Posted on 02/28/2019 3:42:02 PM PST by rickmichaels
After an Edmonton family received a surprise $1,800 Bell phone bill for texting charges, they didn't think the situation could get much worse.
But it did. Because the Zylstras couldn't afford to pay up on time, the family got hit with yet another shock: On Feb. 15, Bell temporarily cut off their only phone service.
"We just feel like they're bullying us," said Joy Zylstra. "I don't know how they're able to get away with this."
Joy and Dave Zylstra's saga began when their 14-year-old daughter — unbeknownst to them — racked up nearly $2,000 in charges by sending thousands of text messages to friends in the U.S. between Nov. 22 and Dec. 31.
At the time, the couple and their daughter shared a Bell small business wireless phone plan, each with their own line.
Dave and Joy Zylstra say their daughter didn't understand the costs involved in sending texts to the U.S. and that they had no inkling of the charges — until they showed up over the course of two bills in late December and late January.
"That was a punch to the gut," said Joy.
Bell spokesperson Nathan Gibson said that Bell knocked $200 off the bill "as a goodwill gesture," dropping the charge to $1,800.
He also said that "as a courtesy," Bell had sent warning messages two separate times when the texting charges climbed to $15 and then $45.
However, the notices only appeared on the daughter's phone and she ignored them, thinking a text from Bell didn't concern her.
"I should have received a notification," said Dave, the plan's account holder. "I could have immediately realized there was an issue and dealt with it."
After Dave received the bills, he cancelled his daughter's phone line.
Following complaints about teens running up data overage fees on shared phone plans, the CRTC, Canada's telecom regulator, added protections to the Wireless Code in 2017: it mandated that the account holder must approve all data charges beyond $50.
Unfortunately for the Zylstras, the same rule doesn't apply to texting charges.
Consumer advocate, John Lawford said texting costs are negligible for providers, and feels the Zylstras shouldn't be on the hook for such a big bill run up by a minor.
"Since it's not really costing [Bell] any money, it just looks like profiteering or being mean," said Lawford, executive director of the Ottawa-based Public Interest Advocacy Centre.
When Bell customers sign up in advance for unlimited Canada-U.S. texting, they pay only $12 a month.
Bell said Dave must pay up.
"As the account holder, Mr. Zylstra accepted responsibility for payment of [all] services," said Gibson, adding that Dave can track all activity on his account using online monitoring tools offered by Bell.
Because this is the slow season for Dave's work as an industrial brick layer, the Zylstras said they asked Bell for more time to pay the bill.
The company laid out a payment plan with the first $1,100 due by Feb. 8. Joy said she told Bell meeting that deadline would be a struggle, but that the family would try their best.
"We just simply wanted a reasonable payment plan to give us time to pay this off until my husband starts working again," said Joy. "But they flat-out refused to help us."
The Zylstras failed to meet the deadline. Instead, they said they paid down about $400 by Feb. 14.
On the morning of Feb. 15, Bell sent Dave a text stating that he must pay a "past due" total of $316.86 by March 1 to avoid a service suspension.
So the Zylstras say there were baffled when, later that same day, their phones lines were cut.
"It didn't make any sense because the text said March 1," said Joy.
Bell wanted a $1,000 payment toward the bill to restore service. In desperation, the Zylstras borrowed the money from a relative, who put the fee on his credit card so that service could resume that same day.
"I was crying on the phone with [Bell]," said Joy, who called to complain the following day.
On top of the texting bill, the family now also faces a $70 charge in phone reactivation fees.
According to the Wireless Code, telcos must give customers notice at least two weeks before and then a second notice at least 24 hours before suspending a customer's service.
Those notices must also include a scheduled disconnection date.
Bell never forewarned the Zystras their service would be suspended on Feb. 15.
Even so, the telco said it still complied with the Wireless Code.
Spokesperson, Gibson provided as proof two letters he said Bell emailed Dave, one on Jan. 26 and one on Feb. 6. They stated that if Dave didn't make his $1,100 payment by Feb. 8, Bell "may" suspend his services. The actual disconnection date of Feb. 15 isn't mentioned.
Dave said he never received the emails which could have wound up in his spam folder. He did, however, receive Bell's text on Feb. 15, informing him his service could be suspended on March 1.
Gibson said the text was automatically generated by Bell's system for past due accounts and unrelated to the payment plan.
The Zylstras said, at this point, they're fed up with Bell and plan to switch providers once they manage to pay off their bill.
"We feel very betrayed," said Dave.
This is exactly why I have used Tracfone for the past fifteen years.
Sucks for them.
This was a very common occurrence here in the US some 10 years ago before unlimited texting plans.
I can write down here exactly what I think of AT&T! Jim Rob’s servers would melt down!
thank goodness for pay as you go phones.
Free markets work. Regulated markets are almost always more expensive.
Me, too. I pay about $28.00, which includes tax, every other month. And I got a Smart phone for about $70.00.
This was me 10 years ago, with three different kids, each with their own episode. For one, it was downloading a ringtone and unknowingly subscribing to some service. For the other two, it was $1200 in data charges. Sad to think that this stuff is still going on. The phone companies advertise family plans, but then allow children who did not agree to the contract to run wild, to the detriment of the family and to the profit of the phone companies.
Wow. No about their bill but the fact they hadn’t bought unlimited texting Particularly when providing a phone to their daughter. You would think that everybody knows the extra $5 per month is more than worth it.
Shame on the provider for not flagging and notifying the family for excess data usage.
I have T-Mobile with 2 lines at $60 even. Unlimited talk, text, data. They even let you stream Netflix at 480 resolution all day if you want.
“”Since it’s not really costing [Bell] any money, it just looks like profiteering or being mean,” said Lawford”
The “it’s free” mentality on display. Blaming the carrier for $1,800 in texting charges?
This is how I refilled last time. 12-months of service for $10 a month.
Which is, of course, totally irrelevant to this story about a BCE subsidiary.
Canadian $?
Not that bad - pay up and quit whining about betrayed.
Thanks, I appreciate that. I use more than 1500 minutes but it would pay to get that plan and then add on as needed.
I have a problem with texting and must use the “speak” mode but speaking clearly solves that problem.
TracFone seems to have ironed out some bugs they had from early on.
Thanks again.
That’s a really good deal.
They did. By text. The notices only showed up on the daughters phone and she ignored them.
Seriously. These people aren't being "Bullied". They just don't want to pay the tariff on stupid.
+1 on Tracfone.
I didnt see ATT mentioned in this piece and I believe this is in Canada too.
Um, it was probaly in their contract.
It is not “bullying”.
You don’t pay for goods or services, you are not entitled to them.
Then the kids need to pay for what they did.
They can earn money and pay it back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.