Quebecers Try to Sue BCE/Telus over TXT Charges
Two crazy Quebecers are fighting the power named BCE and Telus, over the plans for two of the three telecom oligopoly participants to charge 15 cents per incoming text message.
Bell Mobility subscriber Eric Cormier and Telus subscriber Natalie Martin initiated the suits and say both companies are acting illegally by unilaterally changing the terms of cellular contracts with their clients.
Neither class action suit has been approved by a judge. The cases are to be presented in September and lawyers say the legal process could take more than a year if approved.
“What we’re trying to get the court to say is that for the duration of a contract . . . the telephone company should not be able to unilaterally modify the conditions of the contract,” said lawyer Noel Saint-Pierre.
I think it’s great that people are finally standing up to the cell networks in Canada.. I do have reservations on how much this is actually doing mind you..
What will it really take to influence change in this country..
Side note.. Something else that is becoming an issue slooowly is broadband in Canada. IE: limiting downloads/uploads as well as overall speed/capacity. Look over the ocean at the other extreme of Korea and it’s a completely different landscape. How do we compete with that? Are those companies making the same sorta money as our Canadian ones?
I have joined this class action suit. If the internet has taught me anything, that if enough people stand up and make their voices heard, companies are sometimes willing to change…..see ruinediphone
What Telus and Bell should allow is a parachute clause for those existing contract holders to opt out if the service provider decides that their business (see profits) are suffering so much that they need to gouge their customers further. If that was an option, I would giving these douches the old heave ho.
Just as a follow up, Telus has offered a solution to the text billing fee issue; opting out of text messages completely.
Does this sound like something that you would do? Opt of out the technology completely to not pay?
@ducati
Sadly.. Giving up a service cause you’re not paying for it is a valid solution.
Holding back the general public in progressing with the rest of the world (with the use of technology) is sad.
And just to stir the pot a bit more.. wtf is going on with the “access fees” these days.. $7/mth foooooor?
I would absolutely opt out of text messages in order not to pay.
I have never used the technology to send, even when I lived in Europe in 01/02 and texting was huge.
Email via blackberry on the other hand… I wouldn’t be able to give up. Smallish technology difference but given that most of my work and personal correspondence overlap (i.e. file attachments are important and syncing to my computer is critical), text simply isn’t a big deal for me.
And I agree with Dave – opting out and not being able to use the technology is a valid solution, however I don’t agree with the concept that not using text is regressive from a technological standpoint. In this case, you can pay if you want to use and not pay if you don’t. My huge issue was not being able to be in 100% control of your bill each month, by allowing an opt out it is just adding a choice for consumers.
What is much more regressive is the fees charged (and not just for text, mobile usage in general, data in specific, and now broadband internet). That is what is limiting technological use here.
I suppose the problem I see with their solution is that regardless of whether I use the technology or not, if it is utilized by you or the people aroind you, the chances are you are going to pay for a package as you might want to stay up to date or at least be able to communicate or continute to communicate in a method that others might use. I don’t know, I guess thinking about it from a ethical standpoint, it just isn’t a way a company should treat its customers.