Phone companies levy new fee for not making calls

[Jack]

Phone bills are notorious for rankling customers with fees, taxes, tariffs and other mystery assessments. Now some phone companies are adding a new line item to monthly bills: a charge for not making long-distance calls. The category of customers affected by the new fee is the shrinking subset of people who have no-frills home-phone service and don't pay for a long-distance-calling plan. Verizon last month introduced the $2 fee. It is charged to customers who could dial out for long distance, but don't subscribe to a long-distance service and don't make long-distance calls. Durham, N.C., retiree Daniel Bius discovered the $2 charge on his April bill. He says he has no use for Verizon's long-distance calling plan because he makes long-distance calls on his cell phone. "Even though I don't have a plan with them, they say I still have the ability to make a long-distance call if I ever need to, so I have to pay them $2 a month?" Bius said. "What am I supposed to do? Am I supposed to pay them $2 for no reason?" Telecommunications companies are increasingly profiting from bundled services that package wireless, Internet and even television services on one bill. Basic-phone customers are telecom's least-profitable sector, spending a minimal amount but demanding reliability. Phone companies are beginning to charge basic-phone customers for long-distance access, even if they choose not to use the network. "This is not a unique practice to Verizon," said John Breyault, a research associate at the Telecommunications Research and Action Center in New York. "Most of them charge you some sort of fee nowadays. We're concerned because we don't think you should have to pay for something you're not using." The price of long-distance service is not regulated at the state or federal level, a policy intended to spur competition. Phone companies can charge customers a minimum fee for not using long-distance service. "The bottom line is: They're trying to push people onto one of their long-distance plans," said John Garrison, an engineer with the Public Staff, North Carolina's consumer advocacy agency. "They get a monthly recurring charge from most of these plans. And if you don't use any long distance, that's profit in their pocket." Regulators require phone companies to provide basic local-phone service. The phone companies have to give customers a way out of the new monthly fee _ but they will charge another fee to eliminate the first fee. For instance, if Bius pays a $6.75 charge to have his long-distance access disconnected, Verizon will end the monthly $2 fee, but block his outgoing long-distance calls. Customers such as Bius who don't have long-distance calling plans can make long-distance calls, but they pay the highest rates. This is the way long-distance service worked decades ago, before telecommunications companies began to sell packages with monthly minutes. Verizon charges up to 50 cents a minute for customers without a long-distance calling plan. The $2 monthly fee is pro-rated. If customers rack up long-distance charges exceeding the monthly fee, the fee is dropped. If their long-distance bill for the month is less than the fee, they pay only the difference. Either way, Verizon customers will pay $2 a month, guaranteeing revenue for the telecom giant whether customers make long-distance calls or not. Verizon officials say the monthly charge is no different than paying a monthly bill for a home-phone connection and not making phone calls. But consumer advocates disagree. "It's infuriating because they take advantage of grandmothers," said Bob Williams, a spokesman for Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports magazine. "It's really cynical, but they count on that."

Phone companies levy new fee for not making calls : AP Business News : Abilene Reporter-News

What a novel business plan, charging for what isn't used. This makes me want to start a business where I can charge for actions not taken...let people pay me for what I'm not doing. I'll have to decide how much my time is worth when I'm not doing something... :rolleyes:

[Kamehameha34]

It's basically an increase in price for a service with high demand.

That's called a free market.

[shawmutt]

The month that I find that on my phone bill is the month I get rid of my land line.

[gw120]

"If you call long distance, we're going to charge you money, but if you don't make long distance phone calls, we're STILL going to charge you money." Anyone who has any of these companies should get the fuck out and go to the internet and do instant messaging instead of phone calls.

[Jack]

It's basically an increase in price for a service with high demand.

Actually it's a fee for the non-use of a provided service. Non-users are subsidizing users.

[Chris]

Quote by: shawmutt The month that I find that on my phone bill is the month I get rid of my land line.

ditto to that.

right now I only pay the telco because of my internet usage. We of course have a no frills phone line which costs $12 per month - just a dial tone, the phone never gets used, except for the modem line on my satellite box (it dials out at 3am every morning) and thats it. The sat box will charge $5 per month extra if a phone line is not attached. Plus it will take the guide longer to load due to it having to be downloaded constantly instead of having this content delivered to it on a daily basis at 3 am.

The other half of the phone line is hooked into my DSL modem. I pay $37 per month and I have the second from the highest tier of DSL service. Here is the F'd up part. You would think the phone line which is $12 and the internet which is $37 would equal a $50 something bill because of taxes, but these bastards slap us with all kinds of fees, so the bill ends up being about $70. This of course is BS. So I am really considering switching to Comcast - but there is a gamble with this cause Comcast service is spotty. You never know if your connection is going to drop out or when its going to drop out. At least DSL is consistant with this. My work pays up to $50 per month for me to have internet access. The instant these bastards try this on me, it will have been the last straw.

[Kamehameha34]

Quote by: Isherwood Actually it's a fee for the non-use of a provided service. Non-users are subsidizing users.

It's an operational fee for long distance.

Once again, either pay it or give up the service. That's how a free market works.

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: Chris ditto to that. right now I only pay the telco because of my internet usage. We of course have a no frills phone line which costs $12 per month - just a dial tone, the phone never gets used, except for the modem line on my satellite box (it dials out at 3am every morning) and thats it. The sat box will charge $5 per month extra if a phone line is not attached. Plus it will take the guide longer to load due to it having to be downloaded constantly instead of having this content delivered to it on a daily basis at 3 am. The other half of the phone line is hooked into my DSL modem. I pay $37 per month and I have the second from the highest tier of DSL service. Here is the F'd up part. You would think the phone line which is $12 and the internet which is $37 would equal a $50 something bill because of taxes, but these bastards slap us with all kinds of fees, so the bill ends up being about $70. This of course is BS. So I am really considering switching to Comcast - but there is a gamble with this cause Comcast service is spotty. You never know if your connection is going to drop out or when its going to drop out. At least DSL is consistant with this. My work pays up to $50 per month for me to have internet access. The instant these bastards try this on me, it will have been the last straw.

We were doing the same thing -- except our phone bill, with DSL and no phone usage, was about $100 a month because Qwest has a phone monopoly in our area -- until we just got sick of the overinflated bill. So we dropped the satellite entirely (though that was a separate decision) and then killed the land line and went to Comcast and cellphones. We've never had any problem with Comcast's service -- and they don't charge us for NOT using their e-mail service. :rolleyes:

[CoffeeSaint]

Quote by: Kamehameha34 It's an operational fee for long distance. Once again, either pay it or give up the service. That's how a free market works.

And because it is a free market, one is free to bitch about the price one pays for something. For that is also freedom.

One is also free, of course, to make empty comments that contribute nothing to the discussion, because everyone who actually pays for good s and services knows perfectly well that the free market gives them the options you have delineated. It is equivalent to saying, "You are full? Well, you can stop eating or continue. The choice is yours." Or perhaps, "Have nothing to say? Well, you can talk anyway or not. It's up to you."

And one is free to roll one's eyes thusly at said empty comments::rolleyes:

You are still free to comment upon this comment, for mine is admittedly as empty as yours; such is the nature of commenting on empty comments. And freedom will always include the right to make an empty comment about the emptiness of a critique of one's prior empty comments. But I will choose not to exercise my right to a riposte devoid of purpose, so see this as a free shot. Go for it.

[Milton Bradley]

We went throught\ this once before with the other "charge" they added some time back.


My plan this time will be to pay the bill minus the extra charge. I will continue to pay the bill minus the charge until they want to cancel the service.


Unfortunately, the phone service provided by my internet provider sucks. We tried that last time the secret charge was added.


I'm also goint to pro-rate them for any lost time due to outages.


I'm truly wondering if this money ends up in the hands of those spying on us.