Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
General TopicsGSMBluetooth
Providers
AlltelATT WirelessCingularFidoNextelSprint PCST-MobileVerizon
Manufacturers
EricssonNokiaMotorola
Country Specific
Australian GroupUK Group
Related Topics
PocketPCPalmMore Topics ...

Cellular Phone Forum / Providers / Cingular / April 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Getting (or got) a new phone?  You MUST read this....

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Kevin Cook - 08 Apr 2005 01:36 GMT
I have been a Cingular customer for many years, and I got a new phone a few
months ago.  I've received two bills since the new phone, and just received
a third.  It was immediately obvious to me that the subtotal in the base
services section was much higher than the sum of the itemized fees - It just
didn't add up.  Additionally, there just happened to be a line item on my
bill that appeared "garbled" by the printer, and was unreadable, and I
suspected that this was the "missing link.".  There was no fee for it in the
right column, but the difference was $18.

So I called Cingular for assistance. The agent explained to me that this
was a promotional fee, added to my bill because I had recently bought a new
phone (from a Cingular store, mind you!).  PROMOTIONAL FEE????  I asked for
an explanation, and was told that this fee contributes to Cingular's costs
for promoting the phone - Advertising campaigns, signage, etc.

So apparently being a long-term, loyal customer wasn't enough.  And
apparently the TWO YEAR commitment that I had to make for something like a
$50 rebate also wasn't enough.  And increasing my calling plan wasn't
enough.  No.  Still, Cingular wants ME to chip in an extra $18 toward THEIR
costs of doing business....

Needless to say, I demanded a refund and got it with little argument.  You
see, even the customer support reps are embarrassed by this.  Was it a
coincidence that this just happened to be the one line on my bill that was
unreadable?

I still can't believe the audacity.

WATCH YOUR BILLS VERY CLOSELY!!!
Jack Zwick - 08 Apr 2005 03:59 GMT
> I have been a Cingular customer for many years, and I got a new phone a few
> months ago.  I've received two bills since the new phone, and just received
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
>
> WATCH YOUR BILLS VERY CLOSELY!!!

Another WHOOPs charge !
Scott Stephenson - 08 Apr 2005 04:08 GMT
> Another WHOOPs charge !

Better tell Mommy to change the Sesame Street  tape for you- you need to
learn a new word.
scott14661 - 08 Apr 2005 04:47 GMT
Kevin Cook Wrote:
> I have been a Cingular customer for many years, and I got a new phone
> few
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
>
> WATCH YOUR BILLS VERY CLOSELY!!!

Aside from the obvious mistake Cingular made on your bill, if
understand you, you are saying you should be exempt from the $18 fee?
Is this correct?

I guess you think that you should receive special treatment an
shouldn't have to pay the fee, despite the fact EVERY other Cingula
customer has to pay it.  But you're special and you should receiv
royal treatment.  How dare Cingular require you to pay a fee that ever
other customer pays?

Because obviously Cingular incurs no costs when processing you
upgrade.  Obviously the cell phone towers get put for free.  An
despite all that I'm sure no other cell phone company would charge yo
an activation fee.

Damn Cingular, they're so unreasonable
Jack Zwick - 08 Apr 2005 11:04 GMT
> Aside from the obvious mistake Cingular made on your bill, if I
> understand you, you are saying you should be exempt from the $18 fee?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> royal treatment.  How dare Cingular require you to pay a fee that every
> other customer pays?

Since this is a new, unannounced fee, anyone hit with it has FULL
grounds for voiding their contract. PERIOD.
scott14661 - 08 Apr 2005 19:54 GMT
Jack Zwick Wrote:

> > Aside from the obvious mistake Cingular made on your bill, if I
> > understand you, you are saying you should be exempt from the $1
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> Since this is a new, unannounced fee, anyone hit with it has FULL
> grounds for voiding their contract. PERIOD.

What do you mean unannounced fee?  When you renew your contract wit
Cingular it's states so on the contract.  In my particular market, an
I believe most if not all now have the customer accept the contrac
over the phone electronically.  It states "You agree to the servic
activation charge", and basically reads the customer the contract.
Then it clearly states at the end, "To accept these terms, press 1"

How much more announced can you get
Vidguy11 - 08 Apr 2005 20:49 GMT
scott14661 Wrote:
> What do you mean unannounced fee?  When you renew your contract wit
> Cingular it's states so on the contract.  In my particular market, an
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> How much more announced can you get?

and he said he renewed his contract in a store so obviously it wasn
over the phone so he couldnt "press 1 to accept"  :nono
scott14661 - 09 Apr 2005 00:47 GMT
Vidguy11 Wrote:
> and he said he renewed his contract in a store so obviously it wasn
> over the phone so he couldnt "press 1 to accept"  :nono:

It doesn't matter.  Late last year Cingular rolled out a new way o
accepting contracts in stores.  After we have reviewed the contrac
with the customer the customer must use *862 to activate the phone an
accept service terms.  

Even if the rep failed to inform the customer of the $18 fee, It wa
printed on the contract, and mentioned when accepting the terms throug
*862.  My point is the customer was aware of the fee, but felt that h
should be exempt
Kevin Cook - 09 Apr 2005 19:44 GMT
I don't recall a new contract being given to me.  I don't recall signing
anything.  I just checked my files - and I keep everything - No contract.

Don't know about the *862 thing - I did not have to do that.

Again - You're assuming this is an activation fee, but it was called a
promotional fee.  Why are we assuming them to be the same?

You seem to think that it's OK for the rep not to have advised me of this
(and he didn't).  Anything less that full verbal disclosure is shady in my
book.  If that's permissible to your sense of good or acceptable business
practice, I'm sorry to say that I would not want to do business with you.

> Vidguy11 Wrote:
>> and he said he renewed his contract in a store so obviously it wasnt
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> *862.  My point is the customer was aware of the fee, but felt that he
> should be exempt.
Steve B - 10 Apr 2005 08:32 GMT
I just recently signed up with new service with Cingular.  I was told of an
Activation Fee, but never a Promotional Fee.  I did not have to do any *862
thing or anything like that.  I never signed any paper mentioning a
Promotional Fee.

I have not yet received my first bill yet.  But, rest assured, if there is a
$18 "promotional fee" then I will, as Kevin did, dispute it.  Just becuase
every other Cingular customer may pay such a fee doesn't mean it is right.
If I didn't agree to it, then I am under no obligation to pay for it.

>I don't recall a new contract being given to me.  I don't recall signing
>anything.  I just checked my files - and I keep everything - No contract.
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>> *862.  My point is the customer was aware of the fee, but felt that he
>> should be exempt.
scott14661 - 10 Apr 2005 19:08 GMT
Kevin Cook Wrote:
> I don't recall a new contract being given to me.  I don't recal
> signing
[quoted text clipped - 39 lines]
> > Cell Phone Forums: http://cellphoneforums.net
> > View this thread: http://tinyurl.com/4ll89

If what you're saying is correct about not receiving a contract, o
having to do *862, then I would agree you have every right to disput
the charge.  I can assure you however the $18 fee on your bill was a
activation fee, not a promotional fee.  It sounds as though the Rep yo
spoke with on the phone was not very informed or knowledgeable.  

The part that troubles me is the fact you never received any paperwor
or signed anything.  In that case, Cingular can't hold you to th
contract or any fees whatsoever.

For the record, I inform everyone of my customers of activation fees
and any other fees that might be associated with their service.  No
only do they verbally hear it from me, they see it on their printe
contract, and hear it when they accept their service terms on *862.
Three times they either see or hear it before leaving my store.  
don't sit there and read the entire contract to them, as they have th
opportunity to.  I summarize all the important things, and answer an
questions they may have.  So I don't believe I do "Shady" dealings
michael e dziatkowicz - 10 Apr 2005 22:00 GMT
I never get a contract either. I haven't signed any papers for any of the
phones i bought from cingular.

> Kevin Cook Wrote:
>> I don't recall a new contract being given to me.  I don't recall
[quoted text clipped - 59 lines]
> opportunity to.  I summarize all the important things, and answer any
> questions they may have.  So I don't believe I do "Shady" dealings.
subdude - 08 Apr 2005 14:20 GMT
>> Needless to say, I demanded a refund and got it with little argument.
>> You
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
>Damn Cingular, they're so unreasonable.

Yes, they are.  Advertising is a direct cost of doing business and
gets credited to a corporate entity as operating expenses - which gets
deducted from their sales to result in the profit that is taxed.  This
is supposed to be factored into their rates, but Cingular is 'double
dipping' - factoring it as part of their rate (COGS - Cost of Goods
Sold) and then charging for it again as a "Promotional Fee" - thereby
getting it as both a revenue stream and a deduction on their corporate
taxes.

Imagine if your local hospital added their advertising fees onto your
bill. or if the gas station added an advertising surcharge every time
you filled up your tank.  Just because you're to stupid to realize
you're being taken doesn't mean the rest of us are - I too argued this
and received a rebate from Cingular, basically because they don't have
a leg to stand on.

BTW, this reply cost me .43 in bandwidth and time to educate you, so
I'll be sending a bill for Knowledge Transfer to you.  

That's fair, isn't it?

subdude  
Tropical Haven - 09 Apr 2005 00:23 GMT
> Yes, they are.  Advertising is a direct cost of doing business and
> gets credited to a corporate entity as operating expenses - which gets
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> getting it as both a revenue stream and a deduction on their corporate
> taxes.

Actually, any reputable company will keep expenses, such as advertising,
separate from cost of goods sold.  Also, in the double entry accounting
system, in which cost of goods sold is normally a part of, expenses
(which include accounts like 'advertising expense' and 'cost of goods
sold') do not increase the total profit when one item is debited to one
expense account instead of another expense account.  Is the SEC aware
that you're doing Cingular's books like that?

> Imagine if your local hospital added their advertising fees onto your
> bill. or if the gas station added an advertising surcharge every time
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> BTW, this reply cost me .43 in bandwidth and time to educate you, so
> I'll be sending a bill for Knowledge Transfer to you.  

Unsolicited goods are services are legally considered gifts.  Notice it
says UNsoliticed.

> That's fair, isn't it?

If you don't like the charge, don't take the new phone.  It's that simple.

> subdude  
Kevin Cook - 09 Apr 2005 19:11 GMT
Although I've apparently been convicted and sentenced to a public flogging
in your courtroom, I do believe I have a right to final words:

Let me clarify that the fee was not described as an activation fee, and it's
purpose was not described by the Cingular rep as a means by which to cover
the overhead of transition from old phone to new, or for the cost of cell
towers....These are assumptions that you've made, with no evidence to
support it.

The fee was identified as a "promotional fee", and was described as a
contribution to their promotional costs in marketing the phone.  Had it been
identified as an activation fee, I would not have argued.  I was not advised
that any such fee would be applied.  I still stand by my position that the
fee, as described to me, was unjustified.  To me, it's like saying "We'll
give you a discount on the phone, but you must pay some of that discount
back to us for letting you know that the discount was available."

Now, you may be absolutely correct that everyone else is paying this, and
that this is what would be characteristic of an activation fee.   If that is
the case, I can't imagine why Cingular wouldn't simply call it that.
Nevertheless, you must realize that not everyone has the experience and
expertise in how these matters are typically handled, as it seems that you
do.  I honestly do not know whether I paid for an activation fee separately
or not without digging through bills and records.  I was not advised of
one....  Since they are not calling it an activation fee, I didn't make the
assumption as you did that this is what the fee represented.  And if the
Cingular rep thought it was a justifiable activation fee, why was he
admittedly embarrassed by it, and willing to remove it with no argument?

If it's justifiable to you, then pay it.  It's your money.  I just think
that people should be made aware of things that seem questionable,  so that
they can make informed decisions about how they spend their money.

All I know is that Cingular could not justify this fee to me, so I conclude
that I should not pay it.  Nor has you condescending argument convinced me
otherwise...  In my courtroom, your case is dismissed.

> Kevin Cook Wrote:
>> I have been a Cingular customer for many years, and I got a new phone a
[quoted text clipped - 57 lines]
>
> Damn Cingular, they're so unreasonable.
Jer - 09 Apr 2005 20:43 GMT
> Although I've apparently been convicted and sentenced to a public flogging
> in your courtroom, I do believe I have a right to final words:
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> that I should not pay it.  Nor has you condescending argument convinced me
> otherwise...  In my courtroom, your case is dismissed.

Well said, Kevin.

Signature

jer
email reply - I am not a 'ten'

john - 09 Apr 2005 22:04 GMT
> The fee was identified as a "promotional fee", and was described as a
> contribution to their promotional costs in marketing the phone.  Had it been
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> give you a discount on the phone, but you must pay some of that discount
> back to us for letting you know that the discount was available."

do you have anything on paper that shows a charge of $18 for a "promotional
fee"? I'm sorry, I come into this thread late, so if you have said before
you do, I did not realize it. Anyway, the thing I would do i'd contact the
FCC, I think they handle cellular disputes (along with the FDA, for some
unknown reason..might be health issues with the radiation from the
handsets). Ask them if such a charge is legal, they have online dispute
forms.
S John M-M - 12 Apr 2005 13:07 GMT
>Because obviously Cingular incurs no costs when processing your
>upgrade.  Obviously the cell phone towers get put for free.  And
>despite all that I'm sure no other cell phone company would charge you
>an activation fee.
>
>Damn Cingular, they're so unreasonable.

I'm missing Sprint PCS.
--John.
Vidguy11 - 08 Apr 2005 20:47 GMT
whoa take it easy!!! just cuz he called to get the refund doesnt mea
he's better than the rest of the cingular customers or that he shoul
be exempt, you do realize that some reps do not tell you EVERYTHIN
when doing a change in your contract, and that messes people up all th
time, i think he was all good in demanding his money back. and thi
wouldnt void your contract, thats ridiculous, but anytime there is
change on your contract you have a buyers remorse perios to revert bac
to the original status of your contract, which in most markets is 3
days
Vidguy11 - 08 Apr 2005 20:50 GMT
also, i never heard of this promotional payment and i sell cingula
phones, the only 18 dollar fee i can think of is the migration fee fo
ATT customers getting new phones and a new rate plan under cingular
terms and conditions, so maybe something just went nuts your bil
Tropical Haven - 09 Apr 2005 00:29 GMT
> also, i never heard of this promotional payment and i sell cingular
> phones, the only 18 dollar fee i can think of is the migration fee for
> ATT customers getting new phones and a new rate plan under cingulars
> terms and conditions, so maybe something just went nuts your bill

Do you sell Cingular phones as a corporate employee or authorized dealer?

I tried to get a new Cingular phone through an authorized dealer, but
was turned away because he said I have to go directly through Cingular.

TH
scott14661 - 09 Apr 2005 00:53 GMT
Vidguy11 Wrote:
> also, i never heard of this promotional payment and i sell cingula
> phones, the only 18 dollar fee i can think of is the migration fee fo
> ATT customers getting new phones and a new rate plan under cingular
> terms and conditions, so maybe something just went nuts your bill

Let me get this straight, you work for Cingular and have never heard o
an $18 Upgrade Charge.  There is no such thing as a migration fee.  Th
fee that is charged to AT&T customers is an upgrade fee, because the
are upgrading their AT&T phone to a Cingular phone.

It's not a promotional fee, it's an upgrade fee.  Maybe your marke
doesn't charge upgrade fees, though I find that hard to believe, o
you're not very educated
Tropical Haven - 09 Apr 2005 01:29 GMT
> Vidguy11 Wrote:
>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> doesn't charge upgrade fees, though I find that hard to believe, or
> you're not very educated.

He's probably part of an "authorized dealer" which doesn't do upgrades
for existing Cingular customers.  They probably just call it a migration
fee because they don't know it's also charged to existing customers,
which AT&T Wireless are now existing customers of Cingular.

TH
scott14661 - 09 Apr 2005 04:00 GMT
Tropical Haven Wrote:
> > Vidguy11 Wrote:
> >
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
>
> TH

Very good point, I had never thought of that.  I work for an authorize
dealer and we proess upgrades.  I guess I thought all stores di
upgrades
Phillip K Dick - 11 Apr 2005 03:42 GMT
scott14661 babbled...
> Very good point, I had never thought of that.  I work for an authorized
> dealer and we proess upgrades.  I guess I thought all stores did
> upgrades.

a.shole
Vidguy11 - 09 Apr 2005 11:02 GMT
i'm an authorized dealer that does cingular upgrades and never once ha
it posted on a contract or bill that there was an $18 fee. The $18 fe
im talking about is the migration fee (the term that cingular directl
uses for att customers goin over to cingular). also the *862 was jus
stupid, but the reps have the option of just bypassing that whole *86
thing. and tropicalhaven, some authorized dealers dont do upgrades, an
some do, but they may have told you otherwise because of othe
restrictions, i.e. outside of their own sales market, and also tha
whole business degree post may be true to many things, but as far a
the cingular issue goes, it may not, since the customer does sign of
on the terms and conditions of cingular's contracts
scott14661 - 09 Apr 2005 18:07 GMT
Vidguy11 Wrote:
> i'm an authorized dealer that does cingular upgrades and never once ha
> it posted on a contract or bill that there was an $18 fee. The $18 fe
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> the cingular issue goes, it may not, since the customer does sign of
> on the terms and conditions of cingular's contracts.

Then it would go back to the fact that your market maybe doesn't charg
upgrade fees.  Only you would know that, but I know my particular marke
and many others charge an $18 fee for upgrading.

The whole *862  again goes down to different markets, different rules.
In my market we don't bypass it.  There would be no reason to.  The onl
way for someone in my market to bypass it is to either call CS, or C&A.
I'm not sure why someone would bypass it unless the *862 isn't workin
which it rarely doesn't work
Kevin Cook - 09 Apr 2005 19:44 GMT
I did the phone upgrade in a Cingular store in the LA area.  I couldn't
tell you whether this market bears the activation fee or not, because no one
told me whether there would be one.  There was no effort on my part, such as
this *862 procedure.  The guy in the store inserted my SIM card from the old
phone, pushed some keys that I couldn't see, and  gave me a working phone.
That's all I know.

Please see my reply post above - All of this is based on assumption that the
fee was an activation fee....I don't know that this was the case!

> Vidguy11 Wrote:
>> i'm an authorized dealer that does cingular upgrades and never once has
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> I'm not sure why someone would bypass it unless the *862 isn't working
> which it rarely doesn't work.
Vidguy11 - 10 Apr 2005 01:33 GMT
well, the fcc does regulate somewhat, but they dont really do that muc
at all, i remember a friend of mine that called the fcc to complai
about att overcharging them and it took like 4 months to fix, since al
the fcc told them was call the carrier, i dont know if things hav
changed as far as the fcc goes since they got a new guy in charge, bu
its always a possibilit
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.