Errata, observations and working notes
Just about any company that's offered cell phone service in Canada -- including Bell Mobility, Rogers Wireless, Telus Mobility, and Fido -- are named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in August but which is just coming to light now. My friend Tyler Hamilton at the Toronto Star reports on the suit today and I've got the TV version on tonight's CTV National News.
Essentially, the suit claims that the cell phone companies misled customers in describing and collecting what are variously known as system admin fees, system access fees, system license fees or network access fees. Just about every one of the 12 million or so Canadian cellphone users pays the equivalent of about $7 a month on top of their regular cell phone plans for these charges.
You can download the Statement of Claim in the case. (A fast connection is helpful as this is a 4 MB PDF file.)
The case is at a very early stage. A judge has not yet certified the class-action status of the claim and none of the defendants have responded.
|
||||||||
|
Recent Comments
Login
Search
This Month
Month Archive
|
Canadian cell phone companies sued over access charges
Comments
Re: Canadian cell phone companies sued over access charges
by
budman
on Tue 08 Feb 2005 05:01 AM EST | Profile | Permanent Link
So, where is the voice of consumer in this battle? I wonder if there is an easy way for the average mobile user to feedback on the matter or provide real testimonies for having been misled.
I really wish we had real competition in this market. Perhaps Fido could have been considered such competition before being bough by Rogers. A few years back all large motilities got together and moved from per second to per minute billing. Yes, the consumer was informed via a fine print in their bills. It sounds like we are going backwards in the global mobile market. Sometimes, I wonder with if it would be better for the consumer to completely deregulate the market and let foreign players join the game. Can the consumer really loose in this? rY. Re: Re: Canadian cell phone companies sued over access charges
by
Anonymous
on Thu 10 Feb 2005 07:17 PM EST | Permanent Link
Yeah, it is absolutely outrageous the fact that they change whenever they want and it is the consummer that gets to pay.
They say "the System Licensing Charge covers a number of costs, including: federal government licensing charges, spectrum acquisition costs, contribution charges to help subsidize residential telephone service in rural and remote areas, costs associated with area code changes, invoicing requirements for special needs clients, relay services (TDD) and related costs and research and development. The remainder, if any, goes towards the costs of operating the national wireless networks, including new equipment and installations, ongoing maintenance and technology upgrades. "Now I have a question, isn't this just the cost of operation, why is the customer burdened with something that should be paid by the provider as part of the service they offer and the charges for the monthly plans? I think it is time the CRTC or whoever regulates this at a federal level to open the border to international providers to see real competition. What bothers me the most is the fact that they got together and decided to start charging by the minute without telling anybody, only in the fine print. I don't like to pay for something I'm not using. If I talk for 35 seconds, why would I have to pay for 1 minute, who is making the millions with this overcharging? |
National Post Top Stories Who pays for this blog? I receive no fees, considerations, etc. etc. for the posts on this blog nor do I have any plans to accept any. My salary is paid by Canwest Global Communications Corp. I work for that company as the Ottawa-based National Affairs Correspondent for Canwest News Service. The blog publishing platform used here is called Blogware and it's developed by Tucows Inc. of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Blogware users typically pay a monthly fee for using this platform but I do not as Tucows has kindly provided me with this platform. I may report on Tucows, its associated operations and executives, and on industry issues that may affect Tucows. I am grateful for Tucows' assistance but that's it. No favours were promised for their generosity nor do Tucows executives expect any. I hold no direct equity or stock in any company, Tucows included. If you think other disclosures are appropriate in this space, I'd like to hear from you. All of my contact details are always at www.davidakin.com You can read more about this section |
||||||
|
||||||||
