Call for Bell / BCE petition
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- Plans for the $52-billion take-over of Bell Canada, “the country’s largest and most hated provider, are about to come crashing down, it seems,” p2pnet posted late last month.
“Nor is the looming recession responsible,” we went on. ” ‘Bell parent BCE Inc. said yesterday a KPMG analysis indicates the telecom giant cannot meet solvency tests defined in the agreement under which the company will be acquired by an investor group led by the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan,’ says the Canadian Press.”
Now, “BCE is insolvent that’s why the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Fund (OTPF) backed out!” – says p2pnet reader Donald P.B.A. continuing »»»
If the OTPF bought controlling shares of BCE, their debt load would be larger than the total worth of BCE’s assets! That’s also the real reason behind Bell’s throttling; they’re close to bankruptcy! Bell is cash poor and debt laden, therefore the only true course for Canadians is to force the courts to break up Bell’s monopoly! BCE’s place in the 21st century is equivalent to the Standard Oil Company in the late 19th Century who owned everything related to oil: oil wells, transportation, distributing to smaller markets, setting the price of oil, etc. In 1909 the U.S. Dept. of Justice sued Standard oil under the federal anti-trust law of 1890. The charges were, “”Rebates, preferences, and other discriminatory practices in favor of the combination by railroad companies; restraint and monopolization by control of pipe lines, and unfair practices against competing pipe lines; contracts with competitors in restraint of trade; unfair methods of competition, such as local price cutting at the points where necessary to suppress competition; [and] espionage of the business of competitors, the operation of bogus independent companies, and payment of rebates on oil, with the like intent.”
Now let’s look at BCE’s holdings: Bell Canada, CTVglobemedia (formerly Bell Globemedia), VSNL International Canada (formerly called Teleglobe), Emergis (formerly BCE Emergis) and BCE Ventures. Now the only legal remedy for Canadians is to force a court order forensic audit on BCE! Because just like Standard Oil, BCE is using all it’s companies to stifle the smaller companies from succeeding in the market. Bell Canada has a monopoly on the stringing and laying of telephone wires, for awhile they kept up with the growing demand of Canadians. Bell actually invested in new technology, slowly replacing copper wiring with fiber optic wires. However all this was before the advent of the Internet, once the Internet started, Bell just initially piggybacked Internet signals along with its telephone fiber optic wires. But soon the Internet information was outstripping Bell’s ability to constantly transmit all this continuous data traffic, especially as modem speeds keep doubling and the volume of information being transmitted tripled! See, all that Bell is guilty of is greed but that can be expected from a lazy monopoly, especially one that is now owned by BCE and has too much debt. So rather than layout more expenditure to expand its fiber optic network, Bell just begins to ration Canadians Internet speeds through the brilliant marketing scheme of throttling! But does Bell just throttle its own Sympatico customers? No-it throttles all Canadians who have their home phone lines connected to Bell’s fiber optic network even though these individuals are paying a third party to be connected to the Internet!
This kind of tactic is the 21st century equivalent of Standard Oil cutting the flow of oil via rail and trucking to not only to its direct customers but even to customers who are buying oil through a third party! Standard Oil in this case is just as guilty of greed; if you allow a monopoly to exist it can bully all final customers that buy oil, whether they’re Standard Oil’s customers or Corner Joe’s customers! If Standard Oil doesn’t increase it’s rolling stock of trains, build more railways and buy more trucks to distribute the oil; when demand for oil rises due to increased oil demand based on new technology (example: the car), then guess what happens? Standard Oil gets creative and blames the customers, saying that a handful of automobile enthusiasts are using too much gas so we are going to reduce the distribution of oil only for car owners! See that’s what a 19th century dinosaur would do in response to keeping up with the increasing demands of Americans at the turn of the 20th century. Standard Oil in this case is used to doing business as usual, it has too many businesses on its plate, it’s a monopoly and it doesn’t want to put out more money into building more trains, more railways and more trucks because that means there’s less of a profit for them. And BCE is the Standard Oil of the 21st century; it too is a dinosaur of another age—the 20th century!
And like Standard Oil, BCE needs to be broken up because it has a monopoly of fiber optics in telecommunications throughout Canada with its holding in Bell Canada and BCE is a vicious oligopoly within the media business (newspapers, TV and radio) with its holding in the CTVglobemedia empire and as well with its other oligopoly holding of VSNL International Canada that owns a transatlantic cable system! BCE Ventures acted like Bill Gates, gobbling up its competition by buying up all the smaller guys, including the odd start-up company that had superior technology. BCE Ventures didn’t purchase companies to be more competitive; it bought them out in order to stifle rival and possible future threats! So now BCE has become so large and so cumbersome that in order for any company or private group such as the OTPF to buy controlling shares of BCE, they’ll go bankrupt in the process!
At this point, BCE has swallowed too many businesses and is so debt laden that it has no money to invest to improve, update and upgrade any of its numerous holdings. This is now a recipe for disaster and the Internet is the canary in the coalmine here, BCE doesn’t have the financial ability to meet the growing demands (and normal exponential growth of Internet users) of Canadians using the Internet. So rather than naturally invest in expanding it fiber optic network, it blames Canadians for using the Internet the way it was meant, exchanging of information faster as technology improves and as a result, the volume of information rises as well. But BCE has become a behemoth, which has now resulted in gluttony to such excess that it can’t invest in any of its businesses that it holds, all it can do is collect money and if any of its business holdings can’t meet the growing demands of Canadians, it rations service and access rather than invests to expand its capacity!
Therefore, I purpose all Canadians who are adversely affected by BCE’s lousy service sign a petition first, have millions of signatures along with the service(s) they pay for that are substandard or worse due to BCE’s intentional neglect. Then the next step is to take this to court as a basis to force a forensic audit on BCE’s books in order to see why they are charging Canadians high prices for substandard services that are never updated or expanded to meet the needs of Canadians. As a result of this forensic audit, the petitioners (that’s all of us who have signed the petition) ask for the forced break-up of BCE because as one unit, it is financially insolvent! Meaning that BCE has become too large for its own good, in that it has become so enormous that as a whole it can’t invest in any of its parts anymore, thus one by one each part is going to rot and it’s the average Canadian that’s going to get the short end of the stick! BCE’s holdings have become so interwoven into the Canadian economy that unless BCE is broken up and each company functions as a separate entity, the competitiveness of Canada’s economy will be at risk in not being able to compete in the 21st century marketplace! This has already happened with the Internet! How many more services and industries can we afford to be adversely affected by BCE’s inability to update and upgrade its technology and how many more years can we afford to stand idly by and do nothing?
The Internet is the canary in the coalmine right now, it is not unreasonable to expand fiber optic networks so as to go more than 5 times faster than Canada’s average 5 Mega bits per second high speed connection. If Bell Canada is unable to even maintain this speed 24/7 and in doing so must “throttle” users down to the equivalent of a dial-up speed than in 5 years from now, the Canadian economy will be the laughing stock of the industrial world! If BCE is so handicapped that it can’t even afford to have Bell Canada string more fiber optic cable then it’s just a matter of time before all of its business holdings will collapse! And then all fingers will be pointing at the politicians, saying why didn’t you see this coming? If this was going to happen, why didn’t you something years ago? Why didn’t you force a royal commission into BCE’s financial activities? Why didn’t you force the break-up of BCE? Why—why—why—why and yet when everyone will be crying why, it will be too little to late!
And that’s why I want to begin with a petition from all Canadians, with their names and their Bell related services (including third party ISP customers being throttled by Bell) that are lousy due to numerous complaints but mainly for relatively high cost for substandard service! Also attached to these petition pages we’ll need a basic survey of only a few questions where the data can speak volumes to the court. Such as how many technical problems have you had? How satisfied are you with your Bell service(s) [ranging from completely satisfied to completely unsatisfied]? How satisfied are you with customer help from Bell? The price you’re paying for your service(s) do you think you are paying [ranging from extremely too much to extremely too low]? So you get the picture, so the when the petition signing dates have been closed, we’ll also have hard data on how Canadians view their Bell related services. And if let’s say 80% or more of all the petitioners have negative views of their Bell related services than this will be further cause to have the court appoint a forensic auditor into BCE’s books. That’s phase one and phase two is the break-up of BCE!
“So,” adds Donald P.B.A., “do I have any takers who have knowledge in the field of surveys and on the compilation of data to make this happen? Because we need immediately action and we need to have as many Canadians signed up on this petition as soon as possible, so I suggested the game plan — do I hear anyone out there willing to get these forms started?”
Did you enjoy this story, or find it interesting/useful? Help keep the posts coming by donating. No amount is too small. Cheers! And thanks.
p2pnet – BCE, Teachers Union deal: on the rocks?, November 27, 2008
Canadian Press - Bell takeover in doubt, November 27, 2008
Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php
Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:23 pm
Hey Donald P.B.A., your rambling non-sense is difficult to swallow past the first paragraph. Have you ever taken an economics class or read a financial report of a publicly traded company, like BCE? And have you even been paying attention the last 12 months to the world market conditions?
If you did, you’d realize that for one, the market isn’t worth what it was a year ago. It’s lost probably about 30% of it’s overall value in the last 12 months. This means that most companies publicly traded, as well the economies around the world, are worth that much less as well.
Second, BCE isn’t strapped for cash or loaded with debt. Read the financial reports and you’ll see that they have a healthy cash flow. But like every other company around the world right now, they can’t afford to spend spend spend without some sort of short term gain. BCE is probably one of the few Canada wide companies that won’t require any form of stimulus or “bailout” from the Government and taxpayers.
Third, shame on p2pnet for publishing this crap in the first place without taking the time to investigate whether what is being posted makes factual sense.
December 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
funny above guy is cause i saw them have 300+ mill profit two years ago and its down to 150$ mill and didnt they take after that a writeoff of 300million thus putting htem 150$ mill into debt?
The second thing is that BCE deal is largely DEAD, if gone thorugh would have added to BCE’s current debt YES debt to the tune of about 30 billion.
YEA we need the liberal/ndp coaltion to straighten them out.
They should be told:
A) make amends to the people whom you breached contracts with and settle all class action lawsuits.
B) if you survive that upgrade upgrade capacity then when you can give them all 5 megabit unlimited come back we’ll see what you need.
C) other wise die off and go away. No to helping BELL with any money, THEY STILL OWE MY DAD 209$ they ripped off.
December 1st, 2008 at 1:16 pm
either or, concerning the reader’s comments to this post.
gist is, if you hate Bell Canada, sign the petition, period.
this isn’t Reuters, /rolls eyes.
December 1st, 2008 at 1:24 pm
Petition’s are useless. They don’t serve any purpose. Good luck in your attempt to get ‘millions’ to sign a petition against Bell Canada. It just won’t happen. A long, winded out story that proves nothing more than you like to ramble on about nothing. The best advise I give Jon is to be selective when publishing articles; articles that captures your readers’ attention, not bore them to death. ‘Yawn…’
December 1st, 2008 at 5:20 pm
The article isn’t saying sign a petition, the author has set-up a legal argument and now is asking for any person(s) who have the expertise in creating surveys to take-over! There is no such petition and survey, this article is putting out a proper proposal–that’s all. By the way, before anybody pooh–pooh’s this proposal, I suggest you research into the history of Standard Oil first before you even consider giving an opinion! If nothing was done regarding Standard Oil, our world would have looked a hell of alot different in the 20th century! Personally, BCE is too big to be able to put anymore money in research & development, they haven’t got the money! They’re so enormous that they can’t have the flexibility like smaller corporations to change with the growing needs of Canadians for the 21st century. Let’s take the Internet for an example, in 10 years the rest of the industrialized world will be communicating at speeds that will make today’s high-speed connection rates seem like a joke! As a result, all major Canadian industries will have to locate out of the country in order to compete because if everyone is talking to you at a race car speed and they’re waiting for your response when you’re talking back at the equivalent of a donkey pulling a cart speed–do you think they’ll want to do business with you?
Unless BCE is broken up, they’re going to slowly be responsible for the disintegration of the Canadian economy because 21st century trade will be based on sales and communication that are done through the Internet!
December 1st, 2008 at 9:01 pm
I’ve been saying exactly the same thing as Donald for a good 5 years now.
There are laws and rules that are supposed to be complied with…
1) in the operation of a business
2) in the value and support you give your customers
3) in remaining solvent
4) in practicing fair competition
5) in being a “common carrier”
6) in respecting privacy and demonstating openness in your actions
7) in investing profits back into the business, in order to keep up with consumer demand and technological progress.
(I’ll stop here.)
BCE has been blatantly breaking every one of these, and has even thumbed its collective nose at our very Constitution in some of its actions. BCE should be dismantled. Doing so would likely be good for this country, and a responsible move.
BCE should never have been permitted to grow into the behemoth it now is, according to our own rules, but they have. For example, “common carriers”, by legal definition, should not be permitted to offer “content”, but the Canadian Government felt it was okay for this carrier to do so by opening up a “separate company” under the same Bell umbrella.
Donald’s compiled a perfectly sound legal argument.
One which, I’ve also played out in my mind.
All it’s looking for, is for others to ask themselves:
1) Do you agree?
2) Do you want to do anything about it?
3) What are you willing to do?
And I know Donald and I are certainly not alone in this thinking.
December 1st, 2008 at 9:33 pm
first of all let’s be blunt about this point:
Market you are wrong … as stated Chronoss, for once he’s pretty much right
petitions and Canadians just don’t get along, it’s like pulling teeth with rubber band. Just look at how many signed petitions and showed up at parliament hill for Net Neutrality protest. Good effort but not good enough … there should have been 1,000’s of people
so the only thing “that works” is individuals taking Bell to court since these people are the only ones with gutts enough to protest properly and stand up to Bell.
If you’re going to start something then you need to make sure Canadians will get off their asses and actually do something.
This means a plan on many fronts: ongoing protests, ongoing petitions, ongoing bills for lost services and time, court cases in common courts, continuous complains to MP’s and all parts of government, protests on Bell’s doorstep, let it be known this movement is only going to grow and definitely not going to go away!
Petitions: will need be done door to door and in public places to every present and past Bell user, with opening statement of “If you have ever been and bell subscriber we need you and your opinion.”
These people will have to sport T-shirts or something to tell everyone they are taking a petition much different than some bogus market survey
Copies of petitions to be sent to Bell, MP’s, posted on net, sent to all media [TV, newspapers, mags, rags, etc.]
Protests: take it to their doors all over the country on continuous basis with clear signs of what Bell has done wrong. Have clear big signs on your lawns or properties or buildings
Do concerts in name of protests, create appropriate songs etc.
Video everything and post it, it’s your protection against attacks and proof if you need it, pics good too.
Create alternate internet via Independent ISP’s, Wifi, Wimax or intranets
Open part of your Bell Wifi connections to others as much as possible
Overload their [Bell's] network as much as possible without being an idiot.
Most important: Bill them for your lost time, internet problems, their lies, loss of work, overcharging, difference between unlimited access and throttling, loss of enjoyment and anything related.
If they [Bell] don’t pay take them to small claims court
Unless you do this properly as stated here and maybe more you will be SOL, and so will all of Canada … your choice
Enjoy
December 2nd, 2008 at 12:42 am
Just one more thought, the bottom-line isn’t petitions nor surveys of Canadians but how their services and lives are being adversely effected collectively by the business holdings of BCE; that’s the strategy of how to get a court ordered forensic audit! You need people to sign some peace of paper first in order to bring it to a judge, it’s no different than condominium law. I live in a condo in Ontario, owners pay common fees to pay a building management company to manage their building. If they have cause and can show that their building is not being kept up, that the management company is getting kickbacks from contractors (meaning the management company pays electricians, plumbers, etc bills but is actually getting money back from these contractors), etc.; if a minimum of I forget the actual number but let’s say it’s 55% of all owners sign a piece a paper stating their grievances than guess what? They can take their grievances to court and ask the court to appoint a forensic audit. If that audit does show that the building management company has been playing around with the figures, getting kickbacks off of the bills they paid to maintain your building and hasn’t been keeping your building up to scratch–you have legal cause to sue your management company for breech of contract and you’re not only entitled to get a full refund of the money your condo corp. paid the management company, you can also sue for damages!
That’s the entire point of a petition with a short survey, to show cause in a court of law so that the judge can appoint a forensic audit!!!
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:22 am
@ Tom Waite
55% ? WOW!
Try 10% to be affective, otherwise you’re getting ripped off
in many condos ppl are taking pics and video of each incident just to keep them weasels honest
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:26 am
Some fact would have been nice to go along with all the rambling…
BCE does not own VSNL – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VSNL_International_Canada
BCE does not own Emerges – http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2007/11/29/emergis.html
BCE owns a minority stake (20%) of CTVGlobeMedia – http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060721/bellglobe060721?s_name=&no_ads=
BCE is a publicly traded company.. you can look at the financials on a number of sites.
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=TSE:BCE
the following excerpt is from
http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/February2008/06/c7533.html
showing that BCE does indeed spend money on their network
“Bell invested $765 million of capital this quarter and $2,420 million in
2007 with a continued focus on improving the customer experience and expanding
the range of services available to customers through expenditures in areas
such as Bell’s high-speed Evolution, Data Optimized (EVDO) wireless network
and Fibre-to-the-node (FTTN). At year end, Bell’s high-speed EVDO Rev A
network covered approximately 75% of the Canadian population and Bell had
deployed 4,828 neighbourhood nodes through its FTTN program.”
For the R&D comment take a look at the list for 2007
(hint see #2) – http://seekingalpha.com/article/106018-nortel-is-still-canada-s-r-d-champion
KPMG stated that the company currently passes all their solvency tests but that post sale would not after adding on 30+Billion dollars of debt.
i dont like the throttling thats being done but apparently the crtc doesnt mind it so much –
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN2045960320081120
bottom line is that they are not a monopoly and if you dont like their services then choose an alternative provider.
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:13 pm
To Free: RE quote: 55% ? WOW!
Try 10% to be affective, otherwise you’re getting ripped off: unquote
Before your shoot off your mouth, why don’t you research the Ontario Condominium Act first! 10% is a joke and is an impossible figure, I don’t have my copy of the act with me but why don’t you do some research before posting!
To last Reader’s opinion, RE quote:bottom line is that they are not a monopoly and if you don’t like their services then choose an alternative provider: unquote.
BCE is a monopoly! I have chosen an alternative DSL high-speed 3rd party ISP but the problem is all the telephone signals are called on Bell Canada’s telephone lines! It doesn’t matter which ISP company I chose, all of them are being throttled by Bell Canada because Bell’s fiber optic capacity can’t handle the volume! Obviously your ignorant opinion comes from outside Canada! Again, just like I told Free, why don’t you do some research before posting!
Also you should know that BCE has a monopoly on satellite TV, you can’t legally get satellite TV in Canada through any other signal, they’re the exclusive satellite owner to the country…uh I believe that constitutes a monopoly! Do your homework American!
December 2nd, 2008 at 10:13 pm
First of all, the “rambling” has been going on for quite some time now, thanks to Bell treating everyone like shit, and getting away with it, thanks to our government, the CRTC, and the fact that Bell really IS, effectively, a monopoly. They may not wholly own everything stated in the article, but they certainly do occupy far too much territory.
Whenever there is no viable alternate choice, there is a monopoly.
For many of us (including me), Rogers may be there as the only other choice, but yet no really.
I can’t use them, as the cable in my area is not being maintained. (I use Rogers for TV, but I need a helluva booster to bring it in!) Rogers won’t fix it, saying it’s the responsibility of homeowners and apartment landlords to foot the bill.
All other “alternate providers”, for me and many, are the ones using the Bell last mile, which is, as I’m sure you know, THROTTLED. Ironically, by using Bell, I have a chance to cheat the throttle (and I do this quite successfully). CAIP services don’t have that capability, thanks to being attached AFTER the throttling point.
Bell was basically “built by the People” and enjoyed being a telecom monopoly for years.
They were “deregulated” with the stipulation that part of the infrastructure would be opened up to allow services to be offered by future competition. Though this arrangement was never formally challenged and absolved, Bell has successfully gotten away with sabotaging the services of any competition, along with sabotaging its own Sympatico users, while continuing to collect prime rates from those Sympatico users.
Bell is not only guilty of anti-competitiveness, but guilty of successfully…
1) breaching sympatico contracts
2) breaching privacy law
3) breaching “common carrier” rules
4) inadequate customer recourse for everything
5) perpetuating outright lies to the public
6) failing to maintain its solvency through it all.
About #6:
Now that Bell has managed to throw its money (and some of ours) away, and place itself in the position it has, and, subsequently, helping to put Canada behind the 8-ball Internetwise, we have the choice of accepting that, and watching the behemoth fall (taking a good chunk of our communications infrastructure with it), or challenging their very existence NOW, and doing the right thing – taking them apart and forcing each piece to become accountable, functional, and (most importantly) SEPARATE and WITHOUT CONFLICT.
December 3rd, 2008 at 6:15 pm
hey Tom..
ever heard of star choice (owned by shaw) or rogers cable (not dsl based)?
you do some research and quit being so ignorant
December 3rd, 2008 at 10:31 pm
To Reader: Quote:ever heard of star choice (owned by shaw) or rogers cable (not dsl based)?
you do some research and quit being so ignorant: unquote
Ever heard of something called Telesat Canada? Owned by BCE! Who sells the same signal to Bell TV and Star Choice…uh–go ahead, you were saying something about doing some research and not being so ignorant!
Also, I don’t want High-Speed Internet via cable and that’s irrelevant to the article, which states that all DSL telephone signals, whether they be from Sympatico (Bell) or any other 3rd party ISP vendor, all of them use Bell Canada’s telephone lines, thus BCE maintains a monopoly regarding carrying DSL signals.
Finally, Rogers Cable like Bell throttles its users! As well, both offer so-called unlimited high-speed Internet accounts but both have monthly caps of total usage, around 100 Gig (and that’s the total of upload & download combined)! I use a 3rd party DSL high-speed ISP, I have a true unlimited account in that there are no monthly caps on usage! But because I have a contract with a 3rd party for my high-speed Internet, Bell shouldn’t have the legal right to interfere with my data that runs across its fiber optic network because it’s my ISP that leases the use of Bell’s fiber network not me! If Bell in its lease agreement, can instruct 3rd party ISP’s to reduce Internet traffic then it’s up to my ISP to throttle any and/or all of its own customers. But what Bell is doing is throttling all data from all Internet users even if they’re not with Sympatico! This illegal act epitomizes the power of a monopoly! I’m not paying Bell Canada for my access to use its fiber optic network, I don’t have a contract with Sympatico for high-speed DSL service, yet Bell is jumping over my ISP like it doesn’t exist and is throttling my speed as though I have financial contract with them! I don’t, I’m with a different company, it’s irrelevant that I’m using Bell’s fiber optic network, if Bell can’t cope with the amount of Internet traffic then they need to lay down more fiber optic cable! Reducing all Canadians’ speeds via throttling even if they don’t use Sympatico is illegal because any Canadians like me have a written contract for our use with our ISP’s–not with Sympatico! If Bell can’t handle the volume of data then it should either not lease its telephone lines or increase its capacity but what they’re doing is a stopgap measure–throttle everyone–that’s not a long term solution! It’s reasons like this that the mega company BCE needs to be forcibly broken up and allow competition in the marketplace for the common good of the Canadian economy!
December 24th, 2008 at 4:25 am
Bell Canada
Executive Office
1-877-874-0414
It has recently come to my attention that you are now charging me for incoming text messages as well as out going. I have been told that this is now your “new policy”. There are several reasons why I am very disappointed in the mistake you have made implementing this policy and why I won’t be paying for incoming text messages;
1.The person who sent the message has already paid for it. If you charge the person receiving it, you are charging twice for one message. That is obviously unfair.
2.I don’t have any control over people sending me messages. I even occasionally receive spam messages. Why should I be paying for that??
3.We already have a deal. For you to make such a drastic change to our already existing contract is inexcusable.
I have already talked to your exceedingly unhelpful staff on the phone and have received excuses like;
1.We can change the contract to suite our needs whenever we feel like it. My answer to that is; If we all changed contracts to suite our needs whenever we felt like it, imagine the chaos it would cause. You are expected to uphold your end of the deal. I’ve been paying my bill, so I’ve done my part. It’s up to you to do yours.
2.We are doing the same thing to everyone. My answer to that is; Just because you decided to screw over everyone, doesn’t make it OK.
3.We notified everyone earlier. My answer to that is; If you don’t give people any choice, then notifying them is irrelevant.
4.We are happy to make you pay more for a plan where you receive unlimited text messages. My whole point is, I shouldn’t have to pay more for incoming text messages. I’m more than happy to pay for any message I send, but the ones I receive have already been paid for by the person who sent it.
Please don’t send me some generic form letter with more excuses. As I’ve mentioned, I won’t be paying for incoming text messages due to how unfair this new policy of yours is. I am taking the time to write you as an effort to solve this problem and I hope you will return the favor by removing these unnecessary fees from my account and no longer charging me for them. I’ve been a good customer for a couple of years now and never agreed to have this added to my bill. You forced it upon me.
I’m not trying to be rude, but I believe in getting to the point. Any reasonable person can see that my points are very valid and I’m looking forward to hearing back from you to fix your mistake.
Sarah
December 25th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
@ “I wrote this…”
I’m sure M. Davies had a good laugh, before putting it up on “The Board” to share that laugh with the rest of the Executive Office. (Been there, done that.) : (
This is an illustration of the biggest point I’ve been pressing home about Bell (and TO Bell) shortly after the very launch of Sympatico.
It drives me crazy how this behemoth gets away with Breach of Contract as a standard practice, and how very few people have even considered challenging them over this. Indeed, it’s the absence of any real challenge to these contract changes that lets them continue to enjoy the feel of their collective dick planted firmly up the collective ass of so many Canadians.
I was one of the early Sympatico subscribers, and still have that account.
In the beginning, there were no “caps”, and all activity was “unlimited”.
That was in the contract…. No!… IS in the contract.
If I were to go online right now, and read the “current” Terms of Service, I’m sure it would say different – in that, there would probably be a download limit statement of some sort (and my guess would be it wouldn’t be clearly defined in actual numbers) and a clause meant to disqualify the “unlimited” nature of the account.
But, none of this affects me (anymore).
My use is uncapped and unlimited.
Why?…
Because I didn’t take their shit, and challenged them.
Whenever they tried to sneak in any illegal changes, I was there to say, “No, you don’t!”, and held them to their contract. Naturally, they tried the standard “if you continue to use the account with the new TOS, you have already agreed…” crap. I would simply tell them that by contacting them, I have formally objected. I also let them know I’m perfectly aware of the law, and that simply “posting” the changes and letting the system send you an e-mail (after the changes have been posted) does not constitute “informed consent”. The law states a contract IS a contract, and the only way to have key features of that conscription changed is to properly PROPOSE the changes to the client, and have that client actually agree to them. Indeed, if I were to choose to not read the new TOS (which is often the case – how many times have things been changed without any announcement anyway?!), I would still only be bound by the original contract.
To make a long story much shorter…
Yes! I had to spend (waste) a great deal of my time contacting them, and yes!, half of that time was spent with the “Executive Office” (what a crock!). And yes! they tried shutting me down and cancelling my contract. But, in the end, they ended up giving me about a year’s worth of free service, and leaving all my original account features untouched. And, they never bother me now.
I should mention, they also tried something on me that I know they’ve done to thousands…
More than once, they offered to “update” my account to one with “richer features”. Since my account couldn’t be richer (top speeds, unlimited, no caps), that offer was obviously just another attempt to get me to ACCEPT a DIFFERENT contract. One you do that, you surrender your right to uphold the original terms, as you’ve effectively re-signed a new one under “present day” terms. In other words, the “update” is not an update at all – you would be starting a NEW account, and for MORE MONEY!
That must be how Bell managed to get away with a great deal of contract changes. Many people must have stopped thinking long enough to accept that offer to “update”, and, consequently, have forfeited their original contracts… the one thing you can use to stick it to them now, should you still have it.
Bottom line…
1) Know where you stand legally.
Educate yourself to what you have agreed to and/or have given up along the way.
Take those points that you still have in your favour and run with them.
2) Be consistent and firm in your message.
Don’t accept any crap you KNOW is crap. Refuse to accept new terms implemented without your direct involvement. And, don’t let them BEAT YOU by resorting to abusive behaviour or letting them confuse the issue!! (They will deliberately frustrate you in order to provoke you into giving them a legal reason to shut you down, and instruct their front-line workers to do the same! Why do you think a company that has been around that long would “not have a clue” about anything you need to discuss??! It’s by design.)
3) Stick to the facts and document your dealings.
Only press home what has proof, from data on your bills, your visa/bank account, application logs, etc., depending on the issue. And always keep record of everything you do with them – dates, times, names (when you get them, otherwise get the Employee Numbers!), what was done, etc. And, make sure all the “Notes” they say they’re appending to your account records are actually getting put in there. (Don’t know how many times they’ve tried to get out of something by simply “failing” to enter something important I should have been able to let someone else refer to.)
4) Should a viable competing ISP actually become available… DUMP BELL!
I’m still waiting to execute #4.
: )