NationStates Jolt Archive

By TARINA WHITE, SUN MEDIA

CALGARY -- Downloading music and movies onto a computer using a mobile phone racked up a jaw-dropping $85,000 phone bill for a Calgary man.

Piotr Staniaszek said he's outraged Bell Mobility allowed his cellphone bill to skyrocket to a "ridiculously huge" amount in six weeks without alerting him.

"I'm going to try to fight it - it never should have gotten that high," said the 22-year-old well tester, adding his typical monthly mobile bill is $150.

"They should have let me know when my phone bill started going up."

Staniaszek said he signed up with Bell Mobility to pay $10 a month to use a mobile browser on his cellphone.

"I thought it was the same thing when I plugged it into the computer and used it as a modem -- I guess not," he said yesterday.

Bell Canada spokesman Jeffrey Meerman said Staniaszek's cellphone plan is not intended for downloading files to a computer, and that is spelled out in his contract.

"The plan is meant for Internet surfing, e-mail access and file downloads to the phone itself," he said, adding Staniaszek had been using the phone as a modem to download high-resolution movies onto a computer.

"Customers need to understand the service terms and understand what the limits of the plan are."

Staniaszek said he first learned about the costly charges for downloading files to a computer this month when he received his November bill for more than $60,000.

When he called the company for an explanation last week, he was informed his bill had climbed to $85,000 for additional downloading this month. "I was shocked - I thought there was a mistake," said Staniaszek.

Bell has since reduced the bill to about $5,000, but Staniaszek said he doesn't agree he should have to pay thousands because the company allowed the bill to balloon unchecked.

Meerman said Bell typically contacts customers about unusually high usage, but added "we can't monitor the usage of every customer."

"Bills this large are extremely rare," he said.

"In this case, we reduced the client's bill to a fraction of the cost as a sign of goodwill."

He added the company has recommended another cell- phone plan to Staniaszek that is suitable for downloading files to a computer.

Link (http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2007/12/13/4722206-sun.html)

When I first heard of the story, I wondered how someone could rack up $85,000 in a one-month phone bill (is his girlfriend literally a Martian or something?), then I read this article and realized it's all bandwidth- no, your phone isn't your PC, no matter how you wrap your finger around it. Still, though, it's an absurd amount to pay in a single month (even at the comically "reduced" rate of $5,000), but I do think he did it to himself. Thoughts?

Thoughts?

I'm in the wrong business. :p

Where I live, you pay by the kilobyte if you use the phone to connect any data service. I can see how you can rack up a large bill.

Link (http://www.edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2007/12/13/4722206-sun.html)

When I first heard of the story, I wondered how someone could rack up $85,000 in a one-month phone bill (is his girlfriend literally a Martian or something?), then I read this article and realized it's all bandwidth- no, your phone isn't your PC, no matter how you wrap your finger around it. Still, though, it's an absurd amount to pay in a single month (even at the comically "reduced" rate of $5,000), but I do think he did it to himself. Thoughts?

I believe the company does have an obligation to call their customers when a bill gets crazy. I sometimes make rather large purchases on my visa. I will get calls asking if they are authorized usage or not. If the credit card companies can do that then why can't a cell phone company alert a customer if a bill gets into the thousands of dollars?

Yeah, the company should have let him know that his bill was getting out of hand, but if his contract stated that his plan was not intended for anything but downloads to the phone itself, then it is his responsibility to read his contract. Failure to read a legally binding document is not legal grounds for failure to comply with its terms.

Yeah, the company should have let him know that his bill was getting out of hand, but if his contract stated that his plan was not intended for anything but downloads to the phone itself, then it is his responsibility to read his contract. Failure to read a legally binding document is not legal grounds for failure to comply with its terms.

True, but do most people read their mobile phone contract properly? Nope.

I wonder what sort of high resolution movies he's downloading :)

Even if not porn, he's a fool to highlight this as it's most likely illegal downloading, he'll get the bill reduced only to be slapped with an even larger fine.

He's going to be banned from the 'Campaign to Stop Poles being Portrayed as Stupid' society that's for sure.

True, but do most people read their mobile phone contract properly? Nope.

Or any contract properly? Doubt it....

I believe the company does have an obligation to call their customers when a bill gets crazy. I sometimes make rather large purchases on my visa. I will get calls asking if they are authorized usage or not. If the credit card companies can do that then why can't a cell phone company alert a customer if a bill gets into the thousands of dollars?

That's what got me. Bell said they can't "monitor everyone" but I don't understand why they can't have an automated response- like a text message or something- that is sent when the bill gets past, say $250 or something. It's not like they don't have the resources to do it either- this is Bell, easily Canada's largest phone operator, so they can't say they're incapable of implementing such a system anyway.

Or any contract properly? Doubt it....

People tend only read these things when they have an issue or you are a lawyer.

People tend only read these things when they have an issue or you are a lawyer.

I understand the reasoning behind the lengthy contracts- any omission (no matter how small) and an opportunist will certainly look for a way to bilk the company out of lots of money and/or use the products in ways it wasn't intended for. Still, I don't understand why they can't have an abridged version that's a page or two long and have deeper explanations as an appendix or something (so people will only read them if they're interested in them). I mean, other than buying a house or a car (something that *is* a significant investment), do you think anyone has the time to sit through the hours necessary to divulge all those lengthy contracts? I don't.

Let this be a lesson to him: don't do things like this unless you check the terms and conditions beforehand, and always make sure you know what you're getting.

Of course, the company obviously should have contacted him when they began to see massively disproportionate bills (that's just good customer service, especially if it was the result of something like identity theft or even an error), but he was ultimately at fault for not following the terms of his contract and did incur the fees. I think reducing the bill is a very fair move, but he should still have to pay a sizable fee for his use of network resources.

Thank god I pay for a dataplan that has unlimited bandwidth and includes bridging to laptops

(Read the contract the only thing spelled out is P2P) used to use it a lot to post on here actually when I worked nighttime security (power inverter ... security truck ... and my cell phone)

And then things get really stupid when you download a driver off an Internet site, and then you get some message you can't export it to places like North Korea ...

Damn! Foiled again!

I understand the reasoning behind the lengthy contracts- any omission (no matter how small) and an opportunist will certainly look for a way to bilk the company out of lots of money and/or use the products in ways it wasn't intended for. Still, I don't understand why they can't have an abridged version that's a page or two long and have deeper explanations as an appendix or something (so people will only read them if they're interested in them). I mean, other than buying a house or a car (something that *is* a significant investment), do you think anyone has the time to sit through the hours necessary to divulge all those lengthy contracts? I don't.

And then things get really stupid when you download a driver off an Internet site, and then you get some message you can't export it to places like North Korea ...

Let this be a lesson to him: don't do things like this unless you check the terms and conditions beforehand, and always make sure you know what you're getting.

Of course, the company obviously should have contacted him when they began to see massively disproportionate bills (that's just good customer service, especially if it was the result of something like identity theft or even an error), but he was ultimately at fault for not following the terms of his contract and did incur the fees. I think reducing the bill is a very fair move, but he should still have to pay a sizable fee for his use of network resources.

I agree- he did do it to himself, but I do think it's unreasonable to expect him to pay $5,000 in one shot. I say he forks over $84 per month for the next five years as that repays the $5,000 with interest.

And then things get really stupid when you download a driver off an Internet site, and then you get some message you can't export it to places like North Korea ...

Haha- that's the place where Apple sticks in some statement about telling people not to use iTunes to construct nuclear or biological weapons (if you don't believe me, download iTunes and copy and paste the EULA to Notepad and see for yourself). If anyone can build a weapon out of iTunes, I'd certainly like to know how they did it, because I can't figure it out.

If anyone can build a weapon out of iTunes, I'd certainly like to know how they did it, because I can't figure it out.

iTunes actually has detailed plans for nuclear weapons embedded in its source code. :p

I agree- he did do it to himself, but I do think it's unreasonable to expect him to pay $5,000 in one shot. I say he forks over $84 per month for the next five years as that repays the $5,000 with interest.

I'd say have him simply pay the bill for the service he was supposed to be using plus the existing service fee, for a period of one year (mainly for simplicity more than anything else. That cost would not be too onerous and would likely be far less than the $5,000 they plan to charge him. It's not even harsh enough to be a punitive fee; I'd rather this guy learn his lesson and move on than be financially devastated by what really is a simple mistake.

I'd say have him simply pay the bill for the service he was supposed to be using plus the existing service fee, for a period of one year (mainly for simplicity more than anything else. That cost would not be too onerous and would likely be far less than the $5,000 they plan to charge him. It's not even harsh enough to be a punitive fee; I'd rather this guy learn his lesson and move on than be financially devastated by what really is a simple mistake.

So you're saying "wipe the fee completely"...I don't think I'd go that far- I mean, Bell's got a right to be recouped for services it intends to charge people for anyway (such as bandwith). I mean, I'd hate to hear some guy got off paying for a service I'm using, although I do grant this is an absurd and (hopefully) one-time thing. He probably at least deserves a warning at least- $85,000 is a lot to write off.

How about charging him on that other plan (the one that's supposedly built for excessive downloading as Piotr did), at least for that one month?

iTunes actually has detailed plans for nuclear weapons embedded in its source code. :p

:eek: You mean, Apple themselves might be working on weaponry themselves? Does this mean the iBomb is upon us?

:eek: You mean, Apple themselves might be working on weaponry themselves? Does this mean the iBomb is upon us?

Ahh, you see, Apple is doing this very cleverly. iTunes itself is actually a very sophisticated grid computing system masquerading as a music player. When you're not looking, iTunes runs millions of calculations and simulations, testing out the latest in WMD designs whereupon the data is sent to Apple HQ and applied in their engineering department.

Combined with their marketing strategies, they've managed to turn hundreds of thousands of computers into their very own WMD research facility spread all across their world.

:p

One the one hand, he really should have understood the terms of the service before starting to use it. On the other, the service he received is only worth a tiny fraction of what he's charged. It's a bit like not looking at the price tag for apples at the supermarket, and when time comes to pay they ask for 5 thousand dollars for your 3 apples. If it isn't illegal, it is at least immoral to charge this much for so little.