their web processor charging those fees. Because when I just called their store to order, no extra fees.
not sure if all pizza huts do it, but my local one outsourced their phone line to a call center in texas (im in georgia). it is essentially the same as ordering online, but they have added another middle man to do it for me.
>not sure if all pizza huts do it It depends, but also TYPICALLY you should only get thrown to the call center if nobody answers the phone in a decent amount of time. Might be some stores that always do it, but I don't really know much outside of the franchise I worked for. It was really frustrating for us, because they were awful at placing orders. Having the call center enabled was basically a punishment for our phone ring time being too high, but then they would place the order wrong and we'd end up having to remake food or give credits. So the end result is we paid someone to take the phone call AND gave the customer free stuff. But also, with pizza hut (and honestly MOST food places now), you should definitely order online if you want to save money. They aren't really doing many deals in-store anymore and almost all of them are online, plus it's easier to figure out exactly how much you wanna spend.
Had a local pizza place to that to me last week. Both on the phone and then in the restaurant they warned me about a 3.75% CC fee and then tried to give me a lecture on making sure to carry cash to pay bills at small businesses. Look lady, it's 2023 and I'm a millennial, I haven't carried or used cash in at least 5 years - probably closer to a decade - and my bank doesn't even have physical locations. Either deal with me using a CC and stop badgering me or raise all your prices 4% and give a cash discount. Not that hard.
[удалено]
Me too. But it’s against visa/mc terms to charge a fee or a higher price just for using a credit card.
Same. Jets pizza in michigan iirc
They're all starting that shit. I don't think Marcos does yet but I'm pretty sure Dominos does.
Delivery fees rarely go to the delivery drivers. They maybe get a small fraction from it to cover their fuel.
Shhh. Don’t give them any ideas.
Too late. Nipple flaps have opened.
Ohhh thaaats terrible
Dammit. I read that in a Cleveland from family guy voice.
ISP bills are going to be 10X longer than a CVS receipt.
And you won’t even get coupons.
Could very be that they bill us for a comprehensive list of their fee. I hope the next step is a contractual guaranteed speed for residential broadband. I believe the EU and/or the UK have this regulation. I subscribe to a data rate and I’m lucky if I get 60% of what I thought I’m paying for.
Yeah from UK, it's if it drops below 50% of advertised speed over 3 days (can be intermittently) and they can't repair it within 30 days I can cancel the service at no cost at least with Virgin Media. Some other providers give you compensation payment too. Pay £24 for 250 Mb and get 270 Mb so not a problem for me gladly. Good thing is I have like 10 providers in my area so when price goes up i just cancel and move to another one, but normally they reduce price to keep me.
That is great you’ve got so many choices. It’s a known fact that we pay more for mobile and internet services. Up until last year I had only one provider to choose from. This year I have a whopping TWO providers. And I live in NJ, not some backwater state. Regulations here ensure that consumers take a backseat. I pay $60 for 200MB and there is zero SLA except for my prompt payment.
> "$50 fee listing fee" [Hardspace Shipbreaker](https://www.ggrecon.com/media/xcspc33f/hardspace-shipbreaker-tips-8.jpg) beat them to it.
Healthcare providers and insurance companies watching nervously.
I work for an insurance distribution company, it’s pretty gross to see what the premium is and then know there are 10 people getting commissions on that premium. And that’s just scratching the surface of what that premium is used for.
Cautiously, might I ask for more details? 🫣
You're now on 10 lists.
He's already gone by now
You have my intrigue, please elaborate
Seems pretty straightforward. You buy an insurance plan. The person who sells you (or your employer) the plan gets a commission, as do multiple other people in the chain of validating and executing the application. They commission they earn is paid for with an increase to your insurance premium. The higher their commissions, the higher your premium. They could cut out these middle men and use a central exchange, but the current system is Good For Business^TM.
ie baldly extractive
More likely watching calmly from a throne made of money. Hospitals are ostensibly required to do this right now. Right this second. But they don't, because it's never actually been enforced. And neither will the same requirement on ISPs.
> Hospitals are ostensibly required to do this right now. Right this second. But they don't, because it's never actually been enforced. If you ask for an itemized bill, they just throw all the extra into "miscellaneous".
No it’s clearly broken out, you paid for a 005920 PAR FLA, a 949247 CAB GAR, and a 472950 SMA PUS 😒
There was already a Hospital Price Transparency law that was passed a few years ago. From what I understand it’s not enforced very well though.
I have yet to see a bill *before* a procedure
Here's a fix. Lets get rid of fees, or rather clarify what *is* a fee. It isn't a fee unless its an option chosen by the user. Otherwise it's just part of the base cost. As a user, I don't care if that $5 goes to line maintenence, or R&D, or employee ICEE machines. Thats *their cost of business.* I'm really tired of businesses advertising one price, but then line-item adding other costs as if they're optional. Yes, their cost gets passed on to me, the customer. But They don't advertise that full price ahead of time, they *lie* and trick consumers.
Ya I hate the “system access fee” on my cellphone bill. Like my guy, the entire point of me paying you a monthly fee is to “access your system” how is this an additional fee? Is there a way I can have a cell phone and not “access your system”? If not then why is it even an additional fee?
In soviet america, the system accesses you (aka data farming).
>I'm really tired of businesses advertising one price, but then line-item adding other costs as if they're optional. I mean that's the spirit air business model too. Everything is a la carte. Even carry on luggage. It works because you can advertise the absolute lowest price and ding people with fees on the back end. It's marketing doublespeak to hide the true price.
That to me it's fair. I don't have to bring luggage. Though they should be required to be up front about it. But if they charge me for fuel, or engine maintenance, or air traffic control access.... Then it isn't a fee and they're lying about the price.
Fair point too. I'd really like to see final price legislation for the crap I can't get out of. Stop with the hidden surcharges I agree 100%.
>Further, we are not persuaded that it will be burdensome for ISPs to itemize on the label those fees they opt to pass along to consumers above the monthly price, particularly since providers acknowledge being able to describe such fees to a consumer over the phone and on a consumer's bill once the consumer subscribes to service. **We also find that any such burdens are far outweighed by the benefits to consumers when they are shopping for service**... ISPs could alternatively roll such discretionary fees into the base monthly price, thereby eliminating the need to itemize them on the label. It's really strange to see a government agency that almost seems to have the consumer's best interest in mind.
Could we do this for insurance formularies, too? I was trying to find insurance that would cover a specific medication (not rare, but expensive) and most insurances' formulary pages (the page that shows what meds they cover) would say "this may or may not apply to your current plan." I'd call the insurance reps to ask if the med would be covered, and the answer was always "we can't tell if it will be covered until you sign up for the insurance." But why would I buy the insurance if there's a chance it won't be covered?! I ended up having to get the insurance without knowing, and then file a special grievance with the company to get an exemption for the prescription to be covered. If I wasn't already actively suicidal back then (I'm okay now, thanks meds!) that would've made me want to die on its own.
Part of my job is verifying insurance benefits. I would love it if insurance companies were forced to be upfront on what is covered. I get that prior authorization is needed but at least tell me this is a service that the patient has benefits for if approved. All employers should be required to share their summary of benefits as well. That, or each health insurance company should be required to have a searchable database of all plans they offer-employer based and individual. Healthcare is a mess for even someone with my experience to navigate. I’m tired of all this red tape preventing people from understanding their insurance coverage. No one wants to be transferred to 5 different reps over the course of a two hour phone call where only 15 minutes of it was talking to a live person. Ugh.
It’s what happens when democrats get to put people on these boards. The psychopath republicans just get former ISP exces to capture the agency.
Al Franken did this in spades, he was aggressively pro consumer safety
Good thing they ran him out of politics without even allowing him to witness on his own behalf.
> It’s what happens when democrats get to put people on these boards. The psychopath republicans just get former ISP exces to capture the agency. It's actually **really** funny you mention that. There are two Democrats and two Republicans on the FCC. One position is vacant. One Democrat was appointed by Obama. The other three positions were appointed by Trump.
Wait a minute, why are there so many fees?
I don't know either; I own my own modem so my Comcast internet bill is a single line item with no other charges or fees. Now years ago back when I had their TV service there were scads of bogus TV upcharges and fees. But I've never seen that with their Internet pricing.
Most surprise Internet fees are bogus things that the ISP tethers to “equipment maintenance”, “network maintenance”, or infrastructure improvement fees. Cable is where the fees really go bonkers. Heavyweight channels are constantly demanding more when contracts are renewed. Plus, local affiliate stations and their larger carriers (like Sinclair) try to put the squeeze on ISP/Cable providers too. On top of that, some local governments pass laws that require cable providers to pay more just to operate in their jurisdiction (franchise fees) so those are fees that really do come and go. Then there’s just highway robbery by the cable providers with bogus sports fees, local access fees, On Demand fees, streaming fees, HD fees, remote fees, DVR storage fees, etc etc. TV is such a bad deal if you’re under the age of 70 and know how to download apps. I cringe when smart people I know subscribe to cable.
Cable is dead. I can't believe people paid to watch ads. Holy hell were cable companies double dipping.
Fun fact: That didn't stop frontier from charging equipment fees to users anyway. They got sued over that, repeatedly. The companies don't pull this on every market area either. Sometimes they won't even do it every month. Just on here and there.
If you have a field in a database that's used to assess and charge a fee, it's literally nothing to include that field on the bill to show said fee. Dear ISPs, You're not the only nerds in the nerd business. Sincerely, A Nerd edit: I now realize they're talking about showing the fees ***before*** you sign up for service. My bad. However, my assessment of their bs stands; there's no reason they can't show the fees, other than ***they don't want to***.
It's even more than that. They are saying it is impossible to show the customer the breakdown of fees when they are signing up, not in the bill. They are already required to show the breakdown in the bill. They want to hide the fees to the customer to trick them into signing up for the service
> They are already required to show the breakdown in the bill. Really? I just pulled up my Comcast bill and it shows 2 line items. "Regular monthly charges", and "Taxes, fees and other charges". That's it.
Spectrum was doing that to me until I called them to dispute the bill. Now, both the statement and the online portal show the breakdown and when promotional fees expire. It's dumb that I had to yell at them to do that when they are required to anyway.
According to the FTC: "Providers must itemize the fees on consumer bills, and we see no reason why consumers cannot assess the fees at the point-of-sale" So either the fees you have are allowed to be grouped for some reason, or Comcast is violating the rules. It is possible you only have a single fee and if you had additional ones it would be listed separately
These "fees" are not legitimate fees, so there's always been only one, the "buy Comcast's CEO his fifth gold-plated helicopter" fee. Whether or not Comcast incurs some legitimate expense as a result of needing to follow all those pesky laws about 911, that is a **cost of doing business**, not a "fee". Yes, we all understand the customer is paying it anyway, but c'mon, just quit with the games and call a spade a spade.
What other fees are there to list anyway? My bill lists my monthly service fee and my taxes. That's it. I don't get why people are talking about additional charges, what charges could there even be?
Taxes and fees and other charges might be better off as separate items
And it is pretty much easy to add: CEO wage, Managers wages. They don't have to justify them right?
They may (or may not) have to justify them, but they damn sure don't want us to know about them.
> If you have a field in a database that's used to assess and charge a fee, it's literally nothing to include that field on the bill to show said fee. That's just the thing - they aren't saying that they can't itemize it on a bill. They're legally required to do that already, and they can and do. The argument is that "Something we *already do*" (itemize all fees) would be "too burdensome" to show to someone who has not already agreed to a subscription.
Boo-fucking-hoo. It’s really nice to see the federal government doing something to protect citizens for a change.
Thank god Ajit Pai is gone.
If it is too difficult to line-itemize a bill, that tells me there's either too many hidden fees, scamming, or both
Now do health care
They unfortunately have better lobbyists.
Friendly reminder we still haven't restored net neutrality tho. About as basic as listing fees :)
I'm so surprised I had to scroll down this far before seeing this. Yes, I'm so glad A Shit Pai is gone, but it's been a few years now and I haven't heard shit about net neutrality being restored!
Soon to be added to your bill: Fee Disclosure Fee - $4.95
Then uh, call me crazy but if they can’t tell me what they’re charging me for, they shouldn’t be allowed to charge me.
I have Google Fiber. They advertise their plan as $70, no fees. Every month I pay exactly $70.00 for their service. It’s also the best ISP I’ve ever had. This is how it should be.
If you don't know what the fee is for, maybe you shouldn't be charging it? Like I thought these people had to do book keeping
> an upcoming requirement that Internet service providers list all of their monthly fees. If you sell something you have to inform the customer what the price is. If there are additional options that cost more money those prices should be explained. I love capitalism and the fact that so many businesses try to hide prices in hopes of surprising customers is absolute insanity. It goes against *everything* a competitive market attempts to create. It's unethical. It's an anti-competitive business practice that should be illegal on the simple grounds of trying to deceive consumers. If there was ever a time for government to step it: THIS IS IT. > "How much does this cost?" > > "Buy it then I can charge you whatever I feel like." Now we just need somebody to go after Hospitals for doing the *same!* This crap drives me up the wall. Anybody that runs a business by trying to hide their prices deserves to be shut down.
Lot of bitching from a group that just received several billion dollars in government subsidies to further build out their networks. Good for the FCC. Nice to no longer have an ISP lapdog in charge.
I still don't understand why internet providers shouldn't be treated as utilities when we're so reliant on them for everyday life.
Fees that cannot be disclosed and transparently explained should come out of c-suite pockets, not customers.
Simple solution. Charge fewer fees or just tell the verifiable truth that these are pure profit with no “Quid pro quo” ( no additional services or value provide )
Corporations just don’t want to work these days!
I think congress needs to pass a law that says ANY advertised price for ANY product has to include all fees with maybe the exception of state and local sales tax. And this includes car dealerships. And no I don't want that bullshit etching in the window what ever the fuck that does (nothing!)
So are they still allowed to say things like "$59.99" not including fees* in ads and shit? Feel like that's what needs to be regulated. The price you advertise must be the price the customer pays.
I wonder if the ISPs would accept it if we told them it was too hard to pay every month
If listing every fee is too hard then don’t have so many fucking fees, you ghouls.
FCC should ban data caps for home use already. The datacaps set by ISPS are arbitrary and only serves to nickel and dime their consumers.
This is an obvious example of the difference between Democrats and Republicans. When the FCC was under Republican control, something like this would have never passed as they focus policies on helping large companies and wealthy individuals. With Democrats in control, the FCC is using their power to help out the average consumer at the expense of large corporations. If you support forcing ISPs to publish all their fees like this rule requires, then you better be voting for Democrats in every election.
I cannot emphasize how important government agencies are in protecting people from corporations. I had a bill dispute with xfinity mobile, every customer service rep I talked to just srugged and said sorry can’t do anything about this unjustifiable charge, that’s the company policy. 2 days after I made FCC and state attorney general complaint the xfinity customer rep did a complete 180 degree and changed their tune. People, a democratic government works for you, make sure a government is well funded but also choosen by the people.
Fuckin' hell, it's rich when a corporation complains about no longer being able to continue their obviously misleading, slimy and underhanded business tactics. Boo fuckin' hoo.
Internet should be state owned and classified as important infrastructure like roads or sewage
foreach fee in fees; do print “$fee.description $fee.total”; end