Comments on: I just received a 12% fee increase on my Rogers phone bill.

By: Jordan Richardson

Jordan Richardson — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 11:51:59 +0000

Taking a company like Rogers to court would be an expensive, time-consuming prospect that would wind up costing a hell of a lot more than any price increase that every customer for the company undergoes. Beyond which, I’m sure somewhere in the fine print of the advertisement (of all advertising, in fact) is that little notation that lets companies get away with anything: “Terms and Conditions Apply.”

The fact is that the fine print is where companies hide this sort of thing. Was Rogers being dishonest? Absolutely. But were they doing anything illegal? Nope. As unethical as Rogers is, they’ve covered the legal tracks for long enough to know that they can impose these increases and they will. The devil is in the details.

By the way, I’m looking forward to your next movie, Mr. Bourne.

By: Jason Bourne

Jason Bourne — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 04:37:47 +0000

Stop complaining and take them to court. All the complaining in blogs, forums or bathroom walls is not going to make a difference. What choice do you have? Either bow down and pay it, don’t pay it or take it to court.

By: Matt Klassen

Matt Klassen — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 19:06:40 +0000

Come on Jeff! You’re being way too rigid on this issue. You should really try to be more “exible”. HA! This kind of nonsense is what I have come to expect from Rogers…come to think of it, it’s what I now expect from every Canadian telecom company.

By: Joel

Joel — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:57:21 +0000

Yup, sounds like the Rogers I used to know, but never ever loved. You may know that Rogers has spearheaded the “don’t pay a TV tax” or however the wording goes. Not so much telecom related, but is just typical Rogers style. They complain the big television networks want to charge extra carriage fees to help with their struggling advertising shortfalls. Rogers is all over them for this, and calls it blasphemy and nickel and diming its customers. Funny how Rogers, Bell, Telus, Shaw doesn’t tell you about the nickel and diming in their respective industries through the years. Hope the big networks raised this issue in the recent CRTC hearings.

By: Rob Spicer

Rob Spicer — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:42:07 +0000

It’s unfortunate how one-sided these kinds of customer contracts have become. No doubt if you wanted to cancel your mobile agreement there would be substantial penalties involved.

You could always put in SIP Trunks to your business, allocate a couple DIDs to your home location and run VPN capable IP Phones at home to avoid all of this

It will be interesting to hear their response.

By: Tammy Flores

Tammy Flores — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 15:17:27 +0000

That’s a huge problem. People sign a contract and believe they are safe with that deal for the extent of the contract. WRONG!!! These guys can do what ever they want, when ever they want, but it is the consumer that is trapped. NO MORE CONTRACTS!!!

By: Potos

Potos — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:44:14 +0000

Jeff, I feel you pain.
If you can’t get out of the contract then use your “exibility” to switch to the lowest plan for the remaining term; you’ll lose some features, but Rogers won’t get extra $4, the difference between basic and classic. It is not that $4 really matter, what matters is how greedy corporations treat theirs customers with no shame whatsoever.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:32:54 +0000

This will be very interesting. It is so sad to see so many people still using Bell and Rogers services, if more people left maybe these guys would try harder to satisfy customers.

There is competition for cellular and Internet and their rates are lower than what you pay even with a ‘bundle’ discount from Bell or Rogers. I suggest you switch everything but the TV over once this is through.

By: Nabeel

Nabeel — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 13:36:29 +0000

I just got the same notice and I just signed up as well last July. I called Rogers and they said TOUGH LUCK.

Good luck with your fight Jeff.

By: Jordan Richardson

Jordan Richardson — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 11:25:18 +0000

Wow. They actually misspelled “flexibility.” What a bunch of wankers.