Despicable and unbelievable.....US cell phone companies

[need_my_wedge]

I'm in the process of helping my mum (who lives in the US) sort out her finances. I was checking into her cell phone bills because her monthly bill is around $140, but last month she was billed for £480........

They told me that her plan costs $80 p/m for 1400 minutes, but she is usually over, being billed anything up to +$100 dollars a month on average..... I spoke with a very pleasant and helpful girl in the local office, who gave me a lot of advice, and I found that they have a "seniors" plan that she can switch down to for $29 p/m. After the call I spoke with my mum about the "excess useage", my mum said "it's not me, it's the people that call me". I found this hard to believe and thought that she was mistaken, but I called the cell phone company back (Verizon Wireless - to name and shame them). I was informed that every call to my mum's cell phone from any other phone, local or not, that isn't a Verizon phone, is charged against my mum's monthly useage i.e. her friend down the road calls for a chat, they spend 10 mins on the phone, the friend pays a 10 minute call on her bill, my mum pays the same 10 minute call on her bill........... They charge double for every phone call!!!!!

How the F%$* do they get away with that?

I asked this of the girl I was talking to, who agreed with me that this was disdusting (I had some other words, but was polite on the call)? I was informed that all US cell phone contracts were the same, it doesn't matter if all your calls are incoming, the calls are charged on your plan, and you pay extra for every minute over....

Now, I was calling from my BT landline, which I pay £20 a month ($30) and it includes my line rental, all my UK calls at anytime, and all my international calls at any time. The only stipulation is that any call going over the hour is charged, but if you ring off and ring back, you can carry on the call at no extra cost. This is great for my wife who is Japanese, and can call her family every day if she wants to without me panicking about the amount of time she spends talking to her mum and sister. Thumbs up to BT but I still fail to compute as to how the US companies can get away with double billing!!

Disgusting and despicable.

 

[surefire]

Its standard US stuff. I don't think it is unreasonable at all, just that you are used to one method.

The person making the call pays less than someone here would to call a mobile. US mobile numbers have local area codes, unlike here where mobiles have their own prefixes.

If you think about it, it's not unreasonable, that the person who chooses a mobile phone pays for the privilege of being able to take a call anywhere.

Here if someone has a mobile number, it’s everyone else who has to pay more to contact them, why is this any fairer?

 

[need_my_wedge]

I accept that I pay a premium (monthly contract) to have the benefit of receiving calls wherever I'm at. I accept that the company will give me some call minutes as part of the plan. I accept that if I call the number/ mobile in question I pay for the call to that number, and that it will cost me more between services. I don't have a problem with that, I have a problem with the fact that it is being double billed and the call that I make is then also deducted from my mums allocation of minutes, when she wasn't expecting the call. Might be standard practice in the US, but it doesn't make it right, nor I think is it standard practice most everywhere else.

 

[surefire]

There is no double billing, you're paying for line rental monthly and then call usage, either through using up the minutes you get as part of the deal, or with your money.

It's not a secret either, it's part of the contract you agree to when you take out the phone. If you or your mother didn't read the completely standard terms you agreed to, you can't go blaming the phone company for that.

There is no right to having a mobile phone, so by using one, unless you set up your own network, you agree to the terms imposed.

If calls are unexpected, you're not forced to take them, or you can even ask them to call back on a landline or call them from your landline.

I still pose my question though, why is it right for the caller to have to pay more to call a mobile number as in the UK, but wrong for the person being called to pay the extra as in the US?

 

[Golfmmad]

I'm with you on this Need-my-wedge. It's typical American money grabbing barstewards. Anything American is all about money money money! If you take out insurance when holidaying out there it has to be something like 3million, whereas anywhere else in the world is only 1 million liability.

I like the Country but hate their morals!

Golfmmad.

 

[need_my_wedge]

There is no double billing, you're paying for line rental monthly and then call usage, either through using up the minutes you get as part of the deal, or with your money.

I don't get this. I still don't understand why my call to the mobile, a call that I'm paying for, is also charged to the mobile's allocation of minutes, that is double billing (two people paying for the same call). Regardless of where I am, or where I'm calling from, I pay for the connection to that mobile on the rate that I have agreed with my phone company. I don't then expect your phone company to charge you for the call I make to you.

I'm not saying that it's right to pay more to call a mobile, I'm not arguing that my mum didn't read the contract (she probably didn't), I'm not arguing that she didn't understand the concept - she actually did. I'm arguing that in my view, as we do here and many other countries in the world, only one party (i.e. the person making the call) should pay for the call. To do otherwise can see your whole monthly allowance used up and exceeded without your own control over the rising costs.

 

[viscount17]

don't forget that this is how international calls from a mobile are charged. there was quite an issue over this and I think that part of the mobile operators' argument was that you were using two separate operating companies.

it still happens though the charges were reduced

 

[surefire]

I'm arguing that in my view, as we do here and many other countries in the world, only one party (i.e. the person making the call) should pay for the call. To do otherwise can see your whole monthly allowance used up and exceeded without your own control over the rising costs.

The thing is you do have control, answering the phone and continuing the call is voluntary, not compulsory.

Can you explain why only 1 person paying is right? Does only one person use the service?

 

[Region3]

Perhaps both people are paying half of what an outgoing call would cost you in this country?

 

[surefire]

Well in the US a cell phone has a fixed geographic area code.

The caller pays whatever it would cost to call a landline in that area. The receiver pays the fixed rate the cell phone company have set for receiving calls, or uses their minutes.