Customer Discovers T-Mobile's 'Unlimited' SMS Plan Not So Unlimited Thanks To $26,000 Bill

from the well-that-clears-that-up dept

Tue, Apr 28th 2009 7:32am — Mike Masnick

It's getting rather ridiculous to keep seeing companies offer "unlimited" services, only to later find out that they're not unlimited at all. Yakko Warner points out that this just happened to one guy in Pennsylvania, who along with a friend, tried to beat the world record for most text messages in a month (182,000) by messaging each other back and forth. They figured they were fine, because they each had unlimited text messaging plans, but after one of them sent 140,000 messages, he received a bill for $26,000 and learned that, for T-Mobile, "unlimited" actually means 100,000, and those additional 40,000 messages cost quite a pretty penny. To T-Mobile's credit, the company has agreed to let the charge slide, but it makes you wonder why it has that cap in the first place if it's advertising the service as unlimited (and then ignoring the cap when people pass it). Why not actually remove the limit?

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

Filed Under: sms, unlimited
Companies: t-mobile

67 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Tgeigs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 7:43am

In related news...
1. Democracy foisted upon others by Amerika: In defense of the war in Iraq, President Bush proclaimed once again that we have brought Democracy to Iraq and the middle east. When asked about the coincidence of Iraqi elections tending to coincide with American backed politicians, he shrugged and said, "We simply offered strategery advice to them." When then asked why American government refused to work with Hamas, despite the fact that they were democratically elected, he said, "Listen, when we asked the Palestinians to take an active role in Democracy, we didn't mean that they should elect whoever they want. Democracy means electing the people WE want."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- WarOtter (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:27am
  
  Re: In related news...
  Ummm you put your soapbox in the wrong room. Please relocate it to the DILLIGAF room.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:02am
  
  Re: In related news...
  you sir are a fucking idiot
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:10am
  
  Re: In related news...
  WTF? Thats right! T-Mobil's unlimited plan isn't unlimited because of Bush and the Iraq war! Fucking troll.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- SA, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:14am
  
  Re: In related news...
  Wonderful insight. North Korea has elections also. Maybe we should work on their nuclear energy infrastructure with them. It will bring peace. By the way kook aid... Bush isn't in office anymore. Obama won. Maybe he will talk to Hamas for you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Tgeigs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:22am
    
    Re: Re: In related news...
    Haha, kook aid. Best...insult...ever.
    
    And I was just trying to draw a humorous parralel between unlimited not being unlimited and democracy not being democracy. I think I'll give myself a FAIL and move on :)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The infamous Joe, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:57am
      
      Re: Re: Re: In related news...
      ..you know that America is not a democracy, right?
      
      Let me polish up up that "FAIL" for ya before you go. :P
      
      (I keed, I keed.)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 11:14am
  
  Re: In related news...
  what an extreme left wing idiot....don't suppose you have a link to a news article containing the quotes you used???? Try and stick to the topic!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 12:02pm
    
    Re: Re: In related news...
    Please see #26/#37, apology already submitted.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
TheStuipdOne, 28 Apr 2009 @ 7:44am

Consumer Fraud
Wouldn't this qualify as consumer fraud? Unlimited mean there is no limit. A company should not be allowed to redefine words to suit its advertising model.

But since this is allowed I'll sell you an unlimited cell phone plan for voice, text, and data for just $5. I'll make all of my money charging you $1 per minute over the unlimited cap of 1 minute, $2 for each text after your second, and $10 foer each and every bit after your first 5
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark, 28 Apr 2009 @ 7:45am

Blown out of proportion
I've seen this story in multiple places, and I think it is being blown out of proportion.

The system had a "limit" of 100000, before charging customers per text. this is probably a vestige from when there was no unlimited plan. T-mobile probably assumed no one really would go over 100000 texts in a months, so they thought they were safe. Customers can send all the texts they want, and very little has to be done to have the billing system support the users.

This was done because it was a much simpler (ie cost effective) solution than upgrading the software to allow for unlimited. They just put in a cap similar to the other plans, but made it so high that any normal usage wouldn't trigger the overages.

Now these two guys come along, and blow past the number. After getting a surprising bill and contacting t-mobile, they admit our bad, it's how we set up our system, and your account will be credited. Now t-mobile has to go back and update the billing system, or set the new limit to even more ridiculous number (like 10 billion).

This is not the same as the data plans that were offered as unlimited, but really had heavy restrictions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Doe, 28 Apr 2009 @ 7:53am
  
  Re: Blown out of proportion
  This is quite likely the explanation. The system was designed with limits. The limit was set at 5 digits, so it was set to 99,999 messages before billing kicks in. If T-Mobile didn't put up a fuss then no harm, no foul.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:26am
    
    Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
    You didn't read the article did you. They've reversed the charges, but are still investigating it. They also claimed he was violating his terms of service by...well...using it.
    
    There were times, back when we used modems, when I would leave my second line connected for days. No doubt these days that would be a violation of my terms for service because even though I had "unlimited" use of the phone, it wasn't really unlimited.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Robb Topolski (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:37am
    
    Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
    Exactly my thinking. I noticed that my "unlimited" Verizon Wireless voice actually gave me 99,999 minutes in a month (about two month's worth of 24x7 usage). After that, it was 25c per minute. It is functionally unlimited, as with 3-way calling and perhaps some other call-forwarding tricks, I probably could exceed 99,999 minutes somehow.
    
    What disappoints me about the event outlined in the original article (linked in the above) is that T-Mobile chewed him out for abuse. What a better story this would have been for T-Mobile had they congratulated him for the attempt and stirred up buzz. Idiots!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Brooks, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:23am
  
  Re: Blown out of proportion
  Yep, seems like the most plausible theory here. If T-Mobile had secret caps that they were hoping to use to generate revenue, why waive the charges in this case?
  
  Seems like tempest in a teapot to me. Can we talk about the ways that cell phone companies are genuinely dishonest instead of getting worked up over what looks like a technical snafu that they cheerfully fixed?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 11:19am
    
    Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
    You mean like their "heads I win, tails you lose" billing model?
    
    That is, you pay for a certain number of minutes, but if you don't use them, you're still charged the same. But if you go over that amount you get charged more.
    
    This is a very dispicable practice. Contrast with the much more honest electric/gas model of "pay for what you use".
    
    But since all the US carriers do it, you can't simply choose one with a less abusive business model.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:07pm
  
  Re: Blown out of proportion
  The system had a "limit" of 100000, before charging customers per text.
  
  OK, so much for stating the obvious.
  
  this is probably a vestige from when there was no unlimited plan. T-mobile probably assumed no one really would go over 100000 texts in a months, so they thought they were safe.
  
  Do you have a source for that or are you just making stuff up in a lame attempt to be an apologist for T-mobile?
  
  And it still didn't keep them from trying to collect, did it?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mark, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:33pm
    
    Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
    My source was logic, common sense, and knowledge in the actual design and implementation of these types of systems, plus the information from this article (http://www.wgal.com/money/19238949/detail.html) when I originally heard about this last week.
    
    I'm not being an apologist, just a realist. If T-mobile was trying to collect the money for going over the limit on the unlimited plan, then I would be the first to say False Advertising, and sue, and be fined by the FTC, among others.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 3:34pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
      My source was logic, common sense, and knowledge in the actual design and implementation of these types of systems, plus the information from this article (http://www.wgal.com/money/19238949/detail.html) when I originally heard about this last week.
      
      OK, so you're basically just making crap up.
      
      I'm not being an apologist, just a realist.
      
      Bull. Do you own stock, or what?
      
      If T-mobile was trying to collect the money for going over the limit on the unlimited plan, then I would be the first to say False Advertising, and sue, and be fined by the FTC, among others.
      
      Obviously not. More bull. T-mobile did attempt to collect. Yet, you're still apologizing for them.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DoYourResearch, 22 Feb 2012 @ 9:18am
  
  Re: Blown out of proportion
  Actually, it really doesn't cost T-mobile anything to give you unlimited texting, because it doesn't cost them anything no matter how many texts get sent and received. So they don't lose anything whether the limit is 100,000 or it's truely 'unlimited'.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Karl, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:24am

Charging $26,000 for a service that costs virtually nothing to provide should probably be "blown out of proportion."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Luci, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:12am
  
  Re:
  Well, to be fair the charge is approximately $0.65 per message, since the $26,000 charge for around 40,000 messages.
  Still a programming error. How many messages do YOU send in a month?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
jonnyq, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:28am

As often as this comes up, it's baffling that companies are still allowed to send bills like this.

There should be some sort policy in place that if a bill runs up to a certain about (e.g. twice the user's monthly bill) then the user gets a courtesy call.

The idea that you can accidentally leave an iphone on "auto update" or overuse an unlimited service and get a bill over $1000 is absurd.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:31am

What is amazing is that the guy's wife has not already filed for divorce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
noah, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:34am

Re: Blown out of proportion
This is a technical glitch. I can tell you exactly what happened. Someone tells the programmer for the billing system "We need an unlimited plan", the programmer, being lazy, thinks "The 'limit' in an integer. Changing the type or handling the corner cases by trying to implement a special 'unlimited' value would take hours or even days. No way anyone could go over 100,000 in 1 month..." Bam. And he was almost right. You know what the solution almost certainly is? They added a zero. No one will go over a million. But if they do? T-mobile does exactly what they did here, they drop the charges.

T-mobile did the right thing here, but that's not a story is it? So we have to create outrage by emphasizing the fact that 2 guys got a bill for $26,000. Oh noes! A billing error! The end of freedom and consumer rights!

Oh, but we mentioned that they didn't have to pay (after a paragraph about how ridiculous it is), and didn't have to even fight it, so we're not biased. We're not a hype machine like the rest of the media. Seriously Techdirt, apply your usually spot on criticism of the media to yourself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Robb Topolski (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:41am
  
  Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
  Noah,
  A technical glitch would result in charges dropped with an apology. This guy got read the Riot Act, instead.
  T-Mobile deserves to have their nose rubbed in it.
  Robb
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Robb Topolski (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:41am
  
  Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
  Noah,
  A technical glitch would result in charges dropped with an apology. This guy got read the Riot Act, instead.
  T-Mobile deserves to have their nose rubbed in it.
  Robb
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Doe, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:17am
  
  Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
  A programmer is not given the authority to set these limits. Most likely, someone on the business side said that the limit should be 100,000 because nobody would every surpass that. So it is lazy management, not programmers making the choice.
  
  Besides, using a 6 digit number instead of 5 is so simple that it wouldn't even take a minute much less hours or days as you mention.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Tgeigs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:28am
    
    Re: Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
    Anyone remember that Coke promotion with the Coca Cola points, with the joke advertising that w/enough of them you could buy a Harrier Jet? Then some jackass went out and traded for the advertised amount of points on Ebay etc., then demanded his Harrier? I mean, it's funny, but I wonder about the motivation for doing these types of things.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - PRMan, 28 Apr 2009 @ 12:15pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
      "Anyone remember that Coke promotion with the Coca Cola points, with the joke advertising that w/enough of them you could buy a Harrier Jet? Then some jackass went out and traded for the advertised amount of points on Ebay etc., then demanded his Harrier? I mean, it's funny, but I wonder about the motivation for doing these types of things."
      
      Pepsi's advertising department will be disappointed in your comment:
      
      Pepsi Harrier Jet lawsuit
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Tgeigs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 1:25pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
        What the hell is Pepsi?
        
        LOL.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:10pm
  
  Re: Re: Blown out of proportion
  This is a technical glitch. I can tell you exactly what happened.
  
  Oh really? What's your inside source on this case?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
SoreThumbs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:37am

That's a lot of messages
182,000 text messages a month? That's 5,871 messages per day if the month has 31 days.

If we assume that they could be awake and "textable" for 16-hours each day (8 hours for sleeping, bathing, etc), then they'd need to text 367 messages per hour. That's 6.1/minute, or about one message every 9 seconds. Wow.

Un. Freaking. Believable. Some people truly need to get out more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jason, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:56am
  
  Re: That's a lot of messages
  "Some people truly need to get out more"
  
  Maybe, maybe not. These guys are those guys you see talking to one person and texting another at the same time without a break in thought.
  
  Some people just have multi-threading capabilities.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 11:08am
  
  Re: That's a lot of messages
  Actually, its about half that. Assuming they texted only each other and sent the same amount, that would only be 91,000 texts per person. So, they were only each sending about 3 texts per minute.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
RadioEmotion, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:42am

100K/Mo. effectively unlimited IMHO
That's a little less than 2.5 messages/minute.

@John Doe: Yeah, that is the most plausible explanation I can think of. IT legacy strikes again.

Still, unlimited should mean unlimited with no qualms.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
R. Miles, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:42am

Misuse and abuse?
How in the hell is either applicable when both parties understood the term "unlimited"?

I smell a lawsuit, even if the charges were dismissed. It's false advertising.

To me, that's the real abuse and misuse in play here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
David T, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:46am

Massive bills as a sign of poor checks
How can a company reasonably push out a 10k bill on an account that normally runs 60 bucks a month? Maybe the cellular networks should learn from the CC companies and call when a user breaks a (reasonable) spending threshold to make sure everything is cool.

Makes too much sense to be usable, I know...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Neverhood, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:46am

Problems with certain concepts
I guess that the old-school companies just have a problem with concepts like "free" or "unlimited" and it is only the advertising agencies they hire that understand it, and tells the companies that it sells the product, but fails to elaborate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael B, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:47am

Same Old Story
When I signed up for Comcast cable internet, it was advertised as "unlimited". When they imposed caps, I complained, and their response? "Unlimited" means "unlimited access, 24/7", NOT unlimited use. These dirtbags can redefine things at any time and get away with it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 8:50am

What is the difference between advertising and a campaign promise?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:01am
  
  Re:
  just shut up
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:52am
  
  Re:
  Honestly? Because technically, all a politician can promise is to see if the promise is feasible and if it is, he/she can *try* to get it passed wherever it needs to go. Its impossible for a politician to actually make a guaranteed promise.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:34pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Its impossible for a politician to actually make a guaranteed promise.
    
    Yah, it's impossible for anybody to guarantee anything because you never know for sure what the future will hold. There fore all guarantees are null and void.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:00am

What is the difference between advertising and a campaign promise?

There's no law against breaking a campaign promise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jeffry Houser (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:06am

Yakko Warner? Seriously?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakko,_Wakko,_and_Dot
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jason, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:58am
  
  Re: Yakko Warner? Seriously?
  Exactly what I was thinking.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Yakko Warner, 28 Apr 2009 @ 11:12am
  
  Re: Yakko Warner? Seriously?
  Sometimes. Other times, I'm not quite so serious. ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Neil, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:21am

Nothing new
In the UK every "unlimited" plan has a little asterisks next to it saying fair use policy applies. They aren't so generous as America, it's usually about 2000 messages. "Unlimited" data plans are even worse, they are extremely limited. A clear misuse of language, but it's been going on for ages.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:53am

This whole store is dumb
To T-Mobile's credit, the company has agreed to let the charge slide, but it makes you wonder why it has that cap in the first place if it's advertising the service as unlimited (and then ignoring the cap when people pass it). Why not actually remove the limit?

If you knew how the backend systems work, you would have known know that operators still have to enter a (get this) a number into the billing system. It's quantifyable, and thusly, billable. They just expand to the software limit, and then in odd situations like this, do a manual review, override and credit to the account.

This is just like Robb points out with Verizon's 99,999 weekend minutes. What Robb doesn't know is that all wireless companies use the same backend system software. And Yes, Robb probably could do it through fancy manuvering with 3 and 4 way calling. But Verizon would have had to react the same way. No company is immune.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 11:03am
  
  Re: This whole store is dumb
  The only reason an operator would still have to enter in a number is through a flaw in the system. The system wasn't designed for unlimited, but it was probably just not cost effective to patch it. To say its impossible however is ridiculous. You obviously do not write software.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:46pm
    
    Re: Re: This whole store is dumb
    To say its impossible however is ridiculous. You obviously do not write software.
    
    So why should ignorance of a subject keep anyone from spouting off about it?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chargone, 28 Apr 2009 @ 9:55am

ya know, with all the stupid stuff that the NZ government pulls from time to time, and all the stupid things businesses do here from time to time...

i am still somehow amazed by the levels of stupidity one can find in other countries. i may not agree with how things are done here a lot of the time, but I'm still glad to be here and not somewhere else.

there are so many things wrong with this whole situation, it's not funny. I'm sure there's at least three points where this would have been caught here, legally... and that's even after ignoring the 'no harm, no foul' of them fixing it meaning it probably wouldn't even rate mention except as a curiosity 'hey, people, this weird thing happened! strange, huh?'.

reasonably sure that, generally speaking, if someone here were to read 'unlimited X for $Y', it would mean 'there's no limits! at all! as long as you pay your bill!'... if there were a limit for data based stuff, it'd be connection speed. given that the connection speed is useually stated...

ok, i lost my point. well, the one that was actually relevant, anyway. meh, have some ramblings anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JT, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:38am

"And I was just trying to draw a humorous parralel between unlimited not being unlimited and democracy not being democracy. I think I'll give myself a FAIL and move on :)"

We're a Republic. The real FAIL in in your spelling ability. "parallel".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Tgeigs, 28 Apr 2009 @ 10:48am
  
  Re:
  Agreed. I will give myself several floggings.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 12:17pm

Americans are so lazy
It is NOT possible to provide a truly unlimited service in any domain. Americans are lazy and stupid, and they don't want to track their usage. That is why companies provide "unlimited" services such as internet, phone and SMS.

It would be nice if the companies provide non-exploiting pay-as-you-go plans (10 cent/SMS doesnt make any sense when you provide unlimited service for $5 and average user sends 1000 SMSs).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- i, 19 Feb 2010 @ 8:57am
  
  Re: Americans are so lazy
  fuck you punk. you're lazy and stupid. @ least that's what your mom was mumbling last night. she had a hard time talking with 9 inches in her mouth.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
batch, 28 Apr 2009 @ 12:37pm

I think they probably sent the bill just to see if he would pay. Some people do just pay whatever amount the bill claims they owe.

Admittedly, $26,000 is ludicrous, but then again, it was a corporation doing the billing. Whatever humans involved with shipping (ha!, not mailing) the bill probably assumed it had thrown a flag and someone higher up still allowed the bill to be sent. Too bad common sense never intervened.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pangolin (profile), 28 Apr 2009 @ 12:41pm

Not so strange
As someone who has worked on related systems - I can tell you that this is easy to explain. Tmobile used to have plans that allowed a certain number of free messages then charged for the overage. That's OK. Now comes the word that there is an unlimited plan. The easiest way to change the billing system is to create a new "unlimited" tier. This tier will be at some large number that "no one" will never exceed. Oh say - 100000. Well, I guess we should have made it 900000. Oh well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:43pm

Marketing
This reminds me of the Dilbert strip wherein Dilbert gets temporarily transferred to the marketing department. Upon his arrival there he is given a container in which to store his soon-to-be-removed conscience and told to "Remember, it's not lying, it's marketing!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Terry, 28 Apr 2009 @ 2:44pm

This is like free health care. It is free if the treatment is cheap. If the treatment is expensive then they will let you die a slow painful death like they do in Canada, England, etc.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Apr 2009 @ 3:29pm
  
  Re:
  "This is like free health care. It is free if the treatment is cheap. If the treatment is expensive then they will let you die a slow painful death like they do in Canada, England, etc."
  
  No, you can still go to a private doctor, if you can afford it. Just like in the US (where they let you die a slow painful death whether the treatment is expensive or not if you're poor).
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dylan, 30 Apr 2009 @ 11:07am

who's got your back?
Mike, I can't begin to imagine what it was like for that guy to get a $26K phone bill, especially if he actually had a comprehensive plan with "unlimited" texting. Talk about shock! I get particularly riled when people are stuck with huge, often erroneous cell bills; I hear about this all the time because I work for the consumer advocacy website http://www.fixmycellbill.com, powered by a company called Validas, where we slash the average cell bill by 22 percent (not trying to spam or blatantly plug, but it's true). Consumers like the guy in Pennsylvania may not have been actively misled by their wireless providers, but this example seems to illustrate that cell plans are clearly not impervious to problematic charging and subsequently many “unlimited” plans remain vulnerable to significant usage. I could go on and on about how shifty these cell companies can be in their attempts to make you overpay. I'll mention that at Validas, we stop them and have currently put over $5,000,000 back in the pockets of consumers. You can check out Validas’s fixmycellbill.com in the national news media, seen recently on Good Morning America at http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=6887412&page=1.

Good luck to everyone trying to cut your wireless expenses in this rough economy.

Dylan
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
sdfsdfsd, 11 Oct 2009 @ 9:09am

tmobile cap
Sounds alot like their Unlimited data with a 5 g cap.....
Wonder how thats going to play out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
chetan nagda, 24 Jun 2014 @ 12:26pm

chetan
can you give me T-mobile working sms plan and offer update.
my blog is free working android mobile gprs internet and tricks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
m3j, 19 Aug 2014 @ 9:30am

Find tips & tricks herecstweaks trick
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 29 Jan 2015 @ 4:14pm

Tmobile "Unlimited"
When I got with Tmobile.. I asked for Everything Unlimited, that's what they set me up with... (So I thought!) It wasn't until *2 1/2 years later* and adding 2 other lines.. I was told I do Not have unlimited everything! It was my first time signing up with a cell plan.. I had no clue what to expect. I did have unlimited talk and texts, but I was unaware that I didn't have unlimited data. What happens when you get up to the data you are limited to... your Internet slooooooows waaaaaay down From 4G to 2G! I was being lied to for 2 1/2 years. Every time I would call them asking why it's so slow.. I would start out telling them that I have unlimited everything. Boy did I feel stupid! Can't wait to change to another service! And my bull keeps getting higher and higher
[ link to this | view in chronology ]