In a bid to try and end this 6-million dollar lawsuit, lawyers for Bell Mobility argued the case didn’t meet the minimum legal requirements of a lawsuit.

The Supreme Court of the NWT disagreed.

The suit, launched by Yellowknifer James Anderson, was brought against the cellphone provider over its charge for 911 service, which is not provided in Yellowknife or any community in the NWT.

A written decision from the Supreme Court stated that there were grounds for the lawsuit to proceed (http://www.nnsl.com/frames/newspapers/2008-11/nov26_08bell.html).

Julie Smithers, a spokesperson for Bell Mobility in Toronto, said there wasn’t much the company could say given it was an ongoing legal matter. She did add that Bell Mobility believes the lawsuit is “without merit.”

How many people pay Bell a fee for a service that doesn’t even exist?

Surprised?

Now, five months later, Bell Mobility has once again tried to stop the May court date by once again trying, and failing, to quash the class action lawsuit (April 21, 2009).

Per the CBC (http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/04/22/nwt-bell-lawsuit.html)

Appearing before the N.W.T. Court of Appeal in Yellowknife on Tuesday, lawyers for Bell Mobility argued that it never agreed to provide 911 service.The company said there was no mention of providing the emergency service in its contract with cellphone customers.

Well, if there’s no 911 service, as the suit alleges, and Bell admits to it, why is it charging for it?

How many people have been billed for services that don’t exist?

Seems like a common theme with Bell over the past years.

Per the CBC and the three Court of Appeal judges:

But that argument did not satisfy the three Court of Appeal judges, including Justice Jean Côté, who kept returning to the central theme of Anderson’s lawsuit.

“You jolly well billed for it,” Côté told Bell Mobility’s lawyers in court at one point.

The judges dismissed the company’s appeal without hearing a word from Anderson or his lawyer.

The next step in this process is for a judge to find this has class action merit.

Whats the old saying? “You get what you pay for”?

With Bell Canada it seems you get nothing at all for what you pay for.

And they’ll argue in court they have every right to charge you for giving you nothing.

Amazing.

Stay tuned.

[Bell's efforts to charge users for Twitter was a SNAFU, p2pnet posted last month. SNAFU is short for 'Situation Normal - All Fucked Up' - Jon]