Charging for time prior to service?

danindub

Hi guys,

I signed up with eircom recently and I received my second bill which was bit high...

I called eircom and they explained to me, that my first bill covers period from early in April until early in May, which is BEFORE service was provided to me (I had a line connected only on May 2nd) but AFTER I placed my order with them.

Their rep seems to believe that it's perfectly reasonable to charge me fees for service I wasn't provided from the time I signed up.

This can't be legal, can it?

It's fairly common with most telco companies (not sure about other services), the reason being that when your order is placed you fall into the billing cycle for that period so your charged pro rota for the first month & usually a month in advance.

I'm not saying it's good practise or right but that's the most common reason I've heard.

danindub

and is that normal/legal?

it's a little as if bank started charging interest on a mortgage upon approval rather than draw-down... or landlord started charging rent upon signing a lease and not actual term of it...

This is my first, and I'm with few telcoms (UPC, O2, Three...) sounds really odd to me...

SpaceTime

Usually you're charged for the month ahead for fixed charges. So you're paying for line rental, broadband package and any bundles for the month ahead and then any unbundled calls in arrears. They all seem to do it that way.

They also usually run all their bills either on one cycle (one per month) or some of them may have more than one cycle. Very few of them can just start a bill on any random day.

So your first bill will be whatever number of days remaining in this month along with next month's fixed charges and calls you've made outside that bundle.

danindub

danindub wrote: »

and is that normal/legal?

it's a little as if bank started charging interest on a mortgage upon approval rather than draw-down... or landlord started charging rent upon signing a lease and not actual term of it...

This is my first, and I'm with few telcoms (UPC, O2, Three...) sounds really odd to me...

It's fairly common as far as I know. I worked in the Telco industry for years & have heard of it across all the Irish networks. I assume it's legal, it used to & I imagine still is an issue for customers so I can only assume it's legal or Comreg would have made them stop by now.

I've also seen instances where first bills where very low but the second bill was higher because of the added month.

Patrick2010

Deleted User wrote: »

It's fairly common as far as I know. I worked in the Telco industry for years & have heard of it across all the Irish networks. I assume it's legal, it used to & I imagine still is an issue for customers so I can only assume it's legal or Comreg would have made them stop by now.

I've also seen instances where first bills where very low but the second bill was higher because of the added month.

I don't know which Telco you worked for but I know that in the one I worked for we only added them to billing once we were actually supplying them with service. If someone was switching to us from another operator or getting a line installed we would never dream of billing them from the date of order.

Patrick2010

Patrick2010 wrote: »

I don't know which Telco you worked for but I know that in the one I worked for we only added them to billing once we were actually supplying them with service. If someone was switching to us from another operator or getting a line installed we would never dream of billing them from the date of order.

They get billed from the day the order is complete no? Maybe I misread the original post but I thought that what the query was about?

Edit: Just reread the original post, all my comments now make no sense!

No Pants

In short OP, no, it doesn't sound right. I'd get back onto them and look for my money back. If they continue to muck you around, Comreg and the Revenue (since they're no doubt charging VAT).