Missouri Taking On Deceptive Extra Fees
from the not-in-the-advertised-price dept
We've written many times before about how telecom companies like to add in all sorts of official looking fees that aren't required by anyone. That's not to say that the firms aren't using the fees for what they claim (though, that's very debatable), but that people think those fees are somehow required by the government. Now, Broadband Reports points out that Missouri is looking to ban those fees if they're not specifically mandated by law. Broadband Reports also points to an op-ed piece against those who want to ban such fees, which totally misses the point. It argues that by listing out these fees, the companies are "educating" consumers about how their money is being used. While that may or may not actually be true (for example, E911 "fees" were actually used to buy boots for police officers), that's not really the issue. The problem with these fees is that they're snuck onto the bill later - rather than as part of the advertised price of the service. If companies included them in the advertised price, and explained what they were used for, people wouldn't be complaining.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
My basic belief
Unless the customer can opt out of paying the $4, $6.05 and $3.20, then they are part of your base price. Period.
When I visit a local gas station and pay $1.79 per gallon, I see a sticker on the pump that tells me that something like $0.60 of every gallon is for taxes (not just sales tax), would it be fair for a gas station to post prices at $1.19* per gallon and show $1.19* on the pump until after you stop pumping and then it suddenly jumps to $1.79 and recalculates your final cost? No? Why not? That's what almost all the utility companies are doing...
If it's not an optional fee and it's not sales tax then it should NOT be included in your base price.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
"So your telling me that my $2.99 lunch costs me $15.00? Why didn't you say that to begin with!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in thread ]
# portability.
Back in the mid to late 90's I started seeing a fee for .50 odd cents showing up on my bill for " # portability "
I raised holy hell and got the charge permanently removed. At first, they tried to tell me it was a federally mandated tax.
I fought back and said to the phone company that they would not collect a fee from me for a service that they did not provide, nor did I want.
How many years later and we still don't have smooth # portability.
Roll over and play dead or speak up and make a change.
[ link to this | view in thread ]