Free Newsletter
Verizon to pay $1.5M settlement over 'free' ringtones
Free newsletter via e-mail
Tools
Verizon Wireless will pay the state of Florida $1.5 million as part of a settlement reached with the Florida attorney general for third-party charges that appeared on consumers' bills. The customers were charged for ringtones, wallpapers and other mobile content that had been marketed as free or that they didn't realize would result in a monthly charge.
The content wound up costing customers up to $19.99 per month. The charges appeared on the subscriber's wireless bill as company's names, including OpenMarket, M-Qube and M-Blox. As part of the settlement Verizon agreed to adopt "best practices" standards to protect customers from the charges. An investigation found that thousands of Florida customers had been affected by the charges.
"Consumers deserve to get their money back when a company misrepresents something as free that isn't," Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum said in a statement. "I commend Verizon Wireless for providing full restitution to their Florida customers and changing the business model to better protect consumers nationwide."
In late February, AT&T Mobility agreed to refund thousands of Florida consumers for the same problem. AT&T agreed to pay Florida $2.5 million and contribute $500,000 toward consumer education on safe Internet use. The carrier also agreed to the same kind of safeguards that Verizon will adopt.
For more:
- see this release
Related Article:
AT&T agrees to refunds over 'free' content
Comments
Posted by Anonymooose | June 27, 2009 - 3:06pm
I wonder how many people either will not know that they should claim, or will not bother to claim back the hidden charges. This is a prime example why I will not sign a contract with a cell carrier. It really seems sometimes as if the descriptions of charges are intentionally indiscernible. So it’s easy to see how this could happen to literally thousands of people. And I'm sure Verizon is not the only company involved in this kind of scheme.
I prefer to use prepaid phones where I pay for what I use, with no hidden charges added. For instance: my Straight Talk plan will give me 1000 minutes, 1000 texts and 30mb data for $30. Not $35-$40 after all the added hidden charges! And with prepaid phone options now often cheaper than contracts there really is no reason to sign on the dotted line anymore.
Posted by Bindu Mitra | August 26, 2009 - 3:22pm
This is a very example of trickle effect of malafidely increasing revenue without. I have the unfortunate experience of having a family plan with three lines. Every month each of the lines gets the amount of $1.99 added although all the three lines have dta plans blocked!! If I remember to call in then the amount is refunded, if I forget then Verizon gets the benefit of getting away with this cahrge. This is basically a scam and when I had called in to their customer service, I wa sadvised that they could only refund the current month's charges and not the earlier months.
Posted by Get Real | August 27, 2009 - 12:17am
You do realize that this was a 3rd PARTY COMPANY that was charging these people? NOT verizon wireless. When do companies have to stop babysitting consumers? What happened to consumer responsibility? Majority of the time people are occurring these charges is due to kids and irresponsible parents/adults.
Posted by Anonymous | August 27, 2009 - 12:22am
Prepaid is deffinatly not the best solution for everyone. For the most part you will pay more per month for prepaid. Also, with any prepaid service you are not getting the reliable coverage nationwide like you would on regular postpaid service. That means if you use your phone for business or just need your phone for an emergency? You might be in trouble...
Posted by Anonymous | August 27, 2009 - 12:25am
I think Verizon should contact their customers that they accidently charge a 1.99. But I am also thinking how much time that would take to research 80 MILLION customers accounts. I agree with the consumer responsibility. How long does it take you to review a phone bill>??
Comments (5) | Post a comment