1. Welcome to Verizon Forums - the unofficial Verizon community! Have a question about Verizon? Click HERE to get started.
  2. Expecting Cell Phone Forums? We recently moved Verizon specific content to VerizonForums.com. If you previously had an account on CPF, it has been transferred!

Verizon Wireless Fraud? BEWARE!!!

Discussion in 'alt.cellular.verizon' started by John, Jan 3, 2004.

  1. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:44:24 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >I've been on a first name basis with 15 to 20 Natural Science Nobel prize
    >winners over the past 30 years. I'm not ashamed to admit I don't know
    >something less than their work.


    <Hands John a cookie.>
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.



    › See More: Verizon Wireless Fraud? BEWARE!!!
  2. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:24:11 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >gad!!!!
    >
    >it is mathematically IMPOSSIBLE for ANY AVERAGE of 300 and 400 to be less
    >than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    >save me from the stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
    >
    >please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    >please invoke your BRAIN before posting!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    Oh lord. REP Syndrome. (Repetitive Exclamation Point). With a trailing
    '1' none the less!

    Must be a AOL graduate suffering withdrawls.
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.
  3. "Evan Platt" <evan@TheObvious.espphotography.com> wrote in message
    news:amqgvvcjjfv2ksg2qfru4auc339d6mcvih@4ax.com...
    > On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 03:44:24 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    > >I've been on a first name basis with 15 to 20 Natural Science Nobel prize
    > >winners over the past 30 years. I'm not ashamed to admit I don't know
    > >something less than their work.

    >
    > <Hands John a cookie.>


    Cookie or teething biscuit?
  4. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 05:26:13 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >ah, but this is just the groundwork for a class action suit!
    >
    >millions to be had!


    By the attorneys, yes.

    I'm currently 'in' one class action suit against Pac Bell / SBC DSL.
    I'll recieve one free month of service. WHOOPEE.

    Another one came in the mail for Microsoft. Upon seeing that it would
    result in a total of $10, I promptly filed it circular.

    Yes, there are millions to be had - by the lawyers. Not by the people
    effected.
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.
  5. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:30:28 GMT, "Dr. Know"
    <send_no_spam@earthlink.net> wrote:

    >John? John Heywang? Is that you???? Looks like it's time to regulate those meds
    >again, please make an appointment with my office, OK?


    Oh boy does he have a history.

    Complaints about the LA Weight Loss place,

    Oh... and how about THIS classic:

    From: John (jhy001@earthlink.net)
    Subject: TurboTax sucks don't use it on a bet!!!!!!!!!!!
    Newsgroups: misc.taxes
    Date: 2003-08-29 19:48:12 PST

    I had the misfourtune of having TurboTax install a spy program on my
    computer
    this year, without my consent or knowledge!!!!

    They also did not allow you a free download of the state version after
    paying
    for it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    they required payment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    now I find that they do not provide a customer service email address
    to
    complain about these things!!!!

    SO I MUST COMPLAIN HERE

    I will NOT ever use TurboTax again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I sugges the same from everyone in my circle of family and
    friends!!!!!!!!!!

    did you ever notice that the slimery an organization is... the harder
    it is to
    find an actual email address to complain to!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    pass it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

    John
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.
  6. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 05:29:55 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >I am not litigous! only when corporations are stupid! I gave them
    >a chance. they declined! now I prosper!


    You haven't 'prospered' until you win.

    And you won't win.
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.
  7. Evan Platt

    Evan Platt Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 04:19:28 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    wrote:

    >jeez... you are a stupid bunch aren't you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    >did you graduate special education!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    >
    >there are TWO plans. the old 300 plan. and the new 400 plan
    >
    >sigh........... you are stupid aren't you!!!!!!!!!!!!1


    We may be stupid, but we know a question ends with a question mark.
    To reply, remove TheObvious from my e-mail address.
  8. tech

    tech Guest

    "Bill Rubin" <billrubin@prodigy.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF7959F.720BA4C0@prodigy.net...
    > You know I was sort of agreeing with you, but not I think you're
    > totally off base. Are you saying that if I have a 300 minute
    > plan and switch halfway through the month to a 400 minute plan,
    > that all I should expect to be allowed on my full month bill is
    > 200 minutes, and that the number of minutes you had been allowed
    > on your old plan no longer apply? That makes absolutely no
    > sense. The best case you can make is that they split the bill by
    > plan, and they list all of the calls made before the switchover
    > with a prorated amount of minutes from the old plan, and the
    > same for the new plan.
    >
    > Bill


    When you change a plan in the middle of the billing cycle, Verizon closes
    that old plan out.
    If on the day they close it, the time thru the billing cycle is at 50% ,
    They allow you 50% of
    the minutes allowed for 100% of the billing cycle. A 300 minute plan would
    be allowed 150 minutes
    on the final billing cycle of that 15 days. If you used 200 minutes in that
    15 day cycle, yes, you will be charged for 50 minutes overage.
    The new plan you changed too would be PRORATED based on the new plan's 15
    days that it has left in the billing cycle.

    The old and the new plans stand on their own , One does not effect the
    other, period.

    I once, years ago changed plans with 2 days left on the cycle and found that
    my new 150 plan, only had 10 minutes to be used during the remainder of that
    cycle, 2 days divided by 30 days= 0.0666667 X 150 = 10 minutes. even thought
    I had 20 minutes left unused under the old plan.

    Its just like minutes left at at the end of any normal monthly billing
    cycle, THERE IS NO ROLLOVER OF MINUTES.
    Vic
  9. Evan Platt <evan@theobvious.espphotography.com> wrote:

    > People.
    >
    > Have you ever sued a multi BILLION dollar company?


    You *can* sue, and in some cases even win the suit.

    It helps if you actually have a case.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services
    22674 Motnocab Road * Apple Valley, CA 92307-1950
    Steve Sobol, Geek In Charge * 888.480.4NET (4638) * sjsobol@JustThe.net
  10. ileen

    ileen Guest

    John, I completely agree with your logic. I'm amazed at the respondents who
    claim it's somehow your fault for "misunderstanding" Verizon's definition of
    "pro-rating." There are different ways that a switch in plans mid-cycle
    might be pro-rated. For example, Verizon could decide to credit you for
    unused minutes on the old plan and then assign an amount of minutes
    proportional the number of days left in the billing cycle for the new plan.
    Do they do this? No, instead they have this ridiculous method of pro-rating
    that, as John found out, can result in less minutes for the billing cycle
    than even the OLD plan allotted! And customers are supposed to come out of
    hte womb understanding this? I don't think so. AND NEITHER DOES VERIZON.

    Verizon CS reps are supposed to CLEARLY spell out to customers EXACTLY what
    "pro-rate" means. They are supposed to give you a written print-out that
    tells you how many minutes you will have on your old plan and how many on
    your new plan when you switch mid-cycle. If they do not provide this
    information, they are at fault.

    Write to your state attorney general and good luck!

    Ileen
  11. On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 22:15:08 GMT, "ileen"
    <ileen@maine.abbreviationforroadrunner.com> wrote:

    >John, I completely agree with your logic. I'm amazed at the respondents who
    >claim it's somehow your fault for "misunderstanding" Verizon's definition of
    >"pro-rating."


    I don't think he drew the ire of the participants of this group until
    he started attacking anyone who tried to help. To date, I still have
    not seen John post *any* helpful details about his problem. If he
    would, it would certainly help us in helping him resolve his issue,
    although several people appear (rightfully so) to be past that point.
    IMO, I think John is just a lying troll.
  12. Arcy

    Arcy Guest

    "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities in the US):
    > Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank phone

    providers):
    > Dear FCC:
    > Dear Department of Commerce:
    > Dear FTC:
    > Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >
    > It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.


    I can't believe this. There have been 173 posts on this subject, and that
    includes the 58 posts by the OP John. Other posts are:

    36 by Scott Stevenson
    19 by Justin
    10 by Evan Platt
    7 by Ghost of General Lee
    6 by Richard Ness
    6 by Jeffrey Kaplan
    5 by Bob the Printer
    3 by Dr Know
    3 by Jack Jackson
    2 by Real Estate Agent
    2 by Jesse McGrew
    2 by Bill Rubin
    2 by Steven J Sobol
    2 by Andy S
    2 by Homie G
    and 1 each by ileen, Thomas Zelinski, tech, Jeff Phillips, JG, and Ben
    Skversky.

    If the OP is indeed a troll, he got what he wanted, didn't he? Plenty of
    attention?

    And even after all that, the OP is still screaming "sorry, there is no
    mathematical basis for any averaging between 300 and 400
    that is less than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

    I can visualize this scene in the courtroom

    John: sorry, Judge, there is no mathematical basis for any averaging between
    300 and 400
    that is less than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Judge: Bailiff! Get this man out of here!

    John: sorry, there is no mathematical basis for any averaging between 300
    and 400
    that is less than 300!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    [bailiff drags him out of the courtroom]
    John: "I'm going to be rich, I tell ya, I am going to have
    millions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

    <VBG>
    Arcy
  13. On Sun, 4 Jan 2004 15:52:52 -0800, "Arcy" <lovebasenjis@yahoo.com>
    wrote:

    >If the OP is indeed a troll, he got what he wanted, didn't he? Plenty of
    >attention?


    We all need a little troll bashing once in a while, if just for
    sport.:)
  14. "Arcy" <lovebasenjis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:iYadnYEkQstcO2WiRVn-sA@comcast.com...
    >
    > "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    > news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > > Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > > Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities in the

    US):
    > > Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank phone

    > providers):
    > > Dear FCC:
    > > Dear Department of Commerce:
    > > Dear FTC:
    > > Dear Online Newsgroups:
    > >
    > > It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.

    >
    > I can't believe this. There have been 173 posts on this subject, and that
    > includes the 58 posts by the OP John. Other posts are:
    >
    > 36 by Scott Stevenson
    > 19 by Justin
    > 10 by Evan Platt
    > 7 by Ghost of General Lee
    > 6 by Richard Ness
    > 6 by Jeffrey Kaplan
    > 5 by Bob the Printer
    > 3 by Dr Know
    > 3 by Jack Jackson
    > 2 by Real Estate Agent
    > 2 by Jesse McGrew
    > 2 by Bill Rubin
    > 2 by Steven J Sobol
    > 2 by Andy S
    > 2 by Homie G
    > and 1 each by ileen, Thomas Zelinski, tech, Jeff Phillips, JG, and Ben
    > Skversky.


    Hey- I won!

    I think you can chalk the whole thing up to bad TV and a little boredom.
  15. Al Klein

    Al Klein Guest

    On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 01:35:28 GMT, John <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net>
    posted to alt.cellular.verizon:

    >If they prorate the old and new plan which is the non-deceptive way, then
    >that CANNOT BE LESS than 300 minutes. If they do not do that... IT IS DECEPTIVE!!!


    Prorate does not mean average.

    For the period before you switched, you get (# of days in a billing
    cycle/# of days in the billing cycle till you switched) * number of
    minuts/billing cycle (300 in your case).

    For the period after you switched, you get (# of days in a billing
    cycle/# of days left in the billing cycle from the time you switched)
    * number of minuts/billing cycle (400 in your case).

    Any calls over the prorate for EACH period are billed at the per
    minute rate. There are 2 totally separate billing periods here.
    Therefore, if you switched on the 29th day of your 30 day cycle, you
    got a prorate of 13 minutes. If you used more than 13 minutes ON THE
    30th DAY, you were charged extra for them.

    Same thing if you changed early in the cycle and had made a lot of
    calls before you switched.
  16. Arcy

    Arcy Guest

    "Scott Stephenson" <scott.stephensonson@adelphia.net> wrote in message
    news:Uj2Kb.1530$yW1.1246090@news2.news.adelphia.net...
    >
    > "Arcy" <lovebasenjis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:iYadnYEkQstcO2WiRVn-sA@comcast.com...
    > >
    > > I can't believe this. There have been 173 posts on this subject, and

    that
    > > includes the 58 posts by the OP John. Other posts are:
    > >
    > > 36 by Scott Stevenson
    > > 19 by Justin
    > > 10 by Evan Platt
    > > 7 by Ghost of General Lee
    > > 6 by Richard Ness
    > > 6 by Jeffrey Kaplan
    > > 5 by Bob the Printer
    > > 3 by Dr Know
    > > 3 by Jack Jackson
    > > 2 by Real Estate Agent
    > > 2 by Jesse McGrew
    > > 2 by Bill Rubin
    > > 2 by Steven J Sobol
    > > 2 by Andy S
    > > 2 by Homie G
    > > and 1 each by ileen, Thomas Zelinski, tech, Jeff Phillips, JG, and Ben
    > > Skversky.

    >
    > Hey- I won!
    >
    > I think you can chalk the whole thing up to bad TV and a little boredom.


    I guess that's about as good an excuse as any. <GG> Sorry about misspelling
    your last name, Scott. Congrats on your win. <VEG>

    Arcy
  17. Bill Rubin

    Bill Rubin Guest

    Jeffrey Kaplan wrote:
    >
    > Previously on alt.cellular.verizon, Bill Rubin said:
    >
    > ; Unless his bill only covered 13 days, then I don't see how you
    > ; can be correct. Actually we don't really know that answer from
    > ; the OP. What was the billing period you are talking about here?
    >
    > Actually, we do. I did the math. From what the OP did say, he changed
    > his plan somewhere in the middle of his billing cycle. I've changed
    > plans a few times over the last two years, so I do know how it works.
    > From the airtime figures he provided, how much the new plan provides
    > per month and how much he was provided +this month+, simply do the
    > math.
    >
    > 400 minutes/month divided by a 30 day billing cycle is 13.3 minutes per
    > day. 178 prorated minutes for the remainder of the cycle divided by
    > 13.3 minutes is 13.35 days. Since they only deal in whole numbers,
    > round down to 13 days.
    >
    > ; Was it a full month or just a portion? And did you actually use
    >
    > Portion. Otherwise there wouldn't be any need to prorate the plan.


    But what about the portion of the month that he was still under
    the old plan? Does he get 2 bills, one for the time he was on
    300 and one for the time he was on 400? If so, are they sent
    separately or in the same envelope?

    As best I can tell (I do not have time to read all of the
    replies from today) it seems that the OP has not come back and
    told us the exact details of his bill, so I guess we'll never
    really know.

    Bill
  18. Rick Folkers

    Rick Folkers Guest

    John, I will type slowly so you will understand. Averageing is adding two
    things together and dividing by two which is what you are attempting to
    claim you are entitled to.

    To prorate means you take a proportion that matches. In this case they gave
    you 178 minutes out of 400 which would indicate you had 13-14 days of your
    billing cylce. If that is in fact the number of days from when you switched
    to the end of your cycle then you were not cheated and you are making an ass
    of yourself. Many people tried to explain this simple fact to you but you
    refuse to listen. Good luck.



    "John" <jhyNOSPAM001@earthlink.net> wrote in message
    news:3FF767BD.6030206@earthlink.net...
    > Dear State Attorney General (of all 50 States):
    > Dear Better Business Bureau (near the most populous 100 cities in the US):
    > Dear Consumer Reports: (a category for you to use to rank phone

    providers):
    > Dear FCC:
    > Dear Department of Commerce:
    > Dear FTC:
    > Dear Online Newsgroups:
    >
    > It is my opinion that Verizon Wireless is engaging in fraud.
    >
    > I recently received a US Mailing encouraging me to switch to a 400 peak
    > monthly minute plan with 1000 mobile to mobile minutes, and unlimited

    night
    > and weekend minutes (from a 300 peak monthly minute plan).
    >
    > They said they would prorate the phase in to the new plan.
    >
    > In the next monthly billing, I used 292 peak minutes. They somehow
    > prorated my monthly minutes at 178 (!!!) and billed me for 112 peak
    > time minutes for $ 50.40 !!!
    >
    > I don't care HOW YOU AVERAGE 300 and 400 minutes, you CANNOT get a number
    > less than 300 !!!! Unless you failed fifth grade mathematics! So this
    > is clearly a deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair
    > or unlawful gain. The definition of fraud I just looked up on google!
    >
    > I called and complained (someone named Cattrell). They refused to refund
    > my money and to even admit that it was fraud!
    >
    > I don't care much about the money. It is now the principle of it. And
    > the fact that they are ripping off people all across the nation with the
    > same deceptive practice, and I feel it must not only be stopped, they need
    > to be made accountable for every instance of it.
    >
    > I assume that a class action suit and investigation will ensue and return
    > the money to all those who have been ripped off in this manner, and with a
    > substantial multimillon dollar amount of punitive damages to discourage
    > such practices in the future.
    >
    > I look forward to hearing from you that action is being taken. Any lawyer
    > or agent of the law wishing to pursue this case may contact me for

    complete
    > details.
    >
    > Sincerely,
    >
    > John
    >
  19. ileen

    ileen Guest

    "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote

    > I don't think he drew the ire of the participants of this group until
    > he started attacking anyone who tried to help. To date, I still have
    > not seen John post *any* helpful details about his problem. If he
    > would, it would certainly help us in helping him resolve his issue,
    > although several people appear (rightfully so) to be past that point.
    > IMO, I think John is just a lying troll.



    I admit that I did not read most of the posts to this thread, so I have no
    idea if John attacked people or not. I do see that the very first response
    to his post took *him* to task for not understanding Verizon's ridiculous
    method of pro-ration. I have experienced this problem myself so I know
    exactly what John is talking about. This same issue was also discussed
    here:

    http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=235374

    So clearly this has happened to more customers than just the OP.

    Verizon's method of pro-rating can indeed cause the customer to end up with
    fewer minutes than either plan (the original or the one switched to) allows.
    When I switched from a 200 min plan to a 300 min plan I ended up with only
    173 allowable minutes in one month. Here's what happened: I switched
    mid-month after using only 23 minutes on my 200 min plan. Verizon of course
    offered no credit for the 77 mins (200*15/30 - 23) that I didn't use. Then
    I got 150 minutes for the new plan (300*15/30) for a sum total of 173
    minutes. As much as I love Verizon, I think this system is NOT customer
    friendly, to say the least. The only thing that made it acceptable for me
    is that the service rep explained what would happen to me in clear detail
    along with giving me the information in writing. This was in the form of a
    computer print-out coming from a program that Verizon uses *expressly for
    this purpose*. If they don't provide you with this information, they are AT
    FAULT.

    In my case, the CSR even advised me that it may make more sense for me to
    wait for the end of my billing cycle. I decided to go ahead with pro-ration
    because I was travelling and the new plan included the larger home area that
    I needed. The key is, I made an *informed* decision.

    Now, suppose the CSR said nothing to me except that my minutes would be
    "pro-rated." Why should I assume that I'd get charged extra for making more
    than 173 minutes worth of calls? 173 is less than 200 and it's less than
    300, so if someone tells me "your minutes will be pro-rated" of course I'm
    going to assume that using *less* than either allotment is OK!

    Like John, I too would have been extremely angry if pro-ration had not been
    explained to me and I ended up being charged for over-age when my total
    usage was less than what I signed for on either plan. Calling this fraud is
    only over-the-top if, when the customer complains, Verizon apologizes for
    not providing the proper information and rescinds the charges. Otherwise,
    IT IS FRAUD, plain and simple.

    Personally, I think John should try a little harder to get Verizon to make
    this right before calling up (and spending money on) any lawyers. Were I
    him, I'd go to my nearest local VZW store and ask to speak to whoever is
    highest in charge. I'd have a copy of my state's Attorney General complaint
    form in my back pocket in case I didn't get resolution!

    Ileen
  20. Bill Rubin

    Bill Rubin Guest

    ileen wrote:
    >
    > "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote
    >
    > > I don't think he drew the ire of the participants of this group until
    > > he started attacking anyone who tried to help. To date, I still have
    > > not seen John post *any* helpful details about his problem. If he
    > > would, it would certainly help us in helping him resolve his issue,
    > > although several people appear (rightfully so) to be past that point.
    > > IMO, I think John is just a lying troll.

    >
    > I admit that I did not read most of the posts to this thread, so I have no
    > idea if John attacked people or not. I do see that the very first response
    > to his post took *him* to task for not understanding Verizon's ridiculous
    > method of pro-ration. I have experienced this problem myself so I know
    > exactly what John is talking about. This same issue was also discussed
    > here:
    >
    > http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=235374
    >
    > So clearly this has happened to more customers than just the OP.
    >
    > Verizon's method of pro-rating can indeed cause the customer to end up with
    > fewer minutes than either plan (the original or the one switched to) allows.
    > When I switched from a 200 min plan to a 300 min plan I ended up with only
    > 173 allowable minutes in one month. Here's what happened: I switched
    > mid-month after using only 23 minutes on my 200 min plan. Verizon of course
    > offered no credit for the 77 mins (200*15/30 - 23) that I didn't use. Then
    > I got 150 minutes for the new plan (300*15/30) for a sum total of 173
    > minutes. As much as I love Verizon, I think this system is NOT customer
    > friendly, to say the least. The only thing that made it acceptable for me
    > is that the service rep explained what would happen to me in clear detail
    > along with giving me the information in writing. This was in the form of a
    > computer print-out coming from a program that Verizon uses *expressly for
    > this purpose*. If they don't provide you with this information, they are AT
    > FAULT.
    >
    > In my case, the CSR even advised me that it may make more sense for me to
    > wait for the end of my billing cycle. I decided to go ahead with pro-ration
    > because I was travelling and the new plan included the larger home area that
    > I needed. The key is, I made an *informed* decision.
    >
    > Now, suppose the CSR said nothing to me except that my minutes would be
    > "pro-rated." Why should I assume that I'd get charged extra for making more
    > than 173 minutes worth of calls? 173 is less than 200 and it's less than
    > 300, so if someone tells me "your minutes will be pro-rated" of course I'm
    > going to assume that using *less* than either allotment is OK!
    >
    > Like John, I too would have been extremely angry if pro-ration had not been
    > explained to me and I ended up being charged for over-age when my total
    > usage was less than what I signed for on either plan. Calling this fraud is
    > only over-the-top if, when the customer complains, Verizon apologizes for
    > not providing the proper information and rescinds the charges. Otherwise,
    > IT IS FRAUD, plain and simple.
    >
    > Personally, I think John should try a little harder to get Verizon to make
    > this right before calling up (and spending money on) any lawyers. Were I
    > him, I'd go to my nearest local VZW store and ask to speak to whoever is
    > highest in charge. I'd have a copy of my state's Attorney General complaint
    > form in my back pocket in case I didn't get resolution!
    >
    > Ileen


    It sounds like what happens is that they treat your account as
    if you had closed the account for the old plan and opened a new
    one for the new plan, and send separate bills for each. In your
    case, I'm sure that someone here will tell you that you did not
    only have 173 minutes available in the month you switched. You
    had 250 minutes. Sadly, you chose not to use your extra 77
    minutes you could have under the old plan before switching over
    to the new plan. However, once you switched, you did lose them.
    It certainly seems very strange the way they do this -- and I
    can see why they would want to strongly suggest to people that
    they only switch plans at the end of a billing period.

    Do other carriers do things this way?

    Bill

Welcome to VerizonForums!

Unfortunately you can't reply until you log in or sign up.


Forgot your password?