[x0054]

AT&T has recently tried to charge me a leasing fee for my U-verse router. I called in and explained to the person on the phone that I own the router, and referred him to my first months statement were it specifically states that I paid $160+ for the router. The man on the phone told me that their policy has changed, and they now charge leasing fees to everyone who does NOT own their own equipment. I explained to the man that I do. His answer: "As a favor to you, because you are such a long customer, I am going to waive the fee for now." It took me another 20 minutes on the phone to explain to this imbecile that I can not possibly be required to lease my own equipment from my self. His final statement to me still was: "Yes, I can see here that you own the router. Because you feel so strong about this, we are not going to require you to pay any additional equipment fees." I was fucking speechless.

[lesterbuck]

I can think of two ways to handle this that minimize your wasted time:

1. Call in and record the idiocy. I use Skype and a headset, so I can get work done while on hold. When the rep answers and asks "Who am I speaking to?", say "This is so and so on a recorded line.", just like your stockbroker, etc. does. If their standard blurb says they "may" be recording the call for "training and quality control", then you don't have to announce anything, as the call is now recordable by either party. Collect and post these idiotic exchanges, audio and transcripts. Shame and name.

2. Bypass the call center. Look up the registered agent of the corporation in your state. Send them a very threatening letter, return receipt requested, stating the facts and your demand for whatever they are doing to stop. Give them a time limit to stop, and then threaten to sue them in small claims court. There are these standard letters all over the net. Note: whether you actually sue them eventually is beside the point, and entirely optional. Trust me, an actual lawyer will have to respond to your letter, and it will be very expensive for them. You are also on record for any future court actions, and they know that. The letter templates are easily found with google, your state secretary of state may charge a dollar or two for the address of the registered agent, and certified return receipt costs about $6. Cost on their end, probably $200 to start in attorney's time. Much easier than hanging on the phone and being served by idiots.

[lostcolony]

I had this issue with Comcast. I didn't even buy the modem from them; I bought it from Staples, and yet, a year after I'd been with them, they decided to start trying to tack on a modem rental fee.

When I talked to their 'executive' customer service (whatever it is, the people who actually can do anything), they told me to -send them a receipt-. Are you kidding me? Why don't -you- prove that -you- own it? Where's -your- receipt? You didn't bill me for it for a year; pretty sure if we go to small claims court that will be taken as evidence in my favor.

Regardless, since I bought it from Staples, I went back to the store, told them the card I used, the day I bought it (because yay online CC histories), and they printed me off a copy of the receipt. Sent that in...got confirmation they'd remove the charge...and of course I had to call again the next month because the charge was still there.

I'm really tired of these freaking monopolies.

[x0054]

Class action lawsuits are the only way to deal with this! I have no experience in this area, but I know this is a good, reproducible lawsuit. I am willing to be a class rap, just contact me if interested. I think lostcolony, above, has a great class action case as well. It's all small stuff, but you can hit them hard with a class action.

[PhantomGremlin]

Sadly that probably won't work any more.

Just google for "supreme court" "class action" and you will find how your rights are now really limited in this regard. E.g. in 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled: "an arbitration agreement prevented consumers from pursuing a class action under state law".

There have been several anti-class-action rulings by the Supreme Court.

[simplemath]

Honestly, I'm going to buy a nice bottle of wine the day Alito, Scalia or Thomas kick the bucket.

[acdha]

I spent a year and a half with 1.5Mb DSL because it still beat the alternative of paying Comcast and having to call monthly to get an honest bill.

[DrStalker]

Australia has an easy solution: the Telecommunications Ombudsman. As soon as you raise a complaint with them the telecommunications company gets two weeks to fix things before they start getting financial penalties and having to spend time/resources fighting the complaint, so typically as soon as you have the complaint number you get escalated to the secret team with good people-skills and the power to do everything the lower support staff told you was impossible.

If your complaint has any merit they'll fix it for you because fixing it is vastly cheaper than fighting it.

[lostlogin]

What is it with telecoms? I have had issues like this too but in New Zealand. I actually beg them not to transfer me to their fault team in Manilla every time they decide its a fault I have. If I have to speak to Peachy, Pricilla or Daisy again I'll scream. I eventually found that all Telecoms here have their accounts departments within the country. So any issues I have I choose accounts to talk to. The locals have always been rational so far.

[acdha]

Telecoms usually a natural monopoly and relatively fixed demand: you probably don't want to dramatically increase your services so the easiest way to increase their per-customer profit is to play games with fees or bundling and cut their costs to the bone, relying on the inconvenience of switching to keep you from leaving. This ensures that you have a reason to call and that the person you reach will be the end result of multiple rounds of lowest-bidder call center deals.

[lostlogin]

You are very right. There is also this howler from Gattung, the former CEO of Telecom in New Zealand, where she discusses the use of confusion as a marketing tool.

http://publicaddress.net/3147

Edit: Forgot the link. Duh...

[drivingmissm]

They aren't a natural monopoly-- in the U.S. telecom and video cable (cable internet) are heavily regulated government-granted monopolies. Most U.S. local governments, for example, provide for only one or two cable providers.

[acdha]

“Natural monopoly” doesn't mean what you think it means: it's simply a case where the most efficient setup is a single provider. Telecoms fit this category locally because of the need for cabling to each customer – sure, you can run multiple wires but that's extremely expensive and has externalities (i.e. aesthetic costs).

Regulation is a common response to a natural monopoly: cap profits at a certain level to prevent gouging and establish some sort of minimum service requirement to avoid abuse.

What I would prefer is a hybrid model where the city runs the monopoly portion and leases access to various companies. The political process at least offers more accountability than, say, the typical Comcast monopoly victim enjoys.

[annnnd]

Obligatory xkcd: http://xkcd.com/806/