T-Mobile switches users to pricier plans
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
I'm genuinely asking. They must have consulted with lawyers and believe it is legal.
But even if their TOS say they reserve the right to change anyone's plan at any time... that seems like one of those clauses that judges always strike down.
This is just flat-out providing a different service than you contracted for. This is like if I order a $200 SSD from Amazon and instead they ship me a $300 SSD and charge me $300, and there are no returns if I don't cancel the order before it's fulfilled.
I don't understand how this is legal. So I genuinely want to know:
1) Is this actually legal? If so, why haven't laws been passed against this kind of corporate bait-and-switch behavior?
2) Is it illegal but just doesn't get enforced? If so, why not?
3) It is illegal, and there will probably be a class action suit, but T-Mobile has calculated they'll still make more profit including a settlement? In which case, why aren't settlements more punitive?
It's presumably laid out in the contract that their users sign. IANAL but I understand contract law gives wide latitude for parties to make agreements to do things which are generally legal.
One could imagine a legal regime that prohibited price or service changes in otherwise-legal contracts. Of course, that also might not be ideal. For example: a vendor used by the provider suddenly changes the capabilities of a piece of equipment such that the original service sold by the provider can no longer be provided at any price. What everybody wants in that scenario is for you to be seamlessly moved to the closest reasonable alternative, not for your service to automatically terminate. Similarly, most people will gripe about a $10/mo change in price, but against the likely alternative of automatic cancellation, the increased fee is what _most_ people will prefer.
And again, 100% of them will have agreed to this exception-handling clause when they signed up.
> This is like if I order a $200 SSD from Amazon and instead they ship me a $300 SSD and charge me $300, and there are no returns if I don't cancel the order before it's fulfilled.
There is a material difference in changing prices (say) 5 years after a contract was signed and ordering a specific item at a specific price a week or two earlier. IANAL but I believe the ordering of goods via the Internet is in fact covered by different laws in a way that services are not. Which again, makes some sense given that service contracts frequently have a term of "forever," during which time everything about the world can change. (Pretty sure my current phone contract was signed over 10 years ago. I'm glad they changed my plan to let me use LTE, for example.)
Generally speaking, contracts between two parties who know what they're doing, with lawyers, are pretty iron-clad.
But TOS with consumers are not. Unreasonable/abusive TOS clauses are struck down quite frequently. Things like consumer protection laws supersede anything in a TOS.
And consumer protection laws are precisely the kind of thing meant to stop companies from playing bait-and-switch with consumers like this.
Note that consumer panels will have less ability to force a vendor to set prices or provide specific services, so there will not be the third option of c) force the vendor to continue providing the service at the contracted price.
> in Europe abusive and surprising (to an informed party) terms and condiations
It can't be surprising to any informed party that prices change. Especially right now, it cannot be argued in good faith that a price increase was surprising to anyone.
Does the user have to opt in each time the service changes (for ex if 2G service gets dropped)? Who decides what changes require a user's approval?
Feels like customers want to have their cake and eat it: lock the carrier in, but have no obligations of their own.
No.
Would you feel the same if the landlord of your month-to-month rental upgraded you to a more expensive house?
Sure they can increase the rent, and you can move somewhere else, but there is baseline a expectation that the house you rented will not change.
I mean, if they renovated my unit or even the common areas, and told me I could stay at a higher rent I'd think that was just fine. It happened to me at least once already, come to think of it.
But yeah, they raised the rent on people without term commitments effective immediately, and anyone on a term contract could keep their old rate until it expired.
Again if you don't like the risk of this changing out from under you, sign a term contract, right?
Notably "By contrast, the Un-contract is all give, no take. You can keep your existing Simple Choice plan and we won’t raise your rates. As part of this commitment, customers on existing Simple Choice promotional plans − like the Un-carrier’s ultra-popular 4 lines for $100 with up to 10 GB of 4G LTE data − can keep them for as long as they’re T-Mobile customers."
Seems like a shut-and-close case for a class action lawsuit. Whoever made the decision to push ahead with this seems to have missed some internal due diligence - or there's some tiny legal footnotes I'm missing.
https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us
Go to Phone > Billing (or go directly from here) https://consumercomplaints.fcc.gov/hc/en-us/articles/3600012...
Phone Issues: Advertised Rate
Text box content:
T-Mobile is forcing me to upgrade my mobile plan even though I signed up with
their advertised Price-Lock https://www.t-mobile.com/support/account/price-
lock
There is no option to opt-out as of $today's_date. This is a violation of
my contract, and they are relying on the fact that most consumers do not have
enough knowledge/time to call in and argue with customer representatives for
hours. https://www.fiercewireless.com/wireless/t-mobile-will-migrate-
customers-higher-cost-plans
T-Mobile is also forcing customers who want to opt out and keep to their
current contracted plan to listen to an unsolicited sales pitch -- this may
violate telephone advertisement and spamming laws.
While the company claims that customers can opt out, multiple customers have.
reported that phone reps refuse to allow opt-out when they call, which is in
general disingenuous behaviors. I believe that the FCC should force T-Mobile
to provide this option through email or an online menu.
FTC complaint can be made here: https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/File an arbitration claim [1]. Complain to the FCC, and copy the FTC [2] as well as your state consumer affairs regulator [3]. (Ideally, send letters via mail.)
[1] https://apps.adr.org/SimpleFile/faces/SimpleFile.jsf
There actually is:
> Customers can opt out by contacting support after October 17th
https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/174uelk/megathread...
I wonder if this is part of their anticipated legal defense. Oh, you can opt out! No problem! The fact that 90% of customers won't know that fact isn't our fault...
I suppose we could file complaints with the FTC and the FCC, but I suspect it will not help. After all, they probably got thousands of complaints about Comcast, but that didn't prevent Comcast from taking over the media world.
T-Mobile used to be one of the better ones. But it was probably inevitable that they would succumb to the enshittification process that is devouring the corporate world.
As they themselves weasel out of it: they're not "raising prices", they're "moving you to a newer plan with more benefits at a different cost".
Eg, one day my account stopped being able to log in to Canada to use the Canadian data on my account.
Only changing plans fixed it
https://www.t-mobile.com/support/account/price-lock
> Price Lock is our guarantee that we won’t raise the price of your qualifying rate plan for new accounts. You can rest assured that T-Mobile won’t raise the price of your regular monthly rate plan price for current unlimited talk, text, and data on our network on Go5G Plus, Go5G Next, Go5G, Base Essentials, Essential Savings, Essentials, Magenta, MAX, 55+, Military, First Responder, Unlimited and Lite Home Internet, and Business Unlimited plans as long as you’re a T-Mobile customer and keep your plan. And customers don’t have to do anything to get in on this – everyone who activates after April 28, 2022, with an eligible plan gets Price Lock.
https://www.reddit.com/r/tmobile/comments/174uelk/megathread...
Edit:
I called T-Mobile and they said they can't use the code until the 17th, and they'd send out a text message informing of the upcoming changes with the ability to opt out. Sounds really shady.
They may play dumb so you may have to escalate.
Really disappointing as they used to be great years ago.
This shouldn't be legal?
There’s an opportunity for the same sort of thing now, but tracking all the desperate scrambling for revenue as the “we’ll make money after the next 10x users, promise” loses its ground as a business model.
---
LOL @ priced out renters!
It's a new paradigm, and everybody who doesn't buy, now, will be priced out forever. Anybody who does buy will be rewarded with a lifetime of riches, as their property will continue its 20-30% yearly price appreciation.
Renters, and anybody born in a future generation, will not be able to afford a $10,000,000 starter home in 15 years. They will live in tent cities, and Hondas.
This asset bubble is different than all of the previous and other asset bubbles - it will never slow down, or pop. The gains are permanent.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pri...
> QCI 6 is applied to all of T-Mobile's postpaid and prepaid plans (except for Essentials) and Google Fi which also has QCI 6 as well. This means if you want the absolute best from T-Mobile, you want to get a plan directly from them. Even their cheap $10 prepaid 1GB Connect plan has priority data.
Google Fi also gives you unlimited 5G / LTE data when roaming outside the US as well. For their unlimited plus plan, it looks to be on par with the T-Mobile magenta plan in terms of price.
Any excuse to allow the mergers will be found because of that.
In a word, it's plutocracy.
I pay 13 EUR/4 wks (yes, German mobile operators are a bit slippery, too) for 3 GB + unlimited domestic talk and text. If I wanted to waste more time on my mobile, 20 GB would run around 30/4 wks.
Of course, this is with a paid-for handset. I’ve never had a contract over here.
What is the most economical, yet reliable way to receive (and occasionally send) SMSes on a US number while abroad, preferably with a way to transfer an existing US cell number in?
I switched from T-Mobile 3 months ago (when they announced changes to the autopay discount) to Mint. My bill went from $60/mo to $180/yr (breaks down to $15/mo, and I think claiming something is $15/mo when it's actually $180/yr should be illegal, but that's an argument for another day). It's "only" a 5GB plan in comparison to whatever I had before, but my highest month so far has been 1.06GB.
Transferring took 15 minutes. It's the same network.
Sure, many people don't switch out of ignorance, but I know people for whom the reason is simply laziness (because I told them about the cheaper plans).
my brand being me
Some say to go with MVNO but I haven’t found one that would check all the boxes for me. The main networks tend to keep the “premium” features to 1st party customers and MVNO get either lower speed, less data or something.
I wish there was one MVNO that is 1. No BS, 2. Merges 2 or 3 major carriers under one. It could even be the same price..
> I pay 13 EUR/4 wks (yes, German mobile operators are a bit slippery, too) for 3 GB + unlimited domestic talk and text.
Many providers are on par with this in the US. Mint Mobile has 5gb and unlimited talk/text for $15/mo yearly. With PPP adjustment that might be slightly cheaper than your plan.
Now let's talk about how Germans are being abused with their gas prices.
"After paying $12 for Reliance Jio’s new device, customers pay about $1.50 a month for unlimited voice calls and 14 gigabytes of data, a lower rate than services from rival carriers." (Source: https://www.wsj.com/business/telecom/jio-bharat-phone-india-...)
Sigh.
I say this because I also bought an Ooma Hub many years ago for my parents to replace their landline which was advertised as free for life. The company pretty quickly realized that things like 911 incur some fees so all future units included some $10-15/yr in fees, mine does not under the original agreement. This leads me to believe they did the math and figured $12 or so per year lost for a small % of customers is cheap insurance to avoid litigation costs for breaching the original agreement.
The one I might litigate over is T-Mobile has a scam shield service, that's fine except my Google Voice number shows up under my mom's name whenever I call T-Mobile customers, she's never been associated with this number. I just want the record removed. The company that mines the information for this is called FirstOrion and is not complying with repeated deletion requests filled out here https://privacy.firstorion.com/
Just called and canceled after 15+ years—shockingly, they were loath to actually provide the unlock code to port my number out. Switched to an MVNO on the same network that’s >50% cheaper.
https://www.t-mobile.com/news/business/t-mobile-to-acquire-m...
Mint uses the T-Mobile network but is one tier below T-mobile subscribers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pri...
Lower QCI values are better.
> QCI 6 is applied to all of T-Mobile's postpaid and prepaid plans (except for Essentials) and Google Fi which also has QCI 6 as well. This means if you want the absolute best from T-Mobile, you want to get a plan directly from them. Even their cheap $10 prepaid 1GB Connect plan has priority data.
QCI 7 is applied to T-Mobile’s Essentials plan as well as all MVNOs (besides Google Fi) such as Mint, Metro By T-Mobile, US Mobile GSM LTE, and Tello.
I'm not trying to serve websites with my phone, I'm merely communicating.
And I have run out of energy for fighting an increasingly hostile service provider to bring my $130 bill (which used to be less than half that) back down to earth when it could be $15.
AT&T and Verizon had really sweet deals at the beggining of the year to pull alway some of TMO's customers but now that TMO raised their prices, ATT and VZW also unsweetened their plans.
TL;DR - T-Mobile grandfathers but you'll have to call T-Force every time to fight for it. AT&T & Verizon don't hassle their customers.
It’s better than promising free for life and then pulling the plug altogether on the service.
As a Verizon customer, we will have to agree to disagree on this.
Visible is great, but struggles with moving service between phones. I was told it would take at least a week to move from iPhone to iPhone (both eSIM!).
In my experience, US Mobile (not to be confused with US Cellular) is every bit as good as Visible, but has better customer support.
After a year the offer ends and you can keep your current plan at the expensive base rate or you can move to a new plan/offer to get the discounted market rate.
That way they can justify increasing rates over inflation and changing contracts at will.
Try it for a month before porting if you can - in the end it is still an inexpensive mvno and customer service is one of the places they cut costs.
Damn you Ryan Reynolds for selling out.
Occasionally I'll flip to a different MVNO because they usually have new-customer bargains. When I started on Mint I was paying $15/month for 3 months.
The thing about MVNOs is that they have practically zero customer support - but apparently even that's been slashed at full-fare postpaid providers, so maybe I'm not missing much. Verizon used to have legendary customer service, but apparently no longer.
But if you live elsewhere your experience might be totally different. If you live in a different NYC borough to me your experience might be totally different!
A lot of MVNOs offer eSIMs at least. An easy way to do a test drive.
I pay less than $20 a month for a few phone numbers and 5GB data per month. It is also a more private solution since the carrier does not know who I am. I can switch providers with relatively low friction.
Does anyone use the prepaid plans from Mint or Visible, etc? What are the downsides?
As an Italian the big carriers are infamous for unilaterally adding to the bill without any recourse
Or will the mandatory arbitration will still hold?
Edit: namely, this part:
> your debt collection rights, including your right to get information about the original creditor if you ask for it within 30 days of getting validation information from the collector
However they are counting on the misleading practice that most people are busy and won't ask questions.
Lot's of nonsense gets pushed like this.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/15/1163743380/t-mobile-buys-mint...
Even before the acquisition, Mint Mobile was just a T-Mobile MVNO. While Mint Mobile has less expensive plans than T-Mobile, and switching would reduce T-Mobile's profit margin, the quality of Mint Mobile's service is also lower:
> Mint runs on T-Mobile networks so will get the same coverage except it does not get domestic roaming (on AT&T, Verizon, US Cellular, and other small regional carriers such as ACS/GCI in Alaska) that T-Mobile post-paid or pre-paid does. Mint is “deprioritized” (on QCI 7) meaning it will get slower speeds than most T-Mobile plans (that are on QCI 6). How much slower depends on the exact second how many people are on the same tower & band compared to the capacity of the tower/band, but with speeds usually between 20-90% of T-Mobile Magenta/Pre-Paid customers at the same time & location.
https://www.reddit.com/r/mintmobile/comments/wm1ynh/mint_mob...
The U.S. wireless carrier industry is in desperate need of more competition. Price increases (such as this one and T-Mobile's earlier removal of the autopay discount for credit card purchases) are exactly what happen when corporate consolidation (T-Mobile merging with Sprint) reduces the number of high-end carriers from 4 to 3.
This partial monopoly is why they can do this. All of those 'virtual operators' are given deprioritized service but somehow still count as competition when their business is evaluated. Yet another instance of regulatory capture at work.
https://www.reddit.com/r/NoContract/comments/oaophe/data_pri...
What sucks even more is that T-Mobile is STILL the least evil of the only three nationwide wireless carriers in the U.S.