Sprint Surcharges, Taxes, Fees and other Charges

A look at your monthly mobile phone bill will tell you that one needs to pay for surcharges, taxes, fees and other charges in addition to your usage. You are obligated under you cell phone contract to pay these surcharges, taxes, fees and other charges. However, understanding and knowing about these charges may one understanding the need to pay for them. Let's look at some of these charges that are included in your Sprint monthly bill.

Now, these surcharges, taxes, fees and other charges may vary according to your wireless service and your geographical location.

Administrative Charge: this fee is applied per line, per month by Sprint to help defray various costs imposed on Sprint by other telecommunications carriers. It not required to be collected by law and the calculation for this charge are subject to change from time to time.
Regulatory Charge: This fee is collected to help defray costs of various federal, state, and local regulatory programs. It not required to be collected by law and the calculation for this charge are subject to change from time to time.

Gross Receipts Recovery: This fee is charged to recover receipts taxes and excise imposed by some states, counties, and cities. It not required to be collected by law.
State & Local Taxes: Some States, counties, cities, and special taxing districts assess various taxes on Sprint communication services and/or the sales and rentals of wireless phones. These charges are remitted to the jurisdiction that is assessing the tax.

State & Local Required 911 Charges: Some states and localities require wireless carriers to collect a fee for 911 funds. These fees vary by state and locality.

Federal & State Universal Service Fund Assessment: All interstate telecommunications service providers are required to contribute to the Federal Universal Service Fund (USF) and some states may require Sprint to contribute to a State Universal Service Fund (USF).

These are just some of the surcharges, taxes, fees and other charges that are included in your monthly bill. I hope you'll get a better understanding of these fees after this post.

Stay tuned for more mobile phone contract related topics.

Android Update Delay Causes Class Action Suit Against Samsung and T-Mobile

It's has been some time since we featured class action suits in this blog. The last one was on November of last year. But here's a new one filed against the 4th largest US carrier. This new class action suit filed against T-Mobile also involves Samsung and one of the manufacturer's most popular handsets.

If you own a smartphone, then you probably know that software update releases can take a long time. Now, were not talking about fix updates but new versions of operating systems. The Samsung Galaxy S has been notorious for delays in software updates. In this case it's T-Mobile's versin of the Galaxy S, the Samsung Vibrant.

It appears that one user has finally had enough and has filed a filed a class action lawsuit against T-Mobile and Samsung. This complainant claims that both companies have violated the law concerning Unfair and Deceptive Consumer Business Practices. The suit argues that these telecom companies have the deceived users regard ing the hardware, and software reliability of the Samsung Vibrant.

So do you think that this class action suit is valid?

I think that it shows that smartphone users are concerned with OS update delays. After all, no one wants to be stuck with a device with outdated and defective software.

Tune in to this blog for more issues on mobile phone contracts and related topics.

Verizon Wireless Ends its "New Every Two" UPgrade program

The start of 2010 brought some major changes in the US mobile phone arena. Of course, the coming of the CDMA iPhone for Verizon Wireless is the biggest one so far. However, Verizon also delivered some disappointment when it informed subscribers of the end to the popular "New Every Two" upgrade program.

But what is the "New Every Two" program anyway? Well, this program offers Verizon subscribers a credit of $30 to $100 toward a new phone every two years. So you see why it has become quite popular.

Unfortunately, this program will halt as of January 16. The company will stop offering the credit to new customers and won't re-enroll current customers in the program. Consumers can also say goodbye to the early upgrade program.

Brenda Raney, a spokeswoman for Verizon Wireless, has indicated that the carrier plans to shifting to a "simpler program" in which customers will be offered promotions and discounts directly. She stated in an email that "We are a retail business so the New Every Two promotion is evolving to be more in line with how retailers work with customers today. This will include promotional offers via e-mail based on preferences that are more tailored to customers' needs."

This means that customers signing up after January 16, they will not get to access this program. However, Verizon Wireless customers under contract prior to January 16, 2011, who meet the qualifications for New Every Two program will be grandfathered so they can use the benefit one more time.

That's it for this update. Tune in next week for more wireless contract related news and updates.

Verizon Wireless Contracts and Relocation

Relocation appears to be a major concern for mobile phone contract customers. And rightfully so since coverage and network strength may vary greatly from one area to another. Fortunately for Verizon Wireless contract consumers, the carrier has devoted a program to deal with this eventuality.

The Verizon Wireless Customer Relocation program caters to customers moving from one area to another. It handles the complications that relates to mobile phone contracts of consumers who decide to relocate to another area.

Relocating Consumers should contact Customer Service at (800) 922-0204 and a representative will help determine what changes need to be made on the account.

But the big question is, will you need to sign a new Verizon Wireless contract when you relocate?
Here is the carrier's answer:

It depends on the plan type. If you are keeping the same plan and promotion in the new market as the old, your contract will not be extended. The contract, however, will be extended if you purchase equipment at our discounting prices, or accept a new promotion.

But what about fees? Well, there are no fees for changing your calling plan or your area of use. However, prorate charges will apply if you change your service.

Check out the Verizon Wireless Customer Relocation program if yu have more questions.

That's it for this post. Tune in next week for more mobile phone contract information and related news.

Cell Phone Contracts and Taxes

A cell phone bill contains information that can cause confusion among consumers. The taxes included in your bill are a good example of this especially for consumers who have recently transferred to another state.

Taxes and governmental fees are included in your bill. That's why your residential or business street address is very important because it allows a carrier to determine which jurisdiction's taxes and assessments to collect for you cell phone bill. This information is emphasized in your mobile phone contract.

On average American cell phone consumers are taxed 15.75 percent on every month's cell phone bill. This average percentage includes state and local taxes as well as federal taxes.

Now, calculating the cell phone tax that goes into your bill may not be accurate. This means that a carrier may be overcharging you. Of course, it may also mean that you are being charged less than the amount that you should be charged.

So how do you know that a carrier isn't over charging you with taxes?

Well, you need to know that you are paying for several cell phone taxes. Your bill includes the federal tax, which is about 5.05 percent of your phone bill a and is used to fund the Universal Service Fund.

Then there are state taxes and local taxes and fee. Some states also include a sales tax ands add fees for e911 service. Refer to MyWireless.org to get the average state and local tax rates for your residence.

You may contact your carrier if you feel that you are being overcharged with the taxes on your bill. It's the carrier's responsibility to charge you the correct tax based on your billing address. A refund is justified if a carrier is not applying the appropriate rates.

That's it for this pice of info on cell phone taxes. Tune in next week for more information on cell phone contracts and related topics.

The Anti-Bill Shock Rules

There have been recent talks of the FCC's efforts to lessen the occurrences of bill shock. But what is "bill shock" anyway and why should consumers be concerned over it.

Well, here's a good illustration of bill shock from Cnet:

When Kerfye Pierre returned home to Maryland from a visit to Haiti in February after the devastating earthquake, she received yet another shock: a $30,000 phone bill from T-Mobile USA.

Pierre, who had gone to Haiti to visit her sister who was having a baby, was there when the earthquake struck in January. Before her trip, she had suspended her phone service to avoid expensive charges. But after the disaster struck, she was told by a T-Mobile representative that she could use a courtesy plan that allowed her to communicate with people back home.

What she didn't realize was that the plan only included voice minutes. But because the voice network was so unreliable after the quake, Kerfye used texts, e-mails, and Facebook posts from her phone to update loved ones.

Eventually, Pierre was able to get a $25,000 credit to her account, but she still owes T-Mobile $5,000.

Have you ever experienced this? Well, I sure hope not. Fortunately, the FCC has started making a way to counter bill shock. The agency has proposed new regulation that would require wireless operators to alert customers with a text or voice message when they are about to exceed a bundle of voice, text, or data.

The FCC also suggested that wireless operators notify customers when they are about to incur international or other roaming charges that are not covered by their monthly plans, and if they will be charged at higher than normal rates.

The agency proposed that all wireless carriers offer easy to find and use tools that help customers monitor usage and review usage balances.

Hopefully, these efforts will not go to waste and consumers will be able to avoid any incidences of bill shock.

That's it for this post. See you next week for more wireless contract news and related topics.

Pros and Cons of Wireless Contract Services

Last week, we discussed the pros and cons of prepaid offerings. This week, we'll go to the other side and look at the advantages and disadvantages of phones and plans that come with a contract agreement.

Hopefully, this info will help you decide between prepaid services or post pais offers that require a wireless contract.

Contract Pros:

• Subsidized price on mobile phones: Contract consumers can get subsidized prices on phone upgrades every two years.
• Strong phone selection. the latest and greatest cell phones on the market come with contract plans.

Contract Cons:

• Early Termination Fees: If you break your contract, then a hefty fee awaits.
• Expensive: contract plans could be more expensive than a prepaid offering especially for consumers with an individual cell phone plan with expensive data and texting services.
• Credit check: a credit check is a requirement for those who want a taste of contract goodness.

That's it for now. Keep on visiting for more information on mobile phone contracts as well as related news and updates.

Pros and Cons of Going Prepaid

The current trend in consumer preferences show that a majority of subscribers are choosing prepaid options of phones and services that come with a wireless contract. Should you also choose the prepaid route?

Well, here are the advantage and disadvantages of prepaid services. This should help one decided to choose this option or go for services with mobile phone contracts.


Prepaid Pros:

• Cheaper. Prepaid can be less than some postpaid contract service plans depending on the consumer's usage pattern.
• Absence of credit checks. Prepaid has historically offered the best option for consumers with less than perfect credit.
• No wireless contract. One can cancel service at any time without a penalty. yeah, no need to worry about annoying ETF's or early termination fees.

Prepaid Cons:

• Can be more expensive. Individual usage patterns may cost an individual more. Contract family plans can be less expensive than some prepaid deal.
• Limited Mobile phones. prepaid handsets are getting better but the best mobile phones come with a contract
• No subsidized price. Consumers will need to pay the full retail price for a new device that may locked to a single operator's network.

That's it for this post. Check out our blog every week for more on mobile phone contracts and related subjects

AT&T's iPhone Upgrade Policies

The length of a consumer's wireless contract is one of the factors that determine upgrade eligibility to get the new and exciting iPhone 4.

The reduced pricing on the new Apple handset applies to AT&T customers whose contracts have already expired or for current iPhone users. However, the case is different for subscribers using phones other than an iPhone.

Aside from mobile phone contract length, the carrier also takes into account other factors such as spending level and paying his bills on time.

Existing iPhone customers who are eligible for an upgrade between June 7 and the end of this year to get the best pricing for the iPhone 4 with a two-year term commitment. They can purchase the handset for $399 for the 16GB model and $499 for the 32GB variant. A new two-year mobile phone contract.

Only current iPhone customers can upgrade six months early. All other AT&T subscribers must wait until their existing contracts expire.

These factors pretty much sum up the carrier's policy on upgrading to the new iPhone 4. The length of your wireless contract is very important but other factors will be considered as well. In this instant it pays to be a faithful AT&T subscriber.

That's it for this post. Tune in for more wireless contract news and related articles.

AT&T's Grounds for Terminating your Wireless Agreemeent

Do you know that AT&T can terminate your wireless contract without notice? Well, you should. After all, its part of the company's terms and agreements.

You can terminate your wireless contract with a carrier but you need to pay an early termination fee and other penalties. However, AT&T can also "interrupt or terminate your Services without notice" if they find you guilty of the following violations:

• for any conduct that we believe violates this Agreement,
• if you behave in an abusive, derogatory, or similarly unreasonable manner with any of our representatives,
• if we discover that you are underage,
• if you fail to make all required payments when due,
• if we have reasonable cause to believe that your Equipment is being used for an unlawful purpose or in a way that (i) is harmful to, interferes with, or may adversely affect our Services or the network of any other provider, (ii) interferes with the use or enjoyment of Services received by others, (iii) infringes intellectual property rights, (iv) results in the publication of threatening or offensive material, or (v) constitutes spam or other abusive messaging or calling, a security risk, or a violation of privacy,
• if you provided inaccurate credit information, or
• we believe your credit has deteriorated and you refuse to pay any requested advance payment or deposit.

I would avoid committing any of these errors if you want to continue your service with AT&T.

That's it for this piece of info on the wireless contracts of mobile hones. Tune in every week for more mobile phone contracts information.

T-Mobile's Early Termination Fee Schedule

T-Mobile has a pro-rated ETF (early termination fee policy) which means that consumers pay depending on the length of time have left on their mobile phone contracts. However, this system can also be confusing since consumers do ot have a fixed penalty for terminating a T-Mobile contract.

So how do you calculate your T-Mobile early termination fee?

The carrier has provided an ETF schedule that allows subscribers to estimate their fees as long as they know their contract start date (which is also listed on their wireless contract):

As listed in these Terms & Conditions, the early termination fee is $200, if termination occurs with more than 180 days remaining on your term; $100, if termination occurs with 91 to 180 days remaining on your term; $50, if termination occurs with 31 to 91 days remaining on your term; and the lesser of $50 or your monthly recurring charges (including any applicable taxes and fees), if termination occurs in the last 30 days of your term.

If you wish to know exact information about the term of contracts and the early termination fee that would apply if you cancel your then you should can call T-Mobile Customer Care.

That's it for this post. Tune in every week for more on mobile phone contracts and wireless contract topics.

How to Access Wireless Contract and ETF Information Online

Contracts are notorious for the tricky terms and hard-to-read fine print they employ. This can lead to painful fees and fines for consumers who find it hard to find out when their contract expires and other important details on their contracts. Fortunately, some important mobile phone contract and early termination fee information can be accessed right on your computer. Here are a few tips to help you find out:

AT&T

• Customers can view their contract expiration date when accessing their account online (Att.com/mywireless).
• To find out whether the contract has ended or provide a specific date for expiration simply click on the "My Profile" tab on the far right of the screen and click on "User Info."
• This section also provides a hyperlink on ETFs, which directs customers to an Answer Center that provides specific details on AT&T's ETF policy and fees as well as a two-page "Customer Service Summary" which is a PDF detailing the customer's service, plan, and support shortcuts.

Sprint

Log into My Sprint, select "My Account," and scroll over the "I Want To" tab in "About My Devices." Look for the "I Want To" tab and select the "See My Contract Details" link once the box pops up. This will lead to information on when their wireless contract expires.

Sprint provides a chart that allows customers to calculate their prorated fees. IT also provides a link from the site footer to Sprint.com/terms and conditions and Sprint.com/etf.

T-Mobile

T-Mobile subscribers can get general information about T-Mobile's ETFs within the "Terms & Conditions" link at the bottom of the home page on the carrier's main website . The "MyT-Mobile" account page also provides a link to general ETF policy details via the "Terms & Conditions" link.

T-Mobile does not currently include details about individual ETFs on the customer's online account site.

Verizon Wireless

Go to MyVerizon.com and click on "Change Plan".


That's it for this post. Tune in for more info on mobile phone contracts and related news.

No-Contract iPhone 4 No Longer Available Online

Want to purchase the Apple iPhone 4 without an AT&T contract? Well, you won't be able to do it online. Apple's online web store and AT&T's web store no longer offers the iPhone 4 without a new two-year contract.

Does this mean that one can't purchase the handset without a wireless contract?

Well, no since both Apple Stores and AT&T-owned retail stores are still selling the iPhone 4 without a contract. Consumers can purchase the device for $599 (16GB version) and $699 (32GB version). The subsidized prices of the 16GB and 32GB iPhone 4 remained the same.

Carriers and manufacturers allow consumers to purchase a device without a mobile phone contract as long as they pay the whole retail price. The subsidized price is offered with a 2 year contract and an early termination fee.

The iPhone 4 is one of the hottest mobile phones in the market. It provides new features such as multi-touch, Retina Display, 5 MP camera and a front facing camera.

Tune in for more news and information of wireless contracts news and updates.

US Carriers Respond to Rising Text Messaging Rates Concerns

Here's an update to the concerns over the rising rates of Text Massaging that are being charged by Wireless carriers.

A few weeks ago, I made a post about Sen. Herb Kohl, chair of the antitrust subcommittee sending a letter to the four major U.S. wireless network providers. The letter conveyed the senator's and consumer's concerns about the doubling of the rates for sending text messages even though the cost involved with sending them remained constant. The letter was sent ot the offices of AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless.

Now, these carriers have expressed their response to Sen. Kohl's letter on the doubling of the rates for sending text messages. According to an RCRWireless article, AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless have denied that anything illegal was involved in the doubling of the rates for sending text messages.

According to the carriers, they have offered competitive bulk texting plans that have actually made the costs of sending text messages more affordable for mobile phone to consumers. They also would like to express that thay have suffered an increase in antitrust class-action lawsuits due to the congressional questions about the rising text messaging charges.

T-Mobile's representative defended his company by declaring that charges for text messages charged by the carrier has even dropped by half. He also expressed that the concerns over the rising cost of text messaging are exaggerated and untrue. Sprint and AT&T have also released public responses to Sen. Kohl's letter. Interestingly, Verizon Wireless requested that its response remain confidential.

The wireless carriers want to make an effective response to the inquiry because a number of class-action lawsuits have been filed against them citing Sen. Kohl's letter as the foundation for the complaints. They want to clear up this problem as soon as possible since text messaging is a major part of their revenues.

Well, I expected the major US carriers to respond effectively to this inquiry. Text messaging has steadily grown in popularityover the years so they have to take it seriously. Of course, the antitrust class-action lawsuits that have been filed against them also needs to be taken seriously. Tune in to this blog for more updates on this wireless contract issue and other related news.

Roaming in Rural Areas may be Enforced by Legislation

Here's an interesting update for mobile phone users residing in rural areas. A US Representative has introduced legislation that aims to require telecom recipients of rural universal-service funds to provide automatic roaming to wireless service carriers. But before we discuss this bill let us us first discuss mobile phone roaming.

Now I have discussed roaming in my previous blog posts but it wouldn't hurt to give another little introduction to this wireless contract term. Roaming as used in wireless telecommunications refers to the extending of connectivity service in a location that is different from the home location where the service was registered.

Roaming is significant because it allows users to communicate beyond their wireless networks. It is an important service to those who live in rural areas are because the reach of wireless networks is usually limited. Roaming is also significant to customers because it's an important part of their monthly mobile phone service bills. If you "roam" a lot when you use your mobile phone, then you might be looking at a huge bill. Now let's proceed to the legislation that might force roaming in rural areas.

The bill is officially named the Universal Roaming Act of 2008 and was introduced by Rep. Henry Waxman of California. This legislation aims to attach the automatic roaming obligation to any affiliate of a telecom carrier that receives high-cost USF subsidies. Some experts feel that this bill will affect the current debates on on roaming rights by some auction winners that cannot yet access their spectrum. However, the current economic crisis will keep congress busy so further action on the bill is expected to be done next year.

This legislation has been met with some opposition from large carriers because they feel that they not be forced to provide access to licensees that own spectrum but have yet to established networks. If they provide roaming access to these licenses, then a delay in build out of wireless systems is a good possibility.

However, the Universal Roaming Act of 2008 also have its share of supporters. The Rural Cellular Association feels that the legislation introduced by Waxman is far-reaching and beneficial to smaller wireless carriers. The Rural Cellular Association would also want to abolish the cap on USF subsidies given to wireless carriers desiring to build systems in rural areas.

Well, I guess we have to wait until the economic crisis has subsided to gauge whether this bill will pass. This legislation has significant impacts on the current roaming scene so it will be interesting to see further action on it.

Courts Hand Different Rulings on Carriers Billing Litigation

Here's an update to the complaints that have been filed against a few mobile phone carriers. According to a RCRWireless.com article, various federal courts made different decisions on the billing litigation against Verizon Wireless and AT&T Mobility. The article also indicated that the number of antitrust class-action texting lawsuits filed against major US carriers have increased steadily. All of these factors indicate that the mobile phone industry will continue to face challenges from frustrated customers and plaintiffs’ lawyers.

Let's look at the various federal courts decisions on the billing litigation. Verizon Wireless scored well when a U.S. District judge ruled that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts New Jersey law. This means that Verizon's motion on the enforceable arbitration clause was granted. However, the story doesn't end there.

Verizon Wireless did not scroe well with other courts including the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. These courts ruled in favor of consumers by deciding that class-action complaints cannot be necessarily foreclosed by individual arbitration clauses.

AT&T also faced some rough waters in the decisions made on the litigations and suits that they are facing. For instance, a federal court in San Diego did not rule in favor of the top US mobile phone carrier. The case filed against AT&T and other carriers including T-Mobile for charging customers for unauthorized mobile content on their monthly bills was not dismissed. The judge in charge of this case has temporarily ordered that AT&T cannot settle the class action case in Georgia.

However, AT&T Mobility has not yet raised the flag of surrender even though, the judge ruled in favor of the consumers. The company is currently reviewing and considering their next course of action.

Well, it seems that the battle is till raging. Class action suits are still being filed against carriers despite the waivers on the wireless contracts they require from their customers. We just have to wait and see who gains the upper hand on this one. Weill it be the consumers or will the carriers win at the end of the day. Tune in to this blog to find out.

Senate Questions Wireless Carries on Rising Text Rates

Here's some interesting info for mobile phone subscribers who send a lot of text messages. According to this article, Sen. Herb Kohl, chair of the antitrust subcommittee sent a letter to the four major U.S. wireless network providers.

Sen. Kohl's letter was delivered to the offices of AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless. The chair of the antitrust subcommittee wanted the letter to convey his concerns about the doubling of the rates for sending text messages even though the cost involved with sending them remained constant.

Here's the statement released by Sen. Herb Kohl the chair of the antitrust subcommittee:

"What is particularly alarming about this industrywide rate increase is that it does not appear to be justified by rising costs in delivering text messages. Also of concern is that it appears that each of companies has changed the price for text messaging at nearly the same time, with identical price increases. This conduct is hardly consistent with the vigorous price competition we hope to see in a competitive marketplace."

The current charge for sending text messages is 20 cents which represents double the messaging rates imposed by carriers three years ago. AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless serve roughly 90 percent of cell phone users in the US and charge them the same text messaging rate.

The letter sent by Senator Kohl contains a formal request to the network operators asking them to explain the reasons behind the text price increases. Sen. Kohl is also asking AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless to justify the 20 cents rates compared to the rates of sending / receiving emails and other services.

As of the making of this wireless contract post, the recipients of Sen. Kohl's letter has not yet responded. Well, this is certainly an interesting development. I for one, do not comprehend why the rate for text messages has doubled when the cost of sending them remained the same. It would be interesting to see how AT&T, Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon Wireless respond to this letter. That is, if they will offer any response.

Standardized Billing System Might Solve Third-party Services Struggles

Here's an interesting wireless contract scoop. According to this article, Mobile phone carriers are trying to find ways to gain more control their third-party content partners. Third-party content is a part of most mobile phone contracts. Let's delve into this story.

Apparently, carriers like Sprint have been finding ways of dealing with their partners. Sprint for example have have warned their partners that they will forfeit their profits and lose their short codes if they continue to violate Mobile Marketing Association guidelines. Some Mobile Marketing Association guidelines violations involve failure to report billing errors and high refund rates. This move Sprint has encourage other mobile phone service providers to make similar warning to their third-party partners.

But why are the carriers trying to control third-party providers? Well, the main reasons seems to be the increasing complaints in the form of lawsuits from consumers and advocacy groups. All the major carriers and content-subscription service providers have been targeted by consumer advocacy groups.

Mobile phone carriers are also concerned about the reaction of customers to the incompetence and deception of some third-party providers produce. These unsatisfactory performance may cause the carriers to lose customers. Complaints about poor third-party also increases expensive calls to customer-service centers of mobile phone carriers.

There have been some suggestions that a standardized mobile payment platform will be a solution to the problems associated with third-party providers. A standardized mobile payment platform may also ease some the m-commerce space problems. However, a system in the US would would require an enormous effort from carriers and service providers. It may take some time before such a system can be implemented in the US.

let's take a look at some wireless contract policies that deal with third-party services. Here's a statement from Alltel's wireless contract:

The Services will be provided either by us or by our third party vendors or contractors. We reserve the right to change or modify the source of any Services provided to you without notice.

And here's the statement form AT&T's contract:

Third-party content or service providers may impose additional charges. Policies regarding intellectual property, privacy and other policies or terms of use may differ among AT&T's content or service providers and you are bound by such policies or terms when you visit their respective sites or use their services. It is your responsibility to read the rules or service agreements of each content provider or service provider. Any information you involuntarily or voluntarily provide third parties is governed by their policies or terms. The accuracy, appropriateness, content, completeness, timeliness, usefulness, security, safety, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, transmission or correct sequencing of any application, information or downloaded data is not guaranteed or warranted by AT&T or any content providers or other third party. Delays or omissions may occur.

Tune in to this blog to know more about wireless contracts and related topics.

FCC Undecided on Changing Mobile Phone Roaming Rules

Here's some interesting wireless contract scoop for those who make a lot of roaming calls. According to a Reuters article, the Federal Communications Commission or FCC has not yet made a decision on chaining certain cellular roaming issues that have caused some problems for some mobile phone carriers.

This delay on changing the mobile phone roaming rules was seen as significant since smaller carriers have been expecting a decidion on this issue. Let's look at the heart of this conflict since roaming is one of the many aspects of mobile phone contracts.

The problem lies on whether carriers should be allowed to roam in areas where they own airwaves, but have not built networks, are affecting smaller carriers. Smaller carriers own spectrum in certain markets but lack the means to build the wireless networks and so they have to rely on o roam on the existing networks of larger rivals. The FCC has decided to look at this issue after the commission reaffirmed the rights of smaller carriers to roam on the networks of bigger wireless companies about a year ago.

Minor wireless network providers wanted to gain access to areas where they had acquired spectrum. unfortunately, they lack the means to build networks top exploit those areas. Neverthe less, thses small carriers wanted to preserve their right to roam in those areas.

Earlier, the FCC made a proposal that allowed smaller carriers who owned unused spectrum could continue roaming for four years before they lost roaming rights. The FCC wanted to give smaller carriers time to build out their own networks or to give the spectrum back to the government and continue roaming.

However, the FCC's five commissioners were unable to agree on the proposal so it was withdrawn. Some commissioners were concerned that they need more time to study the issue while some wanted to grant a longer phase-in period to smaller carriers.

The FCC did not indicate a specific time frame for making a decision in this issue. Well, this looks like an issue that won't go away soon. This issue affects regional customers who might lose their ability to make roaming calls if the FCC did not grant smaller carriers to roam on major net works.

Tune in to this blog for more news and updates regarding issues related to mobile phone contracts.

Sprint's ETF Lawsuit Loss Could Shake the Industry!

It been a few weeks since I've made a post here. The wireless contract scene has been quite so There wasn't anything to write about. But that's not the case right now. I've just found out that Sprint lost a lawsuit on its ETF wireless contract policy. Let's explore the details of this story.

Apparently, Sprint's early termination fees has violated a state law according to a California state judge when he ruled against the company. The members of the class who sued Sprint for it's ETF were awarded a total of $73 million in reparation for the fees.

The judge's tentative ruling says that Sprint will have to pay $18.3 million to customers who sued over the fees. Sprint should also credit $54.8 million to those who were charged but did not pay the fee. Well, Sprint seems to be in a bind now but the company does have two weeks to contest the ruling.

Not on to the bigger picture. The judge is also considering other lawsuits against telecommunications companies over mobile phone contract policies covering early termination fees. And recently, Verizon Wireless agreed to pay $21 million to settle an identical lawsuit. Overall, things are not looking well for mobile phone carriers.

FCC representatives refused to release any comment on this pivotal court decision however they did indicate that it will not affect the agency's plans on ETF. Currently, the FCC is dealing with lobbying over how best to handle the ETF policies in the wireless contracts of carriers.

The FCC has been asked by various Telecommunications companies to regulate the fees. They want the agency to protect them from class action lawsuits in state courts. The FCC has released information on a plan in which the cancellation fees would be reduced over the life of the contract.

Customers and consumer groups have continually assailed the ETF policies in the mobile phone contracts of cell phone carriers. Perhaps this important decision will fuel the efforts to regulate this troubl;e some fee. Tune in to this blog for more wireless contracts info, news and updates.