Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses The Courts The Internet Advertising Network Programming The Almighty Buck Technology

Charter Customer Sues Over Hidden Fees, Claims 'Massive Billing Fraud' (arstechnica.com) 96

Posted by BeauHD from the read-the-fine-print dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: A Charter customer has sued the cable company, alleging that it falsely advertises a lower price than it actually charges and falsely tells customers that extra fees tacked onto their bills are mandated by the government. The complaint, filed in California State Superior court in San Diego, takes aim at the "Broadcast TV" and "Sports Programming" surcharges that are added to customers' bills despite not being included in the advertised rate. "Charter is committing massive billing fraud by disguising price increases above the advertised and promised service package price in the form of the bogus 'Broadcast TV and Sports Programming Surcharges' line item on customer bills," said the lawsuit filed last week by Michael Song. The plaintiff is a subscriber in California, where Charter, the second largest cable company in the US after Comcast, operates via its newly acquired Time Warner Cable (TWC) subsidiary. Song is paying an extra $8.75 a month from those two fees combined. In addition to subtracting the fees from the advertised price, Charter falsely tells customers that it collects the fees to comply with government mandates, the lawsuit says. A Charter/TWC bill from last month is included in the complaint, and it says, "TWC imposes surcharges to recover costs of complying with its governmental obligations." Song's complaint also has a transcript of a chat with a Charter customer service agent, who claimed that Charter pays the broadcast fee back to the government. The customer service agent apparently has only a limited grasp of English, but the chat transcript helps illustrate one of the ways in which customers are being misinformed about their bills. Song's lawsuit repeatedly refers to the Broadcast TV and Sports Programming surcharges as "bogus" and "hidden," since they subtract a portion of the standard monthly charges from the "services" section of the bill.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Charter Customer Sues Over Hidden Fees, Claims 'Massive Billing Fraud' More

Charter Customer Sues Over Hidden Fees, Claims 'Massive Billing Fraud'

Comments Filter:

  • Comcast does this too. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I was quoted 120$ for internet, and cable. Then I was billed $145, and every so often they try raising the rate. Its a scam, but there is no cable internet oversight! So while our internet is 50x as slow as other countries and 8x as expensive, we have no legal recourse to defend ourselves.

    • Re:Comcast does this too. (Score:5, Informative)

      by MobyDisk ( 75490 ) on Monday November 14, 2016 @08:00PM (#53285731) Homepage

      So while our internet is 50x as slow as other countries and 8x as expensive

      According to Akamai [wikipedia.org], the US averages 12.6Mbit/sec while South Korea leads the pack at 20.5Mbit/sec.

      we have no legal recourse to defend ourselves.

      That's a silly statement considering this is an article about someone using legal recourse to defend themself.

      (Yes, I wasted time debating a preposterous claim by an AC. Yeah, waste of time.)

    • I was quoted 120$ for internet, and cable. Then I was billed $145, and every so often they try raising the rate. Its a scam, but there is no cable internet oversight!

      My mortgage company does this too. Pay regularly and ontime for a few years and receive and email saying, "call us to find out how we are allocating your money." followed a few days later by, "your mortgage will be late if not paid by the 15th.", all the while I am left going, "WTF? I have paid my mortgage on time and regularly for years. How does this shit happen?"

      Ultimately, it is the new business model, fleecing your customers through "administrative fees". It is a shame that companies are allowed to fee

  • It is the ESPN tax. ESPN takes your money, and pays hundreds of millions in rights fees for sporting events. That is why the average NBA salary is $5.1 million a year. Oh, plus the taxpayers are on the hook for building the stadiums.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      And even if you don't have ESPN, you still have to pay the tax. Seems a lot like Microsoft and computers.

      Of course with Charter, it's really worse. I pay extra for ESPN, but it quit in July and they still can't get it to work despite the fact they're billing me for it.

  • I'll be sad when I can't use this ridiculous meme anymore.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Just because he will no longer be in office does NOT mean you can't still blame him, so take heart.... ;)

      • The change from blaming everything on Clinton to blaming everything on Obama seemed to happen in December 2012.

  • Here's how to beat this game... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by buss_error ( 142273 ) on Monday November 14, 2016 @07:47PM (#53285657) Homepage Journal

    Cancel service. That's what I did years ago. I don't watch TV. I only watch what I am interested in. No more "shove that crap down their thoughts and they'll pay LOTS for it" programming.

    Professional sports has gone from some reasonable charge to "holy cow you want HOW MUCH to watch?" Turn them off too.

    Internet gets too expensive? Investigate alternatives such as Zip, ViVent, and other terrestrial microwave ISPs.

    • These snowflakes seem to think that Cable television is a necessity. Sometimes they will even try very hard to form a rational argument about why it is, such as "try not having cable when you have kids."

      Plenty of people have never has cable television, but that doesnt seem to matter.
      • you clearly never lived in a antenna dead/bad reception zone. those living in and near city's don't have that problem but as little as 15 miles outside a city reception is a bad problem.18 years i lived with ABC,CBS and sometimes NBC forget VHF channels lol for 18 years i love cable i hate being forced to pay for stuff i don't want or need that needs to be addressed ASAP

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

          near city's don't

          Since when is don't a noun? This is what happens when your parents abrogate responsibility to the television.

        • you clearly never lived in a antenna dead/bad reception zone.

          Behold another example of someone trying very hard to form a rational argument about why cable is a necessity.

          Lets suppose for a moment that I did live someplace that had bad OTA reception. Then in your view I absolutely have to pay for cable, right? Thats not a rational argument. Its just clinging to the belief that cable is necessary, when it isn't.

        • I have *shit* OTA reception.
          Still no cable.
          I do pay for (ugh) AT&T internet, but not for phone or video.
          Comcast would get my business (simply based on speed/$), but they refused to use the existing wiring in the house (All RG6) and insist on running their own wire through the wall (not gonna happen, 8" of hardened concrete and cinderblock with rebar).

        • Try reading a book or getting a hobby. I live where there's very good reception (the station's transmitters are less than 8 miles from my home) and that doesn't tempt me to turn on the TV. There isn't anything, nothing, zero, zip slant zilch, nada I want to see - not now that I've reclaimed my life and stopped drooling in front of the box.

          All those wasted hours, gone forever...

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I paid $3,000 to have fiber installed just to avoid the cable companies and $150 a month which humorously is better than the cable option price wise and faster in the upstream direction (I get a 20/20 connection for this price). A person in a similar situation as me pays something like $300 / month in order to get a worse up connection. Cable companies suck. I would have gone with ADSL as I have always done in past, but now I live a bit too far from the center of town or CO to get anything but bonded ADSL (

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by nnull ( 1148259 )
          I'm curious how you were able to pay a company $3000 to have fiber installed? I can't even get fiber installed to my warehouse where fiber is available a street away, even if I payed them a million dollars, they would spit on me.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jrumney ( 197329 )

        "try not having cable when you have kids."

        Next time someone attempts that argument, you should thank them for their very sound advice.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by Guido69 ( 513067 )
      How on earth is this (a) insightful or (2) "beating this game"? Insightful is challenging the charges that were not agreed upon to obtain the service at the price advertised.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        I do believe that would be playing the game rather than beating it. If you drop them as a provider altogether you don't play that unethical charge game any more. Assuming the competition (should you have any) is not playing the game also, or in the case you simply go without. The problem is there is no real competition in most places and they know it. Fortunately there is some competition here in some areas, like ADSL, and then there is this wonderful thing called piracy. Combine the two and you can say 'fu

    • or lots of D&D? Ever shoot guns or join a pipe club? TV Sports are Social Circles. It's a reason to get together with people TV as a whole is great for socializing. Water Cooler talk and the like. It's a shared experience. When I couldn't afford cable and my kid had to go without she stuck out like a square peg in a round hole because she couldn't watch the 8 o'clock shows (too late for her to go over to a friends house; and hard to make friends without that ice breaker anyway).

      These shared social e

      • > It's a reason to get together with people TV as a whole is great for socializing.

        It is, so I go socialize when I watch the game, rather than hiding out in my house. I go to the Denver Broncos bar here in Dallas, and cheer with the other Broncos fans.

        Also, I hear the Corvette club is a fun way to socialize. That doesn't make a Corvette a necessity.

      • $100+ per month seems a hell of a lot of money to pay for an ice breaker. And then you have to waste time actually watching the stuff.

        If you actually like sports it seems it would be cheaper (or at least better value) to go down the pub and watch them there - at least you have a chance of making friends there.

    • Even if you cancel right away, you may need to prove breach of contract or false advertising, unless you can find a customer service person who is willing to waive that early termination fee for you.

  • I smell a payday for the lawyers! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 14, 2016 @07:55PM (#53285703)

    I'm sure in 5 years time they'll come to an out-of-court settlement with no admission of liability with the FCC to pay back 10% of the money made with this scheme, pocketing the rest as profit. And if you're lucky, you'll get a $10 voucher off your next cable bill as settlement for the class action. Fucking love the way business works in America, right?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      And the cable bill will go up another $20

  • They are an Internet recovery of something fee, and so far this year doubled it from $1.99 to$3.99/month.

    With if asked about it, they offered me $50/month off everything, if I committed to two years.

    I felt dirty even though I said no, not ready to extend the relationship.

  • Local TV Surcharge (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I live in Lincoln, NE, a market that was served by TWC. One of the most frustrating fees is the surcharge for local TV stations. We used to get the Lincoln and Omaha TV stations, but slowly the Omaha stations have been dropped from the channel lineup or relegated to SD only. We have fewer local stations than a few years ago, but the fees for those have increased. The Omaha stations generally are of a higher quality than those from the Lincoln, which isn't surprising due to the Omaha market being larger. I'd

    • I've always found those a bit annoying... double dipping by the local broadcasters. I always thought they should design a tuner into the cable box and have it cut to the antenna feed for the local stations. We cancelled cable TV, the local guys get no silly fee, but I can still watch all their stuff. It is absurd.

  • About bloody time (Score:3)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Monday November 14, 2016 @08:36PM (#53285947)
    Now go after my cell phone company. I've had a bullshit "Regulatory Compliance Fee" that wasn't disclosed in their adverts for years. By the time I knew it was there I was knee deep in the contract. What pisses me off the most is the number of people I know who think this crap is taxes and go to the polls demanding a tax break for these poor over taxed companies. Laughing all the way to the bank, they are...

  • Cell phone administrative fees (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yogidog98 ( 1800862 ) on Monday November 14, 2016 @09:23PM (#53286207)

    I hope the Charter customer sues the pants off them and wins. I have complained to TWC about the broadcast and sports fees and deceptive pricing for several months.

    Cell phone companies do the same thing but they call them "administrative fees". They are not required by the govt, and not an optional fee from the provider, so they should be included in the advertised base price or not charged at all.

  • The Best Part (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sk999 ( 846068 ) on Monday November 14, 2016 @11:31PM (#53286815)

    Song is not asking for his money back. Why? Because cable companies (and others) normally insert an aribitration clause into their agreements to cover such situations, which would require Song to submit his dispute to arbitration (which would cost much more than the amount that could be recovered). Instead, Song is asking for injunctive relief - basically asking that Charter not charge him in the future. Why would he do so? Let's read a bit more of the agreement:

    "Only claims for money damages may be submitted to arbitration; claims for INJUNCTIVE ORDERS or similar relief MUST be brought in a COURT ..."

    Charter basically demands that Song hale it into court. Nice job, Charter lawyers.

  • They are MASTERS of the hidden fee and deceptive advertising about low fares!

  • Sirius/XM should be investigated also. Their fees are over the top.

  • This is why we cant have (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Nice things...
    Corporate greed and fraud, lawmakers corruption, and business shenanigans ( with a foreign accent ).

    It is time to classify the internet as a utility. Like power and water, or the old phone system.
    Maybe make the wireless cellphone business a utility also.

    Seriously, I don't like too much regulation, but the level of skimmng/tacking and greed here is astounding to the pont
    of makng me a vocal advocate of the public utility solution.

  • Not uncommon, but FCC will help (Score:3)

    by LordLimecat ( 1103839 ) on Tuesday November 15, 2016 @10:38AM (#53288943)

    I had Verizon trying to tell me that their quoted rate of $49.99 (after heavy haggling) was being increased to $60 because of fees and whatnot. All fine and good, but $5 of that was equipment fees. I had purchased my own FIOS router, and returned all set top boxes, so what were the fees? Well, Verizon informed me they were mandatory, and regardless of what the FCC said Verizon had their own policies.

    2 months and 1 FCC complaint later, I got an apologetic letter from Verizon informing me that I was correct and they would lower their price.

    As a child you assume that the laws we have in place means that the problem is solved. As an adult you find out that you have to be vigilant and not afraid to stand up for your rights, because people will take advantage either through greed, malice, or simple ignorance. I dont assume the Verizon reps knew the law, just what they were told by their supervisors, but if I had not taken the initiative on my own I would be paying an extra $60 a year for my ignorance.

    All this to say-- glad this is being pressed, because the only way you get the phone reps to accord with the law is to put the fear of civil suits into the heart of their management.

    • I dont assume the Verizon reps knew the law, just what they were told by their supervisors, but if I had not taken the initiative on my own I would be paying an extra $60 a year for my ignorance.

      Of course they knew, you were not the only one being fleeced. There are still hundreds of thousands of people out there getting charged that fee. I wonder where that 6+ million dollars is going....

  • Require that each and every "government charge" be justified by a CFR cite (or equivilent State/Local law cite)

    if a charge can not be cited then it must be included in the per month charges

    oh btw whenever possible Customer Owned equipment should be allowed (and any related rental charges dropped)

Slashdot Top Deals

"What man has done, man can aspire to do." -- Jerry Pournelle, about space flight

Close