Verizon Wireless billing trick, scam $40 "mistake"

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Tom wrote:
> Quick wrote:
>> Sure. *IF* you have your plan for the entire month. You decided
>> to terminate your plan in the middle of the month and switch to a
>> new plan.
> I didn't consider myself to have terminated my plan; I thought I added
> to it. Point of fact; had the rep. told me of Verizon's policy, I
> would have emphatically said, "No thanks."

Fine. Possibly a shortcoming on the part of the rep. They're human and
some are better than others. Technically, this is all explained in your
contract and literature given you and/or mailed to youwhen you first
get service. The CS executed per your instructions. They failed to
make sure you actually understood what you were doing. It's pretty
clear that they have individual plans and family share plans. I will
assume that when you added a line you made the assumption that
it was simply a matter of terminology and actually the same plan?
So yes, the rep probably could have avoided the whole thing by
being more concientious but it was actually your doing. The
prorate "surprise" happens *a lot* and it seems that VZW's
general policy is to give customers a break the first time.
Especially the prorate when establishing new service.

>> How do you propose they charge you?
> I should have had the balance of the month to use the balance of my
> minutes (had I only 10 minutes left for the month, that is the time I
> would expect to still have after making the change). I would then
> expect to pay a pro-rated amount for the time I had the additional
> benefit of the family share plan. At $19.99 mo. per line, a half month
> should have cost me $10.

Ok, consistent with your assumption that it was the same plan with
a line added to it.

> How should they charge
>> if you used 1500 minutes of a 2000 minute plan by the middle of the
>> month and want to switch to a 400 minute plan?
> Your example is not at all like what I described, but in your example
> I would expect to pay the over usage fee of 500 mins. X $.45, since I
> would be downgrading to a lower minute plan.

Correct, that's how they do it but they don't differentiate between going
up, down, or sideways to the new plan.

> Like I said, the csr did NOT mention the pro-rating. Had he done so,
> I would have simply waited until the first day of my new billing
> cycle.

>> I'm pretty sure I've seen the prorating explained in writing as well
>> (wasn't it on my contract?)...
>
> I don't remember; by the time I finished reading the contract I had a
> headache and truly wished I didn't need a cell phone.

Weak excuse. Understandable, but weak. Your decision of effort
vs. risk. You didn't put forth the effort to understand what you were
doing, the rep didn't put forth the effort make sure you understood
what you were doing, you were surprised, they cut you slack and
credited you the overage. You're upset that you had to call them
to say you didn't understand and the rep didn't make sure you
understood?

They have made changes where (most of the time) sales and CS
will stress the prorating (they didn't do this some time ago). If
I were them I would do away with mid-cycle plan changes. I
find them convenient. Upcomming wedding, trip, job, etc. switch
up in plans. Then switch back down to normal. On Local Digital
Choice and going out of town for a week or 2 of vacation? Switch
to AC and switch back next month.

Here is something I don't know about: How many times can you
switch plans in a single month?

-Quick
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Tom wrote:

> Quick wrote:
>
>

> How should they charge
>
>> if you used 1500 minutes of a 2000 minute plan by the middle of the
>> month and want to switch to a 400 minute plan?
>
> Your example is not at all like what I described, but in your example I
> would expect to pay the over usage fee of 500 mins. X $.45, since I
> would be downgrading to a lower minute plan.

Edit:
Actually, with your example, I would have waited until the end of the
month to switch. Tom
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Quick <dhorwitz@nospamcisco.com> wrote:

> What? You mean you couldn't have made the plan change a
> couple of days early to be *effective* on you billing cycle?
> It would change in the system at midnight, last day of the
> current plan.

Um, I could have, actually a CSR offered to do this for me; but I still
would have to wait 30 days, regardless. Even if the change takes effect at
midnight on the first day of the billing cycle, you still have to pay the
full bill according to the plan *you just switched from* and while you wait
30 days to get your money back, it sits in VZW's checking account, presumably
collecting interest. 'Scuse me? I don't think so. As I pointed out to the CSR
I was talking to, VZW will turn my service off if I wait thirty days to pay
my bill. They obviously expect prompt payment. Therefore, when I am due a
credit, I will expect prompt issuance of the credit from them.

And it is a problem because not only am I switching due to things being
broken here and not getting fixed, I'm trying to minimize my cellular costs
right now; I'm underemployed and looking for contract work at this particular
moment. I need the money *now.*

I complained long enough to end up getting a credit for my troubles from
the CSR, but it still hasn't posted yet. I'll give it another day or two
before I complain; I've been issued recent credits for dropped-call problems
and they seem to take an average of three business days to make it to my
account.

The one other time I had a credit issue was when VZW mistakenly posted a
check that was supposed to have been post-dated. They very readily agreed
to give me my money back, but said it would take six to eight weeks, after
which I informed them that they would be paying all of my bounced check fees
if they did. I had to keep on them, and that meant calling every day, but I
managed to get the check within about a week, and got the check deposited
just in time, before other stuff started bouncing.

If VZW owes you a credit, you *really* have to hound them...

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Quick wrote:


> Fine. Possibly a shortcoming on the part of the rep.
Possibly? Listen up; the pro-rating wasn't mentioned.


The CS executed per your instructions.
You just refuse to get the point, don't you?

It's pretty
> clear that they have individual plans and family share plans. I will
> assume that when you added a line you made the assumption that
> it was simply a matter of terminology and actually the same plan?
> So yes, the rep probably could have avoided the whole thing by
> being more concientious but it was actually your doing

Ok. On the one hand we have Killer Madness who doesn't like anything
about Verizon; no, I'm wrong, he did mention Verizon had a good network.

Quick, on the other hand, can't find a thing wrong with Verizon that
doesn't somehow relate to a deficiency on the part of the customer.

Get this straight. Verizon's pro-rating policy is clearly intended to
be favorable to Verizon at the expense of the customer. Verizon could
have just as easily done it the way I described - at least under the
circumstances I mentioned. Verizon talks a lot about customer service,
but when it comes to performing, Verizon often drops the ball; just like
when the csr failed to mention the pro-rating. Despite your comments,
customers should not have to comb over the contract in order to make
minor changes to their contracts.

Tom
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I vote "idiot troll"....

"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message news:r-GdncSlIYhHrHndRVn-hQ@lmi.net...
> Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
> > "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
> >
> >>Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you are
> >>excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
> >
> > That was uncalled for.
>
> No, it wasn't. Have you read KM's posts? All he wants to do is scream about
> how he's being screwed. If he was serious about being screwed he'd already have
> taken action against Verizon, including dropping them and going to another
> carrier.
>
> I used to be a wage-slave flunkie working at a gas station owned by one
> of the big oil companies (now I'm a self-employed, slightly better-paid
> flunkie :)
>
> I recall an experience with a customer who was a cantankerous jerk (though,
> in his defense, he was also an extremely loyal, regular customer).
>
> At the time, we were selling a small bottle of V8 for 89 cents and tomato
> juice (the same size) for 99 cents. Or it may be the other way around; the
> important thing is that one was 89 cents and the other one was 99.
>
> So the customer pumps his gas, and walks in and picks out the 89-cent
> product and brings it to the counter, but I mistakenly think it's the 99-cent
> product. HOWEVER, I catch myself before I ring it up and, thinking out loud,
> I say, "Oops, this isn't 99, it's 89."
>
> This, of course, prompts the customer to tell me I'm trying to cheat him.
>
> Duh, if I was trying to cheat him I'd just have rung it up at 89 and kept
> the dime. Besides, if I was going to risk my lousy little minimum-wage job
> by screwing over a customer, I'd have attempted to screw over a customer
> for a lot more than a dime. A dime is not worth the trouble. :)
>
> Point being - there *are* people who will take a situation and twist it around
> to portray it in the worst light possible. KM seems to be one of those people.
> OTOH, maybe he's just an idiot troll.
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
> Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
> PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
> Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol wrote:


> And it is a problem because not only am I switching due to things being
> broken here and not getting fixed, I'm trying to minimize my cellular costs
> right now; I'm underemployed and looking for contract work at this particular
> moment. I need the money *now.*

Good luck with your search for contract work. Tom
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Tom <tom@cox.net> wrote:
>> And it is a problem because not only am I switching due to things being
>> broken here and not getting fixed, I'm trying to minimize my cellular costs
>> right now; I'm underemployed and looking for contract work at this particular
>> moment. I need the money *now.*
>
> Good luck with your search for contract work. Tom

I'm not too worried about it... it is coming, it's just taking its sweet
time 😛

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"QuienEs" <QuienEsREMOVETHISandthis@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:4dm6e05tfdvl32f838hr55bftnci06bgb0@4ax.com...
> Two of my relatives just signed up for Verizon Wireless' "America's
> Choice" plan.
>
> On the surface it sounds good, 400 shared peak time minutes
> per-month, unlimited nights and weekends usage, no long distance
> charges and additional benefits.
>
> They have been with Verizon Wireless for about 10 days and the 1st
> bill came, with some surprises:
>snipped



Minutes are figured on monthly basis, not yearly. They divide 30 days into
whatever plan you have. Yes, it doesn't take into account there are some
days that may be weekend days but thats just how it works. Its not some big
scam you are making it out to be. Its clearly laid out in the Customer
Agreement. It should have been explained to them when they got the phones.
There is even a printout that comes with the contract that shows exactly the
prorated charge for the month and the minutes allowed.

As far as the activation fees, I have never seen anyone get charged
incorrectly on them. A simple call to CS should fix that. Would of been
alot quicker than coming on here and posting about it.


KC
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:

>Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
>> "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
>>
>>>Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you are
>>>excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
>>
>> That was uncalled for.
>
>No, it wasn't. Have you read KM's posts? All he wants to do is scream about
>how he's being screwed. If he was serious about being screwed he'd already have
>taken action against Verizon, including dropping them and going to another
>carrier.

I'm not objecting to your portrayal of him. I'm objecting to your
stereotypes about people who take lithium.



==
Jack Hamilton
jfh@acm.org

==
In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted comfort and security.
And in the end, they lost it all - freedom, comfort and security.
Edward Gibbons
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote:

>"Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote in message
>news:R8VEc.6145$151.1579@fed1read02...
>> Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you
>are
>> excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
>
>Not so far from the truth. If you're wondering where our friend Killer
>suddenly came from about a month ago (and why he might have some spare time
>on his hands, along with the shitty attitude), here's a clue:
>http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=lfednQBj-ZyZRjPdRVn-gg%40comcast.com

Different host name, different news server. No indication they're the
same person.



==
Jack Hamilton
jfh@acm.org

==
In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted comfort and security.
And in the end, they lost it all - freedom, comfort and security.
Edward Gibbons
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Hey Putz...I bet no one EVER on here posted a billing mistake in the
customer's favor. How is that possible with so many customer's? O, I know.
The billing system was designed to NEVER make a mistake IN the customer's
favor. Most of you have missed my point and are only thinking of yourselves
and have no clue on what I've been saying the last couple months. I'm even
talking like white trailer-trash teenager and still no one can understand
me.


"Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
news:r-GdncSlIYhHrHndRVn-hQ@lmi.net...
> Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
> > "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
> >
> >>Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you
are
> >>excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
> >
> > That was uncalled for.
>
> No, it wasn't. Have you read KM's posts? All he wants to do is scream
about
> how he's being screwed. If he was serious about being screwed he'd already
have
> taken action against Verizon, including dropping them and going to another
> carrier.
>
> I used to be a wage-slave flunkie working at a gas station owned by one
> of the big oil companies (now I'm a self-employed, slightly better-paid
> flunkie :)
>
> I recall an experience with a customer who was a cantankerous jerk
(though,
> in his defense, he was also an extremely loyal, regular customer).
>
> At the time, we were selling a small bottle of V8 for 89 cents and tomato
> juice (the same size) for 99 cents. Or it may be the other way around; the
> important thing is that one was 89 cents and the other one was 99.
>
> So the customer pumps his gas, and walks in and picks out the 89-cent
> product and brings it to the counter, but I mistakenly think it's the
99-cent
> product. HOWEVER, I catch myself before I ring it up and, thinking out
loud,
> I say, "Oops, this isn't 99, it's 89."
>
> This, of course, prompts the customer to tell me I'm trying to cheat him.
>
> Duh, if I was trying to cheat him I'd just have rung it up at 89 and kept
> the dime. Besides, if I was going to risk my lousy little minimum-wage job
> by screwing over a customer, I'd have attempted to screw over a customer
> for a lot more than a dime. A dime is not worth the trouble. :)
>
> Point being - there *are* people who will take a situation and twist it
around
> to portray it in the worst light possible. KM seems to be one of those
people.
> OTOH, maybe he's just an idiot troll.
>
> --
> JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
> Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
sjsobol@JustThe.net
> PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
> Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Well, for sure SOMEONE hasn't got a clue.....:) I wonder who it might be???

PC

"Killer Madness" <killermo@cnet.com> wrote in message
news:_14Fc.90692$904.5909@fe35.usenetserver.com...
| Hey Putz...I bet no one EVER on here posted a billing mistake in the
| customer's favor. How is that possible with so many customer's? O, I know.
| The billing system was designed to NEVER make a mistake IN the customer's
| favor. Most of you have missed my point and are only thinking of
yourselves
| and have no clue on what I've been saying the last couple months. I'm even
| talking like white trailer-trash teenager and still no one can understand
| me.
|
|
| "Steven J Sobol" <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote in message
| news:r-GdncSlIYhHrHndRVn-hQ@lmi.net...
| > Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
| > > "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
| > >
| > >>Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage -
you
| are
| > >>excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
| > >
| > > That was uncalled for.
| >
| > No, it wasn't. Have you read KM's posts? All he wants to do is scream
| about
| > how he's being screwed. If he was serious about being screwed he'd
already
| have
| > taken action against Verizon, including dropping them and going to
another
| > carrier.
| >
| > I used to be a wage-slave flunkie working at a gas station owned by one
| > of the big oil companies (now I'm a self-employed, slightly better-paid
| > flunkie :)
| >
| > I recall an experience with a customer who was a cantankerous jerk
| (though,
| > in his defense, he was also an extremely loyal, regular customer).
| >
| > At the time, we were selling a small bottle of V8 for 89 cents and
tomato
| > juice (the same size) for 99 cents. Or it may be the other way around;
the
| > important thing is that one was 89 cents and the other one was 99.
| >
| > So the customer pumps his gas, and walks in and picks out the 89-cent
| > product and brings it to the counter, but I mistakenly think it's the
| 99-cent
| > product. HOWEVER, I catch myself before I ring it up and, thinking out
| loud,
| > I say, "Oops, this isn't 99, it's 89."
| >
| > This, of course, prompts the customer to tell me I'm trying to cheat
him.
| >
| > Duh, if I was trying to cheat him I'd just have rung it up at 89 and
kept
| > the dime. Besides, if I was going to risk my lousy little minimum-wage
job
| > by screwing over a customer, I'd have attempted to screw over a customer
| > for a lot more than a dime. A dime is not worth the trouble. :)
| >
| > Point being - there *are* people who will take a situation and twist it
| around
| > to portray it in the worst light possible. KM seems to be one of those
| people.
| > OTOH, maybe he's just an idiot troll.
| >
| > --
| > JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
| > Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) /
| sjsobol@JustThe.net
| > PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
| > Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three
kids.
|
|
|
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Jack Hamilton" <jfh@acm.org> wrote in message
news:bjq9e0laiatvop9u9mf5gpok8lf3rg1lh9@4ax.com...
| Steven J Sobol <sjsobol@JustThe.net> wrote:
|
| >Jack Hamilton <jfh@acm.org> wrote:
| >> "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
| >>
| >>>Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you
are
| >>>excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
| >>
| >> That was uncalled for.
| >
| >No, it wasn't. Have you read KM's posts? All he wants to do is scream
about
| >how he's being screwed. If he was serious about being screwed he'd
already have
| >taken action against Verizon, including dropping them and going to
another
| >carrier.
|
| I'm not objecting to your portrayal of him. I'm objecting to your
| stereotypes about people who take lithium.

Object away, that's your privilege - like so many, you take offense where
none was offered and you ponderously proclaim virtuous "caring" when the
situation clearly called for a little levity to counter the unceasing RAGE
over a trifle.....

The guy acts mightily like he needs lithium - or perhaps just tying his
hands behind his back so he can't type would be enough.....:)

Lighten up - that's what HE should do......

PC




|
|
|
| ==
| Jack Hamilton
| jfh@acm.org
|
| ==
| In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted comfort and
security.
| And in the end, they lost it all - freedom, comfort and security.
| Edward Gibbons
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I didn't write the paragraph you're commenting on.....:)

FWIW, Verizon's policy is clear, simple, direct, to the point and easily
understood. There are those, however, who just must make a big deal out of
nothing......

PC

"Tom" <tom@cox.net> wrote in message news:A4YEc.7$jp1.5@lakeread04...
| Proconsul wrote:
|
|
| > | > Actually it looks to me like the dealer made the mistake. (There
are
| > | > Verizon stores all over New Jersey. Why didn't you go to one of
them?)
| > | > But mistakes happen, and you'll live longer if you don't get so
| > | > aggravated about them. I'm sure they'll fix the problem.
|
|
| It is not a mistake, it is Verizon policy. Apparently the customer
| service rep. is supposed to mention the "pro-rating" upfront, but if
| they don't and you don't catch it, too bad. The policy was NOT
| mentioned to me.
|
| Picture this - I have an 800 minute plan and exactly midway through the
| month I decide to add a line with a family share plan. If I had used
| 600 minutes at this point leaving me with 200 minutes left to use over
| the balance of the month, I would have, under Verizon's pro-rated
| method, used 200 minutes more than I am allotted under their pro-rating.
| Despite the fact that I have 800 minutes to use at any time during my
| monthly period, Verizon will penalize me by charging me for using 200
| minutes in overage, in my case 200 X $.45 minute = $90, instead of
| allowing me to use the actual 400 minutes that I had not used. In other
| words, Verizon says I should have only used 400 minutes halfway through
| the month, despite the fact that it is normally my choice when and how I
| use the minutes.
|
| I do not consider Verizon's pro-rating policy to be customer friendly at
| all. I also object to spending my time trying to have money returned
| that should have never been taken from me in the first place. I do
| agree that it is better to be "nice," since this is a policy of Verizon
| management, not the csr. Tom
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Quick" <dhorwitz@NOSPAMcisco.com> wrote in message
news:1088706049.846646@sj-nntpcache-3...
| Tom wrote:
|

<snip>
?
|
| I must have switched plans 10 times over the past years. *Every* time
| the CS rep. has strongly suggested that I wait until the end of the
billing
| period so as not to get caught with prorating charges. It actually bugs
| me somewhat that I have to take the time to tell them that I am actually
| capable of grasping how prorating works and am then forced to listen
| while it is explained again in excrutiating detail. If I was VZW I would
| cut a lot of overhead by simply not allowing people to switch plans in
| the middle of a billing period.

Fully agreed - I've changed plans many times, and the CSR has NEVER failed
to warn about prorations and NEVER failed to suggest the best way to do
things.....several times delaying the change until it would coincide with
the billing cycle. All the complaining is, IMO, mostly sour grapes....

PC
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Giambi" <byegiambi2WINNER@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2kjv54F36u8sU1@uni-berlin.de...
| "Proconsul" <nospam@nospam.org> wrote in message
| news:R8VEc.6145$151.1579@fed1read02...
| > Perhaps you should have your therapist adjust your lithium dosage - you
| are
| > excessively "enraged" over what is, in reality, a trifle....
|
| Not so far from the truth. If you're wondering where our friend Killer
| suddenly came from about a month ago (and why he might have some spare
time
| on his hands, along with the shitty attitude), here's a clue:
|
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=lfednQBj-ZyZRjPdRVn-gg%40comcast.com

I'm not surprised - his problem as reported in that link is serious. I hope
things work out for him in that regard.....

PC
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Killer Madness wrote:
>
> Hey Putz...I bet no one EVER on here posted a billing mistake in the
> customer's favor. How is that possible with so many customer's? O, I know.
> The billing system was designed to NEVER make a mistake IN the customer's
> favor. Most of you have missed my point and are only thinking of yourselves
> and have no clue on what I've been saying the last couple months. I'm even
> talking like white trailer-trash teenager and still no one can understand
> me.

It's not a matter of not having a clue, it's a matter of not really caring.

Don't go away mad, just go away.

Notan
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

That activation fee mistake happened to me, too. I got my phone from a VZW
store. I am not sure if the salesdroid explained to me on a expected
partial billing.

Random? I signed up last June 3. My first bill showed I had a partial from
June 3 to June 11. My billing cycle is every 12th of the month.

Why can't Verizon just start the billing cycle on the day of the signing of
the contract???

"Quick" <dhorwitz@NOSPAMcisco.com> wrote in message
news:1088643865.996749@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Did they sign up at a VZW store or an agent?
> The stores are usually very thorough to point out the
> prorating to a billing cycle. Let me guess -- billing
> cycle is the 25th of each month? Not very random.
>
> This is so commonly misunderstood that customer
> service usually has the overage charges refunded before
> you finish explaining what happened. Same will apply
> if you change plans in the middle of a billing cycle but
> they are not so apt to give you the auto refund then.
>
> Your idea of not counting holidays is interesting.
> Plans are monthly. Contracts are for years. When
> prorating they figure by the month. Unused minutes
> do not carry over from month to month and not all
> months have holidays in them. How would you
> resolve that?
>
> The activation fee was probably the mistake of the
> sales person entering the contracts.
>
> Here is a trick it sounds like you missed:
> Try calling customer service and explain what
> happened and ask what they can do for you.
>
> -Quick
>
> QuienEs wrote:
> > Two of my relatives just signed up for Verizon Wireless' "America's
> > Choice" plan.
> >
> > On the surface it sounds good, 400 shared peak time minutes
> > per-month, unlimited nights and weekends usage, no long distance
> > charges and additional benefits.
> >
> > They have been with Verizon Wireless for about 10 days and the 1st
> > bill came, with some surprises:
> >
> > 1/ TRICK
> >
> > Their "month" did not start when the phones were activated,
> > SURPRISE ! -- it started 4 days later. We learned that your "month"
> > can start anytime - the dealer told us today it is sort of random,
> > 3-days after you sign up, or 10 days or 15 days.
> >
> > The problem for them was that the first 3 days were treated as a
> > pro-rated partial month. They got screwed because they used their
> > beautiful new cell phones a lot those 1st 3 days thinking they had 400
> > peak minutes to spread over 30 or 31 days, but Verizon Wireless
> > pro-rated the 3 days at 13 peak minutes each which, in their newbie
> > enthusiasm, they had exceeded - resulting in a 3-day [ at 45-cents per
> > minute ] charge of around $7 for "excess minutes".
> >
> > 2/ SCAM [ adding insult to injury ]
> >
> > The scam is the use of 13 minutes per day for the pro-rated period.
> > Apparently they get that figure by dividing 4800 minutes per year by
> > 365 = 13.15 minutes per day.
> >
> > The accurate number should take into account that weekends are free.
> > 2x52 = 104 free days. 365-104 = 261 days to which peak minutes apply.
> > 4800/261 = 18.39 minutes allowance per peak day.
> >
> > 3/ $40 billing computer "mistake"
> >
> > They advertise: "One- or Two-year agreement required per line. $35
> > activation fee per line on one-year agreements, and $15 activation fee
> > per line on two-year agreements."
> >
> > My relatives signed up for 2-years, confirmed by Verizon's billing
> > department and the dealer today. But the bill shows two $35
> > activation fees, not two $15 activation fees. One can assume that
> > their billing computer makes this "mistake" for everyone.
> >
> > Comments welcome, especially about any tricks we may ahve missed.
> >
> > QE in NJ
>
>
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Proconsul <nospam@nospam.org> wrote:
> I didn't write the paragraph you're commenting on.....:)
>
> FWIW, Verizon's policy is clear, simple, direct, to the point and easily
> understood. There are those, however, who just must make a big deal out of
> nothing......

I kinda-sorta agree with you. The *concept* is easy enough to understand
if it's explained by CS. Doing the math may be a different matter. <G>

--
JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, http://JustThe.net/
Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / sjsobol@JustThe.net
PGP Key available from your friendly local key server (0xE3AE35ED)
Apple Valley, California Nothing scares me anymore. I have three kids.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

C C wrote:
> That activation fee mistake happened to me, too. I got my phone from
> a VZW store. I am not sure if the salesdroid explained to me on a
> expected partial billing.

doh!

> Random? I signed up last June 3. My first bill showed I had a
> partial from June 3 to June 11. My billing cycle is every 12th of
> the month.
>
> Why can't Verizon just start the billing cycle on the day of the
> signing of the contract???

Sounds like a basis for your next class action.
"VZW *always* starts your billing cycle a week or less after you
sign up knowing that you will be using a lot of minutes immediately
trying out your new phone and service which will result in proration
overage charges resulting from their intentionally uncomprehensible
prorating calculation." yea... that's the ticket.

-Quick

>
> "Quick" <dhorwitz@NOSPAMcisco.com> wrote in message
> news:1088643865.996749@sj-nntpcache-3...
>> Did they sign up at a VZW store or an agent?
>> The stores are usually very thorough to point out the
>> prorating to a billing cycle. Let me guess -- billing
>> cycle is the 25th of each month? Not very random.
>>
>> This is so commonly misunderstood that customer
>> service usually has the overage charges refunded before
>> you finish explaining what happened. Same will apply
>> if you change plans in the middle of a billing cycle but
>> they are not so apt to give you the auto refund then.
>>
>> Your idea of not counting holidays is interesting.
>> Plans are monthly. Contracts are for years. When
>> prorating they figure by the month. Unused minutes
>> do not carry over from month to month and not all
>> months have holidays in them. How would you
>> resolve that?
>>
>> The activation fee was probably the mistake of the
>> sales person entering the contracts.
>>
>> Here is a trick it sounds like you missed:
>> Try calling customer service and explain what
>> happened and ask what they can do for you.
>>
>> -Quick
>>
>> QuienEs wrote:
>>> Two of my relatives just signed up for Verizon Wireless' "America's
>>> Choice" plan.
>>>
>>> On the surface it sounds good, 400 shared peak time minutes
>>> per-month, unlimited nights and weekends usage, no long distance
>>> charges and additional benefits.
>>>
>>> They have been with Verizon Wireless for about 10 days and the 1st
>>> bill came, with some surprises:
>>>
>>> 1/ TRICK
>>>
>>> Their "month" did not start when the phones were activated,
>>> SURPRISE ! -- it started 4 days later. We learned that your
>>> "month" can start anytime - the dealer told us today it is sort of
>>> random, 3-days after you sign up, or 10 days or 15 days.
>>>
>>> The problem for them was that the first 3 days were treated as a
>>> pro-rated partial month. They got screwed because they used their
>>> beautiful new cell phones a lot those 1st 3 days thinking they had
>>> 400 peak minutes to spread over 30 or 31 days, but Verizon Wireless
>>> pro-rated the 3 days at 13 peak minutes each which, in their newbie
>>> enthusiasm, they had exceeded - resulting in a 3-day [ at 45-cents
>>> per minute ] charge of around $7 for "excess minutes".
>>>
>>> 2/ SCAM [ adding insult to injury ]
>>>
>>> The scam is the use of 13 minutes per day for the pro-rated period.
>>> Apparently they get that figure by dividing 4800 minutes per year by
>>> 365 = 13.15 minutes per day.
>>>
>>> The accurate number should take into account that weekends are free.
>>> 2x52 = 104 free days. 365-104 = 261 days to which peak minutes
>>> apply. 4800/261 = 18.39 minutes allowance per peak day.
>>>
>>> 3/ $40 billing computer "mistake"
>>>
>>> They advertise: "One- or Two-year agreement required per line. $35
>>> activation fee per line on one-year agreements, and $15 activation
>>> fee per line on two-year agreements."
>>>
>>> My relatives signed up for 2-years, confirmed by Verizon's billing
>>> department and the dealer today. But the bill shows two $35
>>> activation fees, not two $15 activation fees. One can assume that
>>> their billing computer makes this "mistake" for everyone.
>>>
>>> Comments welcome, especially about any tricks we may ahve missed.
>>>
>>> QE in NJ
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 1 Jul 2004 22:48:29 -0400, "Killer Madness" <killermo@cnet.com>
wrote:
>Hey Putz...I bet no one EVER on here posted a billing mistake in the
>customer's favor.

Of course not. You'd have to be a moron to do that. Someone might see
the post and fix the mistake. I've seen people do similar things
regarding their Internet Service Provider (e.g., brag about how they're
being undercharged), and two days later their account gets cut off.

>How is that possible with so many customer's? O, I know.
>The billing system was designed to NEVER make a mistake IN the customer's
>favor.

Oh, so you'd design a system that WOULD make mistakes in the customer's
favor? I hope you don't look for a job in the software industry. I can
see your resume now: Wrote a billing system that intentionally made
mistakes. Sure!
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:45:02 -0400, Tom <tom@cox.net> wrote:

>Proconsul wrote:
>
>> | > Actually it looks to me like the dealer made the mistake. (There are
>> | > Verizon stores all over New Jersey. Why didn't you go to one of them?)
>> | > But mistakes happen, and you'll live longer if you don't get so
>> | > aggravated about them. I'm sure they'll fix the problem.
>
>It is not a mistake, it is Verizon policy. Apparently the customer
>service rep. is supposed to mention the "pro-rating" upfront, but if
>they don't and you don't catch it, too bad. The policy was NOT
>mentioned to me.

The "mistake" I was referring to was the apparent failure of the agent to
adequately describe the pro-rating of minutes during the initial billing
period.
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Sorry - you need to do your "editing" and "snipping" more carefully....I
didn't write any of the words quoted below.....

However, since you choose to address your comments to me, I'll reaffirm that
I don't buy the usual complaint that the CSR screwed up. It's my experience
that most people don't listen to what they're told and don't read what they
sign. THEN, they feel self-righteous and complain to the high heavens when
they find out they didn't understand what they signed or what they had been
told....

Calm down, lose the "attitude" and then talk to the service people - they'll
cheerfully correct any real mistake, even if it's YOUR mistake......

PC

"Bob Scheurle" <njtbob2@X-optonline-X.net> wrote in message
news:1cmbe0hdtkq2ae9l3p33k1lp2eg5r8fp6j@4ax.com...
| On Thu, 01 Jul 2004 13:45:02 -0400, Tom <tom@cox.net> wrote:
|
| >Proconsul wrote:
| >
| >> | > Actually it looks to me like the dealer made the mistake. (There
are
| >> | > Verizon stores all over New Jersey. Why didn't you go to one of
them?)
| >> | > But mistakes happen, and you'll live longer if you don't get so
| >> | > aggravated about them. I'm sure they'll fix the problem.
| >
| >It is not a mistake, it is Verizon policy. Apparently the customer
| >service rep. is supposed to mention the "pro-rating" upfront, but if
| >they don't and you don't catch it, too bad. The policy was NOT
| >mentioned to me.
|
| The "mistake" I was referring to was the apparent failure of the agent to
| adequately describe the pro-rating of minutes during the initial billing
| period.
|
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Proconsul wrote:
> However, since you choose to address your comments to me, I'll reaffirm that
> I don't buy the usual complaint that the CSR screwed up. It's my experience
> that most people don't listen to what they're told and don't read what they
> sign. THEN, they feel self-righteous and complain to the high heavens when
> they find out they didn't understand what they signed or what they had been
> told....

While what you say is true, I can't understand why Verizon does it this
way. Surely if the billing date was the same as the day the contract
started then there wouldn't be anything to explain, omit, understand
or make an error on.

Roger
 
Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Killer Madness" <killermo@cnet.com> wrote in
news:KDUEc.3347$YK5.1122@fe32.usenetserver.com:

> Thank you Tom. And of course we'll come to expect people saying, "did
> you read the fine print", or, "did you ask those questions before
> signing". I bet half the people in this group has been robbed or has
> had money taken from them every month without even knowing about it.
> Not a lot of money to notice right away...but like I said before. When
> you have billing *mistakes* happen to hundred of thousands of people,
> your going to get a lot of money out of it.
>

Conversely, I won the lottery a few years ago when a credit for over $400
showed up on my Verizon Wireless bill! I sat tight, figuring the idiots
running the company would notice their error and kept putting money into
the wireless pot to pay the bill after the error was discovered.

The same idiots you've dealt with never noticed or wouldn't admit they'd
made a mistake of this proportion to their managers, putting their asses on
the block. So, I got a "Good Customer Bonus" for a few months before my
credit ran out....to my delight.....(c;

Does anyone but me ALWAYS overpay and recurring bill by some odd amount
like 73 cents? I always do. If the bill is for $42, I send them a check
for $42.73 and always maintain that little credit to my account. You just
KNOW whatever company has these few dollars on that stupid computer have
GOTTA screw up every so many billings......ad nauseum. I used to play this
game with Bell$not landline for 30 years.....worked great!

Larry
try it....great fun.