Customers will be able to cap their monthly mobile phone bill to prevent "bill shock"

indesisiv

Sounds sensible if you have set a sensible limit.
Although all phones have data counters in them now so you can set it to turn off data when you get close to your limit anyway. Why do people not set this up? Its there so use it!

Frozen_up_north

indesisiv wrote: »

Sounds sensible if you have set a sensible limit.
Although all phones have data counters in them now so you can set it to turn off data when you get close to your limit anyway. Why do people not set this up? Its there so use it!

It's not just data, click on a link and accidentally dial a chargeable number and it can be costly. A friend thought they dialled an overseas number on Skype for a 1.6p/min call, it went through the mobile network by accident and cost £45. That's worth a cap.

I would prefer to switch to EE from Three, but until they introduce a spending cap I won't.

zagfles

Frozen_up_north wrote: »

It's not just data, click on a link and accidentally dial a chargeable number and it can be costly. A friend thought they dialled an overseas number on Skype for a 1.6p/min call, it went through the mobile network by accident and cost £45. That's worth a cap.

I would prefer to switch to EE from Three, but until they introduce a spending cap I won't.

Yes, there are so many ways to run up an enormous bill, like when phones get stolen by professional thieves who can run up thousands of pounds of premium rate calls in a few hours, or when roaming with ridiculous data charges of hundreds of times the cost of data at home or the cost locals pay.

It's so unlike any virtually any other form of spending, where getting "ripped off" might mean paying 50% over or maybe double the expected price. Not hundreds or even thousands of the expected price as is often the case with mobile contracts.

zagfles

pmduk wrote: »

If it's a hard cap that forbids further use once that limit has been reached I predict lots of complaints on here that mobile networks have left customers stranded in emergencies unable to make calls because of the cap.
I worked for a network with such a cap and regularly took calls from unhappy customers who has set a cap for a teenager and were then unhappy that said teenager were unable to call Mum/Dad. Obviously they blamed the network.

What, they took out a capped contract and then complained the cap was applied :rotfl:Haven't they heard of reverse charge services people can use in an "emergency"? They aren't cheap, but what's a few quid in the event of an "emergency"?

mobilejunkie

zagfles wrote: »

Yes, there are so many ways to run up an enormous bill, like when phones get stolen by professional thieves who can run up thousands of pounds of premium rate calls in a few hours, or when roaming with ridiculous data charges of hundreds of times the cost of data at home or the cost locals pay.

It's so unlike any virtually any other form of spending, where getting "ripped off" might mean paying 50% over or maybe double the expected price. Not hundreds or even thousands of the expected price as is often the case with mobile contracts.

The only person who "ripped off" anyone in that situation is the account holder, who couldn't be bothered to put a sim lock and phone lock on. After all, it takes less than a minute...

zagfles

mobilejunkie wrote: »

The only person who "ripped off" anyone in that situation is the account holder, who couldn't be bothered to put a sim lock and phone lock on. After all, it takes less than a minute...

Some people just aren't aware - and the networks don't encourage it - the last contract SIM I got was sent without the PIN lock enabled! Imagine if banks did this with credit/debit cards!

Some people think a phone lock is sufficient without thinking about the SIM. Yes you can sneer at them and call them stupid, but SIMs should certainly come with PINs enabled by default. Some do now I believe.

Besides getting the phone stolen isn't the only issue. It's charges of hundreds of times the expected/normal cost as above eg when roaming, using NGN's etc.

Hopefully once caps become compulsory for networks to offer - it will also be compulsory to ask the customer if they want a cap and if so how much. Or set a default perhaps at quite a high level eg a hundred or so. No normal user should ever get near it, and if they're not a normal user they can ask for an increase.

mobilejunkie

Then people are asking for it and the rest of us shouldn't have to subsidise their negligence. You also plainly don't understand how they work - and it's not rocket science; ALL network sims come UNlocked. If they came LOCKED and people are that thick they'd be a mass of them complaining because they couldn't use their phones. Da!

zagfles

mobilejunkie wrote: »

Then people are asking for it and the rest of us shouldn't have to subsidise their negligence. You also plainly don't understand how they work - and it's not rocket science; ALL network sims come UNlocked. If they came LOCKED and people are that thick they'd be a mass of them complaining because they couldn't use their phones. Da!

Do they have the same problem with their bank cards? Maybe banks should issue credit cards with no PIN, eh? Reckon that's a good idea? You could probably run up as big a bill on a stolen SIM as on a stolen credit card.

What cost would need "subsidising" if networks issued SIMs with a PIN set by default? Any trivial cost would likely be outweighed by savings when SIMs get lost in the post etc.

mobilejunkie

1) Bank cards have an expiry date with replacement cards having the same pin. 2) Customers can't use their card until the pin arrives. 3) It must cost a lot more to administer such a system and customers would have to pay for that. 4) Card customers have to go to a cash machine in order to set their own pin - sim card locks can be set immediately in seconds. 5) Sims do have a set default number - but they are the same for all customers. Card numbers require a system of different numbers for different customers controlled centrally and not by the phone.

As for the second paragraph, if people are too lazy or careless to set BOTH pins you would have the rest of us pay for that when the scenario you painted happens. Of course, they would also have to compound their negligence by losing their phone in the first place. All of which is off topic anyway.

zagfles

mobilejunkie wrote: »

1) Bank cards have an expiry date with replacement cards having the same pin. 2) Customers can't use their card until the pin arrives. 3) It must cost a lot more to administer such a system and customers would have to pay for that.

Strange how banks can afford to have fee free current accounts and credit cards then isn't it, if all this is so costly. In fact not only free, but current accounts with high interest rates and credit cards with 0% offers as well.