CONSUMER NEWS    RECALLS    COMPLAINT FORM    SCAM ALERTS  


Complain about a product or service

Small Claims Guide | Class Actions | Lemon Law | FAQ | Resources | Newsletters | Spanish
Automotive    Education    Electronics    Family    Finance    Health    Homeowners    Shopping    Travel   
NEWS   Latest |  Archives |  Auto |  Cells, etc. |  Computers |  Financial |  Health |  Homeowners |  Parents |  Privacy |  Scams |  Seniors |  Travel

Sprint Removes Three Fees, Adds Two New Ones

Company claims new charges will "defray costs"





By Martin H. Bosworth
ConsumerAffairs.com

December 17, 2007 


How to Avoid Early Termination Fees
Site Offers Cell Phone Contract Swapping
---
News
FCC Not Ready to Pry Open Wireless Networks
Sprint Removes Three Fees, Adds Two New Ones
Sprint, T-Mobile Prorate Termination Fees
AT&T Changes Contract Policy
California Supreme Court OKs T-Mobile Class Action
Verizon Wireless Changes Contract Policy
FCC, Congress May Limit Cable, Cell Phone Termination Fees
Cell Phone Consumers Win Court Victory
Text Messaging Charges Surprise Cell Phone Users
Cell Phone Customers Held Captive by Termination Fees
Poll Finds Cell Phone Users Want Stronger Consumer Protection
Michigan Challenges One-Sided Cell Phone Contracts
New York Considers Tough Cell Phone Consumer Protection Law
California to Try Again With Telecommunications Bill of Rights
California Suspends Wireless Bill of Rights
California Adopts Wireless Consumer Bill of Rights

Sprint customers got a little surprise in their holiday stocking this week. The company announced it was removing three of the extra fees it bills to customers from their monthly charges, including fees assessed for 911 service, number portability, and costs of compliance with federal programs.

However, the company also sent along a lump of coal by offering two new fees -- an "administrative charge" of 75 cents monthly, and a "regulatory charge" of 25 cents.

According to Sprint, the administrative charge will "help defray various costs imposed on us by other telecommunications carriers" while the regulatory charge is "being assessed to help defray costs of various federal, state and local regulatory programs."

These charges are not taxes and are not amounts we are required to collect from you," the carrier said.

While customers may receive a minuscule savings from the new fees, what are they and why, if the company isn't required to charge them, does it do so?

The mysterious fees, or "unfees" as disgruntled customers call them, are basically thinly disguised price increases or, to put it a little more generously, ways to pass on increased business costs to consumers. It's a common, if unpopular, practice and is not limited to the wireless industry, though wireless carriers are certainly fond of it.

When Verizon won temporary relief from paying into the Universal Service Fund (USF), rather than pass on the savings to customers, it promptly replaced the USF fee with a new fee that almost exactly mirrored the USF fee.

BellSouth tried to do the same but both telecoms backed down after Federal Communications Commission (FCC) chair Kevin Martin threatened an investigation for violating the agency's "Truth In Billing" requirements for customer service charges.

Congress attempted to gain some relief for consumers when Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) and Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) introduced the "Cell Phone Consumer Protection Act of 2007," which would ban the charging of any extra fees beyond what government regulations mandate, and require wireless carriers to spell out fees in clear, comprehensible language.

But the bill has languished since its introduction, with no sign of forward motion before Congress adjourns for the holidays.

Sprint, meanwhile, bowed to consumer pressure and competition from its larger rivals AT&T and Verizon Wireless when it recently announced that it would prorate its contract cancellation fees and not charge customers who want to change plans by locking them into new contracts.

But the "unfees" continue to frustrate those who want to pay a flat, fair price for the services they get. As one commenter at Broadband Reports put it, "If I go to a grocery store to buy something, I see the price that is charged, and I pay a sales tax ... If I wanted, I could look at other stores carrying similar items, and comparison shop based on price, knowing that another store isn't showing an artificially low price that includes an 'unfee.' "



Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.


Consumer News

May 17 2008

Recent Recalls & Safety Alerts

READER SERVICES

Print, Email & More

Subscribe

Free consumer newsletters
Sign up now!





Back to the top |

Advertisement


Home | Rogues Gallery | Good Guys | Complaint Form | News | Recalls | Search | Video | FAQ |
Consumer Resources | Small Claims Guide | Lemon Law | Newsletter | Contact Us
Advertise With Us | Testimonials | Newsroom | RSS Feeds | Radio | Job Postings




Terms of Use Your use of this site constitutes acceptance of the Terms of Use

Advertisements on this site are placed and controlled by outside advertising networks. ConsumerAffairs.com does not evaluate or endorse the products and services advertised. See the FAQ for more information.

Company Response Welcome If complaints about your company appear on our site, we welcome your response. Please see the Response Form for more information.

For more information, see the FAQ and privacy policy. The information on this Web site is general in nature and is not intended as a substitute for competent legal advice.  ConsumerAffairs.com Inc. makes no representation as to the accuracy of the information herein provided and assumes no liability for any damages or loss arising from the use thereof. 

Copyright © 2003-2008 ConsumerAffairs.com Inc.  All Rights Reserved.