£437.07 T-Mobile bill

Buzby

Legislate for what? Irresponsibility?

Just because someone is unaware of the charges makes them them fully liable. If you leave the confines of your own network, unless you took time to arrange a more cost effective connection (call package, local SIM etc) you pay what the network states it will charge.

PAYG should be the first port of call as there is no bill shock. When the money runs out, so does the service. Or is that too much like common sense?

grumbler

Jimx26 wrote: »

Why would they?...

Buzby wrote: »

Legislate for what?...

Why questions? Wasn't €50 limit introduced recently for EU?
And in many other countries such legislation does exist for any charges abroad.

I am not saying that it is right or wrong. My point is that your question marks are absolutely inappropriate.

mrcamp

You probably used what you are being billed for. Pay the thing or see if they can work out a payment plan with you.

NFH

You should have waited until you received the bill before asking here. Nobody can help you unless you explain what you have been charged for.

Oscar1971

just for info, t-mobile will charge you for every incoming call and if it's diverted to voicemail you will be double charged.

I have just come back from turkey (band 5) and I have a number that i put on reject - this goes straight to voicemail... I have been charged 2 lots of £1.50 for the privilege of not even receiving the call.

It's ridiculous but it is supposedly in the T&C's, but bear in mind if on pay monthly voicemail is switched on by default and if you don't realise this even if your phone is off when abroad you will be charged £1.50 twice for each unanswered call.

I personally think this is extortion and I am seriously considering moving networks at end of this contract. I accept charges for overseas use but not without all the proper information and at reasonable rates.

JethroUK

Jimx26 wrote: »

Why would they?

Buzby wrote: »

Legislate for what?

Well with the fear of repeating myself (seems like every other post at the mo)

Phone companies "know" when your bill hits £100, £200, £300, £400 - £2400 (i think that was worst case)

"Knowing" this, they are complicit in allowing the bill to run away - they also 'know' your bill is running away without your 'knowledge' and that's totally immoral (if you're not sure why ask your friends or family)

Since phone companies wont act morally/ethically, the law could make them send notice when user bill hits these markers so that the user also 'know's - then being 'informed' they might choose to say......hang up?

Shame i have to explain morality

sign of the times i guess

Earthworm

I guess the OP didn't bother responding as nobody said what they wanted to hear. It is a shame though as if they had just given some more information there could have been a variety of things they could have done to reduce the cost to themself (potentially).

For the record, I do feel there should be a clear way of monitoring your usage, and how much it is costing you so far, when abroad. I do feel people set themselves up for these really high bills a lot of the time but it is fair to say that not everyone knows what a MB will get them on their phone. It just bugs me when people return to see there bill and then act as though they did everything they could when they didn't even didn't check the rates for use in the country they were going too.

The cost of using your phone abroad is something that should form part of your budget when planning a holiday... The same way food, drink and shopping money are.

wantmemoney

yet another example of where a customer requested 'spend limit' on the account would have protected them.

the problem is of course the Networks (and some people on here) clearly don't want the customers to be protected from accidental/unintentional spend.

Earthworm

wantmemoney wrote: »

yet another example of where a customer requested 'spend limit' on the account would have protected them.

the problem is of course the Networks (and some people on here) clearly don't want the customers to be protected from accidental/unintentional spend.

I agree but also disagree with this. Lets say this was in place now and that the OP had requested a spending limit of £100 on their account... Because the OP did not plan their usage and check the charges before they went their limit would have been reached 1/4 of the way into their holiday. Now lets just say that the OP, on the final day of the holiday, lost her passport or money... Maybe they need to ring home to get a family member to transfer funds across to their bank account, maybe they needed to ask a family member to pay for the taxi from the airport on the way from home... This is now not possible at all. It also means that from the point the OP is home until their next billing date their phone is useless as they have hit their limit.

In reality the OP could have logically researched this before they went abroad, considered their options and budgeted accordingly based on fees. I totally get that the networks could act in a more caring manner, but this does not then remove blame and responsibility from the user.

JethroUK

Earthworm wrote: »

I agree but also disagree with this. Lets say .. .

.....they got stuck on a desert island and forgot to pack their phone.....

.
There will always be 100's of "lets say "s - I'm sure you can think of a few that mitigate people driving wrong way up a one way street - but that doesn't mean we should not have laws/regulations /rules, especially when huge corporation s are flagrantly milking the unsuspecting public

Personally I think the first step is to keep the customer informed of excessive use (maybe just a text)

I would in fact let previous "victims " Sue retrospectively - but thats just me