Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
FCC Demands AT&T Refund $7 Million in Unauthorized Charges by Scammers
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You know as well as I do that the fine payment will be recouped via other channels. But in the end, the customer will be the one footing the cost.
This years fine will be recouped indirectly via next years rate/service changes.
Perfectly legal as long as one isn't tied to the other in the accounting.
I personally would be okay of not getting money back....as long as the CEO is being Starship Trooper about it.
my comment does make sense, duh i know they get their money from customers or they wouldn't be in business. what I am saying that is NOT right is rate increases to offset the cost of what they did. The company shouldn't have to stick it to their customers the bad choices the company made.
Of course taxpayers pay for the infrastructure and staffing of government investigative and enforcement departments. And in many cases their is no way to recoup monies spent on said investigations.
But when a wrongdoer has the means to pay for the investigation into their own malfeasance they should underwrite it.
AT&T is probably relieved that the FCC hasn't uncovered any more of their scams... Bunch of greedy crooks.
Which will be passed on to us
And written off in their tax returns.
Double whammy.
Why did I not have the option to right-click and open this (or any other MacRumors article) in a new tab - as I could do yesterday?
Anyone? Anyone?
Anyone? Anyone?
These charges started around the time the first iPhones came out, so I dunno about that.
The executives at the top of the company are the ones that profit with their huge, year-end bonuses. The executives, as individuals set up a system that allows for these scams to occur.
They are the ones that personally profit and they should be the ones that are personally punished. Attach the fines directly to their salaries and year-end bonuses until its entirely paid back to the customers.
They are the ones that personally profit and they should be the ones that are personally punished. Attach the fines directly to their salaries and year-end bonuses until its entirely paid back to the customers.
Hey guys,
Can't FCC demand, or at least remind AT&T and Charter that this is 2016 and they probably have to consider providing a little more than their current fastest 24 and 60 Mbps internet service in the center of Los Angeles?
Yes, I am not exaggerating! There are two choices we have in Burbank / Glendale, CA:
1) AT&T U-verse 24 Mbps down and 5 up for $50 and that's for the first 12 months including the 600 GB data cap, etc. I think it's something close to $70 after 12 months.
2) Charter Spectrum 60 down 4 up at $60.
Can we all agree this is monopoly shared between two dinosaurs at its best? I'll gladly pay $150 for 300 Mbps.
Can't FCC demand, or at least remind AT&T and Charter that this is 2016 and they probably have to consider providing a little more than their current fastest 24 and 60 Mbps internet service in the center of Los Angeles?
Yes, I am not exaggerating! There are two choices we have in Burbank / Glendale, CA:
1) AT&T U-verse 24 Mbps down and 5 up for $50 and that's for the first 12 months including the 600 GB data cap, etc. I think it's something close to $70 after 12 months.
2) Charter Spectrum 60 down 4 up at $60.
Can we all agree this is monopoly shared between two dinosaurs at its best? I'll gladly pay $150 for 300 Mbps.
Burbank is not the center Los Angeles. Get out of the sticks (Valley) my friend.
Not the least surprised that AT&T allowed this to occur on their network, especially since they ignore the numerous scammers using their landline service. But T-mobile? That hurts.
Time to move to Nashville. Comcast is testing gigabit service there.
http://corporate.comcast.com/news-information/news-feed/gigabit-internet-nashville
I definitely encountered the scam they're referring to, though. I used to work for a small steel fabrication firm doing I.T. support and it got to the point where I had to review every month's AT&T phone bill for the land lines because almost without fail, there was at least one of these scam "services" tacking charges on.
Typically, they'd claim they were a directory service of some sort, or sometimes claim they provided some sort of generic "web service". AT&T was relatively useless in helping stop any of it, even though their customer service people were WELL aware it was a rampant fraud going on. They always hid behind the claim that it was out of their hands to stop it, since the FCC regulations required that they let 3rd. parties bill for services through the monthly phone bill. (My counter-argument is that while that was fine and good, that didn't imply customers shouldn't be able to "opt out" by requesting a block on all 3rd. party charges. But that fell on deaf ears.)
The only resolution I could ever get for the charges was calling the billing or contact number for each of the scam services, and asking for a refund. Believe it or not, they'd actually answer the phone, pretending to be legitimate, and really would credit your bill when asked. I think that was part of their strategy to keep the scam going as long as possible.... (They made the bulk of their profit on the people who didn't catch it on the bills. So those who actually bothered to call in and complain would get refunded, so as not to raise more suspicion.)
Typically, they'd claim they were a directory service of some sort, or sometimes claim they provided some sort of generic "web service". AT&T was relatively useless in helping stop any of it, even though their customer service people were WELL aware it was a rampant fraud going on. They always hid behind the claim that it was out of their hands to stop it, since the FCC regulations required that they let 3rd. parties bill for services through the monthly phone bill. (My counter-argument is that while that was fine and good, that didn't imply customers shouldn't be able to "opt out" by requesting a block on all 3rd. party charges. But that fell on deaf ears.)
The only resolution I could ever get for the charges was calling the billing or contact number for each of the scam services, and asking for a refund. Believe it or not, they'd actually answer the phone, pretending to be legitimate, and really would credit your bill when asked. I think that was part of their strategy to keep the scam going as long as possible.... (They made the bulk of their profit on the people who didn't catch it on the bills. So those who actually bothered to call in and complain would get refunded, so as not to raise more suspicion.)
You realize that if that happened Sprint would simply double, triple or even 10x their prices and there would be nothing you could do about it because you'd have no other option? Look up Ma Bell and have a read about what single phone providers have done to this country in the past.
Competition is good. Even if you don't use the other providers, they're helping keep prices low for you. If Android went away, Apple wouldn't have to bother putting any effort into building better products as you'd have no other options to buy.
Why are so many so clueless about the benefits of competition to the consumer? Consumers win the more competition there is. That's why we have laws to prevent monopolies.
This was a clear scam. I would like to see AT&T executives made to pay punitive fines and those customers who were cheated to be compensated. Why should shareholders pay the price of gross incompetency by the AT&T leadership. Even T-mobile indulged in this most shameful practice until it was punished by FCC. AT&T is one of the most corrupt companies. No wonder these crony capitalist companies can only conduct business in the US where lobbyist can be bought for a dime on the hill to feed the eager snouts in Congress.
[doublepost=1470714109][/doublepost]The only way to stop repeat occurrences by AT&T is to put the CEO in jail for a year ...I wonder how much my rate will go up to cover these costs
Although I am happy to hear that the Sham was discovered and stopped, the reality is that this penalty is so low that it become the cost of doing business. Does not really affect ATT as they simply will pass the cost on to the consumer. Same for T-Mobile.
What does this have to do with Tim Cook? Apple has no control over AT&T telephone billing. You are just trolling.
Well, on point 2... they have until the last day of 2019 to have *at least* 300 mbps service. Time Warner had already committed to this in NY and Cali by 2018. And put your wallet away, it's at the same price tiers they have today...