As a mortgage lender, welcome to the full transparency. The only people that complain about it are the people that have a lot to hide.
ISPs complain that listing every fee is too hard, urge FCC to scrap new rule
Submitted 1 year ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
Tygr@lemmy.world 1 year ago
beebarfbadger@lemmy.world 1 year ago
All I hear is “we´d lose too many our costumers if we had to tell them how we´re fleecing them.”
alex@lemmy.daqfx.com 1 year ago
Lol. I hope you don’t genuinely feel that a 200 page contract presented to you in a time sensitive environment during one of the most stressful times of your life is an actual fix the convoluted process of home buying.
It presents no real options. You just have to sign 50 random pages of shit you don’t understand and nobody explains or walk away from the purchase often with sizable financial losses at that point.
Chriszz@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s too hard can you pwease make it easier for us corporations 🥺 👉👈
Dasnap@lemmy.world 1 year ago
BradleyUffner@lemmy.world 1 year ago
And yet they still manage to list them perfectly fine on my bill.
Saryn@kbin.social 1 year ago
They just don't want people to look at their bills and see:
C-Suite 3rd Yacht Fund: $2.39
Monopoly Maintenence Fee: $5.25
Lobby/Bribe Fee: $3.16AttackBunny@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I have to itemize every invoice, for ever customer. Sometimes 100+ items long, and it’s rarely the same, customer to customer. I’m pretty sure they can figure out how to do it too.
Poob@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
If Comcast hates it, it must be the best solution. In fact, I think we America should run all laws by Comcast executives
ShellMonkey@lemmy.socdojo.com 1 year ago
Local ISP here I actually had to search on third praty sites to get any idea what their business tier costs since their site refused to say. When they’re allowed to hide things to a point where you need to go through several pages to know what upload speed and data caps they offer it’s obvious they’re looking to screw with people. Top tier was about $150/month for 6tb originally, then during the covid years it got bumped to 8tb because reasons, bow the standard top tier is about $130 with a 3tb cap. Make up your mind people, are you charging for the speed or the volume?
devious@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This article has serious “not the onion” vibes!
FoxBJK@midwest.social 1 year ago
Why am I paying all this money then? I mean, assuming we wanna believe this bullshit premise. Your computers can’t itemize a bill!?
RememberTheApollo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If they created the fee they can list it. I’m sure accounting has a breakdown of how profitable each and every fee is.
autotldr@lemmings.world [bot] 1 year ago
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Five lobby groups representing cable companies, fiber and DSL providers, and mobile operators have repeatedly urged the Federal Communications Commission to eliminate the requirement before new broadband labeling rules take effect.
The filing was submitted by NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, which represents Comcast, Charter, Cox, and other cable companies.
The trade groups met on Wednesday with the legal advisors to FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel and Commissioner Brendan Carr, according to the filing.
The FCC rules aren’t in force yet because they are subject to a federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review under the US Paperwork Reduction Act.
The five trade groups complain that this would require ISPs “to display the pass-through of fees imposed by federal, state, or local government agencies on the consumer broadband label.”
ISPs could instead include all costs in their advertised rates to give potential customers a clearer idea of how much they would have to pay each month.
I’m a bot and I’m open source!
there1snospoon@ttrpg.network 1 year ago
Why would it be easier for the consumer to get one line item “ALL FEES” on their bill, instead of a more granular, itemized bill that explains the reasons I’m paying for something?
It isn’t easier. It’s just more obfuscating.
Spacemanspliff@midwest.social 1 year ago
Because then they don’t have to come up with technobabble to disguise what the fees are, can you imagine if they actually listed “yatcht fee” the peasents would revolt.
TauriWarrior@aussie.zone 1 year ago
“The labels must be displayed to consumers at the point of sale and include monthly price, additional charges, speeds, data caps, additional charges for data, and other information.”
Its talking about point of sale not bills
McBinary@kbin.social 1 year ago
How about we just scrap the ISP instead and start over with a company that can list what they are charging for? This isn't hard. Either it's a legitimate fee or it's not. I have a feeling they just don't want to disclose that they have been ripping people off for a few extra bucks every bill for the last decade.
rambaroo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That’s exactly what this is. They obviously have software that calculates the fees, so claiming they can’t tell us why it’s building when they clearly know why already.
billiam0202@lemmy.world 1 year ago
They don’t want customers to know how much of the fees are “non-mandatory,” i.e. what is imposed by the ISP but not required by law.
FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 year ago
That’s what it is. They don’t want people to know what extra fees they’re tacking on. Of course they can list what they’re charging for. Is their accounting so bad they don’t know who they’re charging for what? I seriously doubt it. This is as easy as a spreadsheet output.
valkyre09@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If they’re so unsure what they’re charging people, perhaps it might be worth looking into their reported earnings and tax paid.