982 EUROS METEOR BILL!!!!

lala88

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

She didn't say that. Could you stop pretending people said stuff that they didn't say?

How else will they get the point across if they dont make things up?

campo

OP ignore the person on here who probably works for meteor

You are a single mum that kid comes first not meteor ring em and offer a hundred euro if they don't like it then tough I say , what's the worse they can do give you bad credit ...

Make sure when you contact them to get all names and tell them you are going to papers..1k for a months BB I don't care if meteor are legally in there rights its pure BS

The Narrator

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I can't see how she "clearly" has no sympathy for "anyone" - or is a shill, or coldhearted. She seems like someone who has worked in customer service and is exasperated by the refusal of people to acknowledge customer responsibility, and the notion that the company is always at fault and trying to be horrible to the customer when there are two sides, and the notion that the company should spoonfeed the customer 100%.

Surely the company should have some kind of responsibility to offer something akin to value for money?

lala88

campo wrote: »

OP ignore the person on here who probably works for meteor

You are a single mum that kid comes first not meteor ring em and offer a hundred euro if they don't like it then tough I say , what's the worse they can do give you bad credit ...

Make sure when you contact them to get all names and tell them you are going to papers..1k for a months BB I don't care if meteor are legally in there rights its pure BS

Are you actually for real? Its actually amazing the amount of people on here who will openly encourage people not to pay bills

the fact their a single mother or not has nothing to do with it. It is not good enough to ''offer €100 and if they say no then tough''

Also what are the papers going to do? Run a story about how Meteor sent out a bill to a customer?

lala88

The Narrator wrote: »

Surely the company should have some kind of responsibility to offer something akin to value for money?

How is it the responsibility of the company? What they signed up to was value for money but the OP went over that

The Narrator

lala88 wrote: »

How is it the responsibility of the company? What they signed up to was value for money but the OP went over that

I honestly can't believe how you're trying to justify €1000 for a months broadband.

Did you always have a complete lack of morals? Or was that something they removed from your character when you started working for Meteor?...

This is going nowhere, I just hope nothing like this ever happens to you or anyone you know.

Good night.

wonski

lala88 wrote: »

How else will they get the point across if they dont make things up?

How else would I get my point which is:

1k/month for "so called broadband" is extorsion?

I am not making things up, there is a reason roaming charges have changed. There is a system in place to protect customers from unfair practises and charges. And there is some common sense and good practice in business. That is all I'm saying but some of you are doing the mantra of "you signed the contract, you pay". Very dangerous attitude, as I explained before.
We all pay bills, sign contracts, and I don't mind paying my dues. I do, however, stand up if a company is taking a p*** like in this case.

campo

lala88 wrote: »

Are you actually for real? Its actually amazing the amount of people on here who will openly encourage people not to pay bills

the fact their a single mother or not has nothing to do with it. It is not good enough to ''offer €100 and if they say no then tough''

Also what are the papers going to do? Run a story about how Meteor sent out a bill to a customer?

I think you should be asking yourself are you for real , would you really expect a single mom to take food off her table so she can pay meteor 1k...

And what would the press do oh I dunno something like a headline of meteor bills single mom 1k for watching Netflix ... Oh I hear the bad publicity from here

Femme_Fatale

campo wrote: »

And what would the press do oh I dunno something like a headline of meteor bills single mom 1k for watching Netflix ... Oh I hear the bad publicity from here

A particularly salacious lying rag would publish such a one-sided headline yeh, without giving the other side.

campo

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

A particularly salacious lying rag would publish such a one-sided headline yeh, without giving the other side.

Plenty of lying a rags would I point you to the thread of 7.50 for 3 chicken fillets.... Lone parents vs big bad mobile company well always sell a paper

wonski

lala88 wrote: »

the fact their a single mother or not has nothing to do with it. It is not good enough to ''offer €100 and if they say no then tough''

So is the fact another poster works in customer service, but it has been mentioned for some reason...
Regarding the papers - number of articles (across the globe) was written about unfair charges from mobile operators regarding roaming charges and out of bundle charges. Some of the bills quoted were in hundreds of thousands euros. But that is OK, they signed a contract and should pay:rolleyes:

The Narrator

I understand the customer service side of it perfectly.

It's the charging someone 24 times the going rate that bothers me.

Person 1 gets service: €40
Person 2 gets service: €982

That you don't see anything wrong with that baffles me.

ArnieSilvia

I hope my experience in this matter will help you as I feel that you got hard done by and for those smart ones keyboard warriors commenting - I wish it happened to you.

Speaking from personal experience (2 years ago) with Vodafone 5 gig mobile broadband, I got caught in same way.
After installing the dongle on the attic and using "pringle can and pasta drainer" antenna the speed increased from 50kb to 1.5 Mb and so my usage.

At the time, online monitoring of usage was useless. It was showing irrelevant figures most of the time.

Then I was going to download something bigger and rang customer care how much usage is left. They said "You've got 1.5 gig" so I thought great - I only needed 1 gig. 2 days later bill came in - 250 euro:eek: Total usage 7 gig :eek:

I rang them straight away and at first they wanted to blame me but I pulled my finger and told them that there's no way I'm going to pay that because they told me I'm ok to download 1.5 gig. They contradicted themselves saying that usage on their website is delayed few days so in effect even themselves had no idea of my usage at the time I rang customer care !!!!! Also usage on their website was quoted not in data but time I think which was irrelevant to usage.
To cut story short, I told them that I'll happily meet in small claims court. They gave up and send me usual bill (30 euro or so):D

Surprise surprise 2 months later (due to poor usage monitoring on the website and no chance of monitoring using dongle software) my dongle stopped working, I rang them and they said that they have a 250 euro warning limit (IIRC) and once this is hit they stop the broadband. So I said to them well done for putting me into this situation, how nice from you. I said I'm not paying this for clear reason that I had no way to monitor my usage therefore I was put into an unfair situation. I said that we could meet in small claims court which stopped all discussion immediately and they offered that I pay 100 euros I think to which I replied I'll pay 50 IIRC and that's how it ended.

After that incident I was fed up and decided it'll be cheaper to actually buy DVD rather than watching youtube on dongle. Lucky me, I moved to Dublin and yeahae, cable broadband cheaper than that vodafone joke.

This whole situation put me well off from both vodafone and bill pay (but seems like all companies play that dirty game)

Even Tesco, on pay as you go got me done, once I got my first smartphone. Once my broadband run out they started charging extraorbitant sums and in one day 50 euro credit run out. I rang them and they got me 10 euro back. Reason being I told them that would not be in this situation if their website worked correctly. I planned to top up my phone 20 euro and my wife's 20 but ended up topping up mine twice (due to their system glitch). Not sure if 1 hour on the phone was worth it.

BLAME THEM IF THEIR SYSTEMS DON'T ALLOW YOU TO MONITOR USAGE CORRECTLY AND IF THEY HAVE NO SAFEGUARDS TO PROTECT YOU AS A CUSTOMER !!!!!

wonski

http://news.yahoo.com/fla-woman-shocked-200-000-cell-phone-bill-135239012.html

Femme_Fatale

The Narrator wrote: »

I understand the customer service side of it perfectly.

It's the charging someone 42 times the going rate that bothers me.

Person 1 gets service: €40
Person 2 gets service: €982

That you don't see anything wrong with that baffles me.

I think she's just saying that the cost is the cost and it was originally outlined - she's not saying that there's anything right about that cost. Do you think that the company should change the bill to a different rate after the fact? Because that's not how these things work.

Ken.

The Narrator wrote: »

I understand the customer service side of it perfectly.

It's the charging someone 42 times the going rate that bothers me.

Person 1 gets service: €40
Person 2 gets service: €982

That you don't see anything wrong with that baffles me.

What don't you get. Person 2 used 42 times more of the service. That's like saying it costs you €40 to fill your tank with petrol but it costs me €900. Why should I pay it. We both got the same thing (a tank of petrol).

wonski

ken wrote: »

What don't you get. Person 2 used 42 times more of the service. That's like saying it costs you €40 to fill your tank with petrol but it costs me €900. Why should I pay it. We both got the same thing (a tank of petrol).

But the person didn't use 42 times more, She/He was charged 42 times more for the same. Quite a difference.

wonski

http://technorati.com/business/article/woman-receives-15-quadrillion-dollar-cell/

The Narrator

Femme_Fatale wrote: »

I think she's just saying that the cost is the cost and it was originally outlined - she's not saying that there's anything right about that cost. Do you think that the company should change the bill to a different rate after the fact? Because that's not how these things work.

I think that the company should at least have some kind of practice that properly alerts someone after their bill goes over a certain amount, ie. €100 or €200.

But that isn't how these companies operate, they instead are happy for people to run up these crazy bills that a lot of people would have difficulty paying.

I definitely think that the company should reduce the bill. They're selling broadband, not diamonds.

Dynamo Roller

I got done like this a few years ago with 3, similar circumstances. I didn't even bother to ringing them based on the ridiculous bill they sent me for a service that was bordering on extortion anyway. I just sent back the bills and solicitors letters and they got tired after a few months.

dudara

This is turning into a late night Thunderdrome. We are 8 pages in, with numerous responses, but only one post from the OP. Plus, about 7 of the 8 pages have been pure repetition, with no real new content.

How about we all take a deep breath, and wait for the OP to return with an update.

dudara

ardle1

dudara wrote: »

This is turning into a late night Thunderdrome. We are 8 pages in, with numerous responses, but only one post from the OP. Plus, about 7 of the 8 pages have been pure repetition, with no real new content.

How about we all take a deep breath, and wait for the OP to return with an update.

dudara

Meteor Good Plan..

COYVB

wonski wrote: »

But the person didn't use 42 times more, She/He was charged 42 times more for the same. Quite a difference.

They used far more data than the other person in your hypothetical. In a system where you pay for what you use, how is it unfair to pay more for consuming more bandwidth?

getsome

Similar situation happened to me, I lent my brother my O2 stick and he constantly watched videos on youtube. One month later O2 had taken €200 out of my bank account. Rang up and complained about no notification of exceeding the limits and no letter making me aware that they were taking more than our agreed amount out of my account.....one week later refunded me 149€, lesson learned and contract canceled.

People bang on about paying an outrageous bill amount of €982, yet when its their bill they will be the first to complain. Don't pay that amount offer double your usual monthly bill, that should be enough to cover the GB usage.

Meteor should have a check system or start offering a option to cut off the broadband when you have maxed out and not try and screw their own customers.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

The rates for data outside of a plan are total robbery, I think that needs to be looked at seriously on a European level. However, it is up to the customer to inform themselves about the product they are using and all potential charges which may arise. Internet/broadband packages seem to confuse a lot of people and so we see a lot of this kind of thing. It seems to be a combination of customers not being sure and companies, such as meteor, being eager to take advantage of this uncertainty by charging high data fees. Both parties are to blame but Meteor will have the law on their side in this case so will probably come out on top.

Cabaal

In all honesty the bill is high but people can't dispute that the OP used the service and went over the cap.

If the OP signed up to a call package with 200min included but then racked up bills by calling places for 3000min in a month I don't think people would be defending her.

At the end of the day its not meteor's fault if the customer refuses to acquire a little bit of information themselves in order to understand what 1GB is, its not complex or hard.

The op checked usage on the software on their computer, there are many reasons why this may not be working correctly and alot of which could be caused by problems on the customer's computer. The fact is they should be checking their usage from time to time as good practice but they didn't do this and they didn't notify meteor of any issues with doing so before. The op makes no mention of checking the meteor website directly when it comes to their usage.

Sure you can argue that the charges are high for data usage, but then so are mobile call charges, text message charges of 9c and even landline call charges. But none the less those are the charges, if you don't like them then don't signup to the service.

wonski

Cabaal wrote: »

Sure you can argue that the charges are high for data usage, but then so are mobile call charges, text message charges of 9c and even landline call charges. But none the less those are the charges, if you don't like them then don't signup to the service.

The only problem I see with these charges is that if we compare it with out of bundle charges for calls/texts , this would be equivalent of few euro/minute of phone call. If you go over your limit you pay regular rate of 20-30c/minute. Not 3 euro/minute. There has to be limit somewhere...
And I can't understand that customer is not stopped from racking up bill like this - I know the OP is not a baby, but still with such an unusual bill there should be a way to block the service at some point.
I hope OP got sorted, and won't have to pay full amount - for many people out there it is a lot of money.

SpaceTime

It's like this:

Imagine if your power company charged you say :

€35.99 / month for 350kWh units. 10.2 cent per unit

Then all of a sudden, for any units over 350kWh (bundle) they charged you €4.28 per unit (42 times more)

Lets say a typical electricity bill was about 500 units.

So that's :

35.99 for your first 350kWh

Then 150*4.28 = €642 for the next 150kWh

So your electric bill would come in at €677.99

...

If any power company did their calculations like that there would be marches on their HQ!
Yet, for mobile broadband services many posters on here seem to think it's fine and that the consumer should be screwed like that because they signed up to a multi-page confusing contract.

....

I can understand that networks need to limit the amount of traffic on them, especially when you're talking about mobile networks with finite on-air bandwidth. However, you can police that with simple caps that throttle you down to EDGE speeds i.e. cut your 3G service or that just stop the service entirely until you call them and buy an extra bundle or leave you disconnected until the next bill cycle even.


----

Also, this is about as transparent as mud to many customers. They have no idea how much data they are using. You could be on a HD stream of some online video and not realise how much data that's using per minute vs browsing the web. Most people are completely clueless about these things.

On top of that, the networks tend to even confuse themselves. I have seen data being sold as "up to 24 Megabytes" instead of "Megabits/s". Caps are often not explained very clearly.

There should be something like:

This is capped at 40GB per month. Each GB after that will cost you €50. This is a PENALTY RATE.

Also a lot of people don't appreciate how small a 30GB limit is when compared to say a one of the fixed-broadband packages from a landline or cable supplier that are increasingly just unlimited with a vague FUP policy of maybe 500GB per month at which point they might just throttle you at worst these days. Very few of them will charge you for going over cap and if they do it's not likely to be more than a relatively small price per GB.

x43r0

I had a similar issue with an O2 dongle a few years back

I called Comreg who spoke to O2 on my behalf and my €290 bill was cut in half and I paid the €145 remaining

Cabaal

SpaceTime wrote: »

If any power company did their calculations like that there would be marches on their HQ!
Yet, for mobile broadband services many posters on here seem to think it's fine and that the consumer should be screwed like that because they signed up to a multi-page confusing contract.

But telecom contracts aren't confusing IF you bother your arse to read them, most customer's never take the time to do so though. They just blindly agree.

Also, you don't need to read the contract to know you will be charged for going outside of the stated cap, take a look at

http://www1.meteor.ie/mobilebroadband/billpay/?linkid=broadband_sub

It states the cap but then clearly it normal sized text states:

2c per MB if you go over your allowance.

As for your example of protests with electricity, this is utter nonsense.
Customers have plenty of choice when it comes to Broadband packages and caps, nobody forced the OP to go with the package they choose.