|
Blistex posted:Long story short, gently caress BELL. Bell makes money from "billing errors" all the time. (At least in Mobility where I worked.) They'd make "errors" and bill people for things, and refund the charges if/when clients noticed. Anything other than 100% of clients catching it is free, unwarranted money for them. Example Bell set up a new tower in Calgary, but coded it in their systems as Edmonton. What happened? Anybody in Calgary who placed/received a call while connected to that tower was billed long distance. quote:CTV's Lea Williams-Doherty contacted both the western regional customer service department and the technical solutions department but neither had heard of the problem in Calgary. Did Bell proactively adjust the billed charges? No. They'll only refund if the client catches it and calls in. They go as far as being up front about it in the CTV article. quote:Anyone who was closest to that tower when they were making, or taking, a call may have some of the incorrect charges on their bill ... We do encourage our customers to review their bills during that time period and contact us if they do see any incorrect charges," says Smithers. I have so much hate for telcos and all the borderline illegal poo poo they get away with. 
less than three fucked around with this message at 04:19 on Nov 2, 2010 |
#
¿
Nov 2, 2010 04:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:06 |
|
|
Lukano posted:Seriously, I think it's the only ISP left in the country that's completely 'do as you will, you pay for a line - we give you YOUR LINE' service. Shaw isn't dicking around with customers.* * anymore. They stopped tracking bandwidth usage a few years ago.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2010 02:44
|
|
|
I wouldn't call myself a "Power User" by any means, but I can easily use 175GB in a month. Sucks because my Shaw package includes 125GB. Also, oh snap! Shaw 1gbps service. Watch it have a bandwidth cap of like 300GB. less than three fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Nov 8, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2010 00:00
|
|
|
bob arctor posted:They disbanded the team that calls and e-mails when you go over. They are however working on a way to start charging for overages (no idea what those overages will be) Hmm, yeah. I just saw this.  Which would be silly if they wern't going to start tracking.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2010 00:25
|
|
|
Sprawl posted:Here in BC telus offers their Optik which is either 19/1 or 25/3 it isn't capped and doesn't have and bandwidth limits. Optik™ High Speed Download/Upload Usage: 100 GB/month Additional Download/Upload Usage: $2/additional GB used They're playing the same game as Shaw. Listed limits, but currently not enforced. (And less bandwidth and double the overage rate of Shaw, too.) Do you honestly think the moment Shaw turns on metering, Telus won't follow suit?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 01:20
|
|
|
frumpsnake posted:Yeah, and it's about the same price as Shaw's lovely 15/1 (125GB) plan that never gave me speeds over 7Mbps.  Not bad at all for 15/1 service at 4:30pm.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 01:28
|
|
|
Sprawl posted:Yes it says that but it doesn't track it at all on their web page. No traffic what so ever so it nothing is there you can't be billed for it. Anyways it might be because i have the tv stuff too that they aren't monitoring it. Shaw's not monitoring either, unless you're in Edmonton.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 05:10
|
|
|
bob arctor posted:Right now my pet peeve about Shaw, is that once a week like clockwork they mail me (physical mail) a letter saying since I have Internet and Phone I should get TV too. Yeah, I get the direct mailers too. Add a landline for only $10! Cable $10 for 6 months! Or something. I asked them to stop sending stuff, but they didn't. It did stop phone calls, so whatever I was happy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 08:45
|
|
|
Of course this is after they stopped bugging me with "Hey, we know you're not paying for cable, so start or we'll cut it off! wink wink." I moved into a place and Shaw never disconnected the cable service when the old people left. I don't own a TV, so I never noticed. Every month they'd phone/send a postcard and be like  Did you know you're getting cable service and not paying for it!? No, I don't have a TV But if you don't start paying for cable, we'll turn it off! I don't have a TV. I don't need the cable, go ahead. Seriously, you don't have a TV? We'll give you [discounted rate] No. I don't want it.They'd keep doing this once a month to me, where I'd get progressively angrier and explain to them that I still don't own a TV and how am I supposed to know I'm still getting free cable (and you still haven't turned it off) and I don't want it. They eventually stopped calling, but I'm pretty sure I still have cable, their attitude every time was all "  Well you'll buy a TV eventually"edit: Oh look I saved a photo of one of the "personalised" postcards they were sending me 
less than three fucked around with this message at 09:13 on Nov 9, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 08:56
|
|
|
8ender posted:People get really roped into those sort of deals too. I had a friend that was convinced they were paying next to nothing for internet because "Rogers bundles have big discounts". After a few weeks of terrible service they did the math and it turned out that, surprise!, they were paying close to $50 / month even after the bundle discounts for pretty bog standard broadband. Shaw's bundle pricing is really good actually for Internet and phone. (They don't give you a bundle discount for TV.) It actually is only $10 to add a residential line, forever. Not just a promotional price. High Speed Internet is $47. Residential phone line is $30.95. If you take both, you get $10 off both the Internet and the phone, making them $37 and $20.95 = $57.95, $10 more than Internet alone. I only use my cell phone though, and use next to no minutes on it so there's just no reason for me to get a landline, even if it's only $10. edit: Rogers' comparable Internet and phone services are $67 and $30, so it'd have to be pretty huge bundle discount to be priced anywhere near Shaw. less than three fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Nov 9, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2010 19:51
|
|
|
frumpsnake posted:But from what I can see, it's $47 for 15Mbps/125GB on Shaw, or $50 for 25Mbps/250GB on Telus. If you compare my quote with the page now, they've increased the bandwidth cap in the past few days in light of all this Shaw news.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2010 20:17
|
|
|
Got a Shaw direct mailer today, right on schedule. This month's deal? Home phone, promotional pricing: $19.95/mo for first six months! After that, regular rate of $20.95/mo applies. Whoo! I can get a landline and save six loving dollars over a 6 month period! Sign me up! 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 17, 2010 00:36
|
|
|
City of Vancouver voted today in favour of lobbying the CRTC to reverse their decision on usage based billing.  http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Vancouver+city+council+takes+stand+against+Internet+metering/3989389/story.html Of course I fully expect the CRTC to ignore it. Somebody needs to pull a Quebec Bill 60 and regulate it at the provincial level, because it's clear the CRTC isn't up for protecting consumers at the federal level.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2010 02:18
|
|
|
DropDeadRed posted:So are you saying that switching from Rogers cable over to Teksavvy cable will not get me around any P2P throttling that they do? (I know it gets past the monthly bandwidth cap.... at least until Rogers files that UBB) Exactly!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2010 05:25
|
|
|
Update on Shaw's movement into evil. Since beginning their roll out of usage based billing for Internet, they've quietly reduced everybody's bandwidth caps by 20%. Now their customers can hit their caps that much sooner. :iamafag:
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2010 03:56
|
|
|
Arsten posted:Are Canadian apartment buildings made out of cloth or something? How is an apartment not a permanent residence? Nah. It's more just one of the thousands of bullshit made up fees Bell uses against you. Such as $3/month on your landline for touch tone service. But hey, you're always welcome to use a rotary phone if you don't like it!  (Actually I don't think you're allowed to opt out of touch-tone service, even if you only had a rotary phone. It's just one of the many hidden fees that you have to deal with.) HAY GUYS. BELL INTERNET, ONLY $31.95 A MONTH! *plus $4 modem rental fee per month. No you can't buy the modem outright haha what are you stupid? Bell's "$31.95" internet is actually $45.90 once you wade through the pricing bullshit and mandatory fees. The "$14.95" landline is $30.93. This is Canadian Telecom. 
less than three fucked around with this message at 06:28 on Dec 24, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2010 06:21
|
|
|
When I worked for Bell Mobility, they forced us to push this poo poo on threat of dicipline/termination. Tell client "oh hey, we'll give you internet access on your laptop with our USB stick! Device is free and service is only $10 a month!" The fine print[unspoken] 2 year contract. Max $400 cancellation fee. You must have another Bell service and bundle it onto our lovely OneBill. Includes 50MB data. Use anything more and we'll rape you on a sliding scale. (500MB $25 extra, 1GB another $10, next GB another $15, etc.)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2010 10:24
|
|
|
Parachute Underwear posted:I don't know how we worked it out with them, but unless you mean with tax, ours is $40.90 for Fibe 7 with 60GB + the extra 40GB. $46.17 with tax. It's leagues better than what I used to get for almost $50 with Videotron (30GB). The straw that broke the camel's back for Videotron was buying The Force Unleashed on Steam and watching 5/6 of my bandwidth go down in one night. I was simply going by posted rates. Much like retention plans for Cellular, it's usually possible to get a better deal. It shouldn't have to be like that, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2010 06:04
|
|
|
drcru posted:I really wish they serviced the suburbs Heh, suburbs. They don't even serve outside the Downtown Core. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2010 13:00
|
|
|
Powershift posted:Great news, alberta! involuntary sex time! Yeah, mentioned it over a week ago on the previous page. Nice to see others are noticing now. Here's a giant thread where Shaw's official PR guy stops by to basically say "This is actually better for you, because now you have the choice between staying below your cap, or paying extra if you need more. See that's good because before you had only one option (using your internet without worry) and now you have two!  "ShawJames posted:I've seen some posts here suggesting that this new policy has been financially motivated to avoid upgrading our networks. That's actually not the case. In fact, just a few weeks ago we increased the included usage for all of our services by 25%, just in time for NetFlix. If you want to think about it in financial terms, just consider how much more bandwidth the network would need to allow a 25% increase for every customer, and how much that kind of network upgrade would cost. It's pretty clear that our motives are not financial. If they were, increasing the included usage would not be very sensible, would it? It would, after all, considerably reduce the number of customers exceeding their monthly traffic allowance, would it not? ShawJames posted:In the past, our direction was to identify customers who were exceeding the included traffic level, and after an initial warning, suspend their connections. Of course, having the Internet connection suspended is disastrous for many people, but unlimited bandwidth is not a possibility with today's technology. So how can we ensure that customers remain within their included usage without disabling their connections? By implementing a small charge, we give customers the option to either remain within their included usage or pay for the excess traffic that they are generating.  If he wasn't official, I'd write him up as being one of the best trolls ever. less than three fucked around with this message at 02:14 on Jan 4, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2011 02:06
|
|
|
Antioch posted:I don't even see anywhere on the Shaw site that lets me track this. I'm in Red Deer too, and man if I get a bill with an overage charge when they don't even let me track my usage on their site there will be hell to pay. According to ShawJames this is how it'll work: The first month you exceed your bandwidth allotment, you'll start seeing usage details/chart on your bill. The bandwidth counter will also then be available on shaw.ca (No charges though.) You get another free pass for your next monthly overages. (Plus a bill warning) Third month that you have overages, you'll start paying. So basically you can't even start to monitor your usage until you've gone over.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 22:17
|
|
|
So my outrage has been noticed and CBC Marketplace asked me to do a TV interview tomorrow. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2011 22:10
|
|
|
teethgrinder posted:Please talk about how the caps are insulting to legitimate traffic, like Netflix (maybe even mention that it seems awfully like anti-competitive behaviour), but also digital distribution like Steam and PSN. (I have no idea what downloads are like on XBLA.) Yeah, I was definitely going to mention Netflix/Steam and Shaw's own VOD offering. Also mention how it was tried (and failed) in the USA with 300gb caps, far more than what they're offering here. Going to counter the talking point that "Only 20% of customers go over their caps" by mentioning this fails to address the rest of the client base who's most likely hovering just below the cap, and with usage increasing at a steady rate it's only a matter of time before this 'timebomb' explodes and normal users start getting charged. vvvv yes was going to mention bandwidth costs and what Rogers/Shaw did with lowering caps. less than three fucked around with this message at 00:12 on Jan 7, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 00:08
|
|
|
Well that went allright. It'll be on CBC National tonight, not Marketplace, my bad.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 21:08
|
|
|
They spent a bunch of time filming filler shots, oh god I don't know what ones they'll use. I didn't really have much prepared for when they were like "type. now watch a video. now... etc"
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 23:07
|
|
|
Wafulz posted:Hahaha please tell me you had this thread open at the time I had a thread open in the background as I gave the interview. Can't remember if it's this one, it might have been. They had me clicking around a few tabs of threads to film me 'moving the mouse'
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 23:16
|
|
|
At the end of the interview they asked me to go further on how it made me feel emotionally, as expected. I think I did alright for not just spitting out "gently caress YOU ALLLLLL "
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2011 23:20
|
|
|
univbee posted:Yeah, I kind of wish they'd picked a better candidate (e.g. college roommates in an apartment who are in the 200+ gig range). Oh well. That's what I was though.  I was all like 'bwaah college student sharing, we each use like 150 gigs" but I'm not sure how much made it in there. Haven't seen it yet. edit: The segment was only 2 and a half minutes long? less than three fucked around with this message at 06:56 on Jan 8, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 06:43
|
|
|
Kreeblah posted:Yeah, it looks like they treated it more like an extended PSA than an actual story. I think you ended up getting about two or three lines. But hey, I got to mash keyboard while on YouTube.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 07:11
|
|
|
univbee posted:It's about 30 minutes from being done uploading, and yes, it's very short (things on The National are always very short). They've had it up for like 3 hours here: http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/TV%20Shows/The%20National/ID=1727320821
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 08:44
|
|
|
btw that's my modem and wireless router. 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2011 09:23
|
|
|
I just got a thought. Imagine what things would be like if Shaw and Rogers didn't do that territory swap like 10 years ago. The West Coast woulda been hosed a long time ago.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2011 04:49
|
|
|
I'm not sure how reliable this tip is, picked it up off DSLReports. Telus is trying to capitalise on this fiasco with Shaw and is offering Optik TV/Phone/Internet for $15 each for one year. (So $45 for the three.) DSLReports posted:Give Telus a call at 1-877-495-8508 and ask about the $15/$15/$15 promo, code LWB01. And enjoy phone, TV, and unmetered Internet for $45 for the next year. I'm going to give them a call tomorrow about it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2011 05:31
|
|
|
Videotron subscriber gets $1,800 bill for usage. Not that I'm surprised really. This is the future of Canadian Internet.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2011 20:56
|
|
|
priznat posted:Does the shaw internet usage button show up when you exceed your monthly quota automatically or does someone need to actually flag your account? I don't see one on my account despite using a lot of netflix and the occasional torrent. It'll show up once: a) The monitoring is enabled in your area, and b) You've exceeded your cap for the first time. (You aren't billed for your first month of overages.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2011 22:48
|
|
|
Novus owns their own lines, they're not a reseller.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2011 02:14
|
|
|
Shumagorath posted:Paying overage to Rogers or Bell would probably be a lot cheaper than downtown Vancouver. +1. But living in Vancouver is nicer.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
Vancouver Goons: TekSavvy now has Cable internet service available. http://new.teksavvy.com/en/res-internet.asp $39.95 and $54.95 for the two tiers of unlimited usage.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2011 20:26
|
|
|
univbee posted:Not sure if I'm reading this right, but I think it's saying that the big telecoms can't charge excessive per-GB amounts to resellers; they can charge by the gig, but can't charge way higher than cost price like they're doing now. I'm probably wrong about this, though So $1.70/gb into the pockets of Bell and Rogers. The ruling also notes that the UBB usage isn't an actual cost for the big telcos (and they can change/waive the UBB fees at their leisure) but would be a direct cost to resellers impacting their services and pricing. It doesn't change their position, but it's nice to see the CRTC actually understands how they're helping B/R/S gently caress over everyone. less than three fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Jan 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 19:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 19:06 |
|
|
priznat posted:So I heard that on the Telus Optik, while they do have the quotas they don't really enforce them because the TV stuff all comes across as data too. Do they not have the ability to determine what packets are data and what are for the tv? I would think that would be fairly trivial.. Yeah, they can tell the difference. I'd also take Telus' comments about not going to implement UBB charges with a grain of salt. You'll note they are fighting on the side of Bell in these CRTC decisions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2011 20:32
|
|