Obscure Charges That Utility Companies Add to Bills
propublica.org
propublica.org
Anyway the person who sorted phone bills out got this bill for some obscene amount of money and they phoned up to say no, these calls are contractually supposed to be free, send us a revised bill that removes these charges.
The phone company says "Ah, you need to specifically identify any call you're disputing and then we can consider altering the charges". Which is now making _us_ do their job. Nope.
So he just gets the bill and crosses everything out. Absolutely everything on the bill gets crossed out, test calls, dial-up, everything, and sure enough the phone company took the hint and just zeroed the bill and stopped messing us about.
You were obviously not the customer they were going for.
The people who make my boots seemed disappointed that I didn't want to pay them 250% of the normal price when for a few years the boots were fashionable and people who don't actually care what boots are for were wearing them because it was "Hot", but they got over it, and I'm still buying their boots, at the same price I did before, and they're still making a profit, just not Scrooge McDuck money.
Are you referring to that time frame where Timbs became a fashion thing?
Verizon 5G just moved into my neigbhorhood. It was a Spectrum/Brighthouse monopoly until then.
As a response, Spectrum cuts price by 65% to compete. Amazing what a little competition can do.
Edit: For anyone wondering, this was PSE&G in NJ
Utilities support basic human necessities. We need power for light and heat. When the base cost for these necessities rises (to subsidize infrastructure projects), the poor are the hardest hit. And the fact that these governments are essentially "hiding" taxes inside of utility payments is outrageous.
If you regulate entry, you probably better at least keep an eye on prices.
If you want to argue that it should be possible to build whatever power plant wherever, go ahead, but most people don't agree with that.
What I am saying is the price of a utility (or anything) should not be based on how much a person earns. If the utility needs to raise prices to cover their costs, they should raise prices. If the government wants to help poor people, the government should give cash to poor people, or pay the utility on their behalf. But the price of whatever is sold should not be masked.
And if the utility needs to raise prices, they should be raising the prices, not adding fees. I can understand splitting out the cost of delivery vs cost of generating electricity, but beyond that is just unnecessary confusion for a buyer.
Most all of their other charges you can see or can easily find out how they are calculated; they either list how on the bill itself, or with enough digging on their website, you can find the information. And while such charges may not be entirely "likable" - you can at least see what they are for, and can figure out how to mitigate them in some manner.
But this one charge - and I wish I had a copy of my bill in front of me to know what it's name was - it doesn't seem to be tied to anything - yet the amount is a significant fraction of the entire bill; sometimes up to a third of the bill in total!
I was looking at it one day years ago, and I couldn't figure it out. I went on the website, googled the hell outta it, and nothing could be found on what it even was, let alone how it was calculated. It's name was very obscure, yet it took up so much of the bill that I wanted to know what it was and how I could lower it. I showed my wife, and she was just as confused.
The following day she called up APS and talked to somebody there, and despite staying on the phone for a few hours, they couldn't tell her anything as to what it was or how it was calculated. I don't know if that was a ruse on their part, or what, but to this day we have this extra charge/fee on our bill, and we have to pay it, but nobody can tell us anything about it, what it is, how it works, etc.
I would personally love to go "off grid" and tell them to stick it, but here in Phoenix (and possibly other states and municipalities as well) they've (utility companies and lobbyists) made it their goal (if it hasn't been enacted in full yet - I haven't kept up on it) to make it a "law" that says if you have a home that has pre-existing hookup to the house, you have to pay for that hookup whether you use it or not.
I'm still trying to figure out how that is considered to be legal or fair, and why - if it is, and becomes mandated - why the republicans in our legislature, who accept this, are against the healthcare coverage mandate of the ACA...
For utilities, it’s regulatory pressure.
For hotels, it’s competition on advertised prices. Airbnb is particularly bad about this.
It seemed like a mandatory fee, but instead it was a charge they added on top of their crappy long distance plans. Some of which you paid a monthly fee to have for access to “discounted” rates.
Changing to another LD provider gave even cheaper rates for no monthly fees.
I’m much better off without cable and it was obscure charges that motivated me to cut the cord.