Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Surprise Verizon charge / Service in St. Louis

Last response: in Network Providers
Share
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:15:47 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I live in Maryland Heights, MO, a suburb of St. Louis. I first got a cell
phone 20 months ago. I went with Verizon and signed a 2-year contract,
which is up this Sept. All of a sudden, Verizon added a charge of $1.96 to
my invoice.

I immediately called Customer Service. They told me the charge was "beyond
their control" because it's for some sort of tax the City of Maryland
Heights is now charging Verizon. IE, Verizon is passing this tax on to me.

I'm appalled Verizon is apparently expecting their customers to pay their
taxes, regardless of when or if it was levied by the town I live in. I've
filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business Bureau. I'm also
wondering if what Verizon has done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT
in my original contract price.

Has anyone here had this done to them by Verizon?

Secondly, I'm now considering switching to Sprint in September when my
contract expires. Does anyone have any thoughts on Sprint vs. Verizon for
the St. Louis area? My general understanding is that Sprint has better
phones, better sound quality, and better prices. Verizon, though, has
better coverage nationwide. Currently, I'm in Verizon's America's Choice
plan. I'm a low to average cell phone user, so don't need tons of minutes.

Thanks for your comments.
April 13, 2005 11:15:48 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Harvest 314 via CellPhoneKB.com wrote:
> I live in Maryland Heights, MO, a suburb of St. Louis. I first got a cell
> phone 20 months ago. I went with Verizon and signed a 2-year contract,
> which is up this Sept. All of a sudden, Verizon added a charge of $1.96 to
> my invoice.
>
> I immediately called Customer Service. They told me the charge was "beyond
> their control" because it's for some sort of tax the City of Maryland
> Heights is now charging Verizon. IE, Verizon is passing this tax on to me.
>
> I'm appalled Verizon is apparently expecting their customers to pay their
> taxes, regardless of when or if it was levied by the town I live in. I've
> filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business Bureau. I'm also
> wondering if what Verizon has done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT
> in my original contract price.
>
> Has anyone here had this done to them by Verizon?
>
> Secondly, I'm now considering switching to Sprint in September when my
> contract expires. Does anyone have any thoughts on Sprint vs. Verizon for
> the St. Louis area? My general understanding is that Sprint has better
> phones, better sound quality, and better prices. Verizon, though, has
> better coverage nationwide. Currently, I'm in Verizon's America's Choice
> plan. I'm a low to average cell phone user, so don't need tons of minutes.
>
> Thanks for your comments.

Your complaints should be directed to Maryland Heights. The tax they
passed is on users from Maryland Heights. Why would you expect me or
other Verizon users to pay taxes to Maryland Heights (which would be the
case if VZW didn't pass the tax payment directly on to those residents)
when we don't live there.

Taxes like that are originated by cowardly politicians who think they
can apply nuisance taxes instead of either being fiscally responsible or
raising property or other taxes.
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:15:49 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

George wrote:
>
> Your complaints should be directed to Maryland Heights.
> The tax they passed is on users from Maryland Heights.
> Why would you expect me or other Verizon users to pay
> taxes to Maryland Heights (which would be the case if VZW
> didn't pass the tax payment directly on to those
> residents) when we don't live there.
>
> Taxes like that are originated by cowardly politicians
> who think they can apply nuisance taxes instead of either
> being fiscally responsible or raising property or other
> taxes.

Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 

"I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business Bureau.
I'm also wondering if what Verizon has done is legal. Obviously, this
charge was NOT in my original contract price."

-Quick
Related resources
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:15:50 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Quick wrote:
>
> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>
> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business
> Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has done is legal.
> Obviously, this charge was NOT in my original contract price."
>
> -Quick

Read your contract again.. something about applicable state and local
taxes....
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:15:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

"Peter Pan" <PeterPanNOSPAM@AkamailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:3c5ktoF6lqolhU1@individual.net...
> Quick wrote:
>>
>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>
>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business
>> Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has done is legal.
>> Obviously, this charge was NOT in my original contract price."
>>
>> -Quick
>
> Read your contract again.. something about applicable state and local
> taxes....
>
Look at all of the other miscellaneous bull*&$^ charges on your phone bill.
Also look at your gas, water, electric, cable, trash, etc bills and you'll
see a whole bunch of local, state, and federal charges and surcharges (read:
taxes) that your providers all pass on to you, the consumer.

Don't act so surprised!
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:15:51 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Peter Pan wrote:
> Quick wrote:
>>
>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>
>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better
>> Business Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has
>> done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT in my
>> original contract price."
>>
>> -Quick
>
> Read your contract again.. something about applicable
> state and local taxes....

O jees, I've got to work on my presentation. smilie faces
or something...

When I said "some nuisances should be taxed" the
"nuisance" I was refering to was the OP... His city
is imposing a tax directly on the users of that *particular*
city. It's not clear if he realised that. Even if he did I
think it a bit extreme to expect VZW to eat that. Kind
of like expecting GM to pick up the state imposed road
use tax for driving your Chevy. In any event, he fired
off to the BBB, and is looking into if it's actionable...
Sure, maybe, eventually, all that could be justified after
pursuing the issue to a greater extent through less
extreme/more normal channels but it struck me as
an initial, knee jerk, over reaction ...nuisance...

anybody pick that up from my first reply?

-Quick
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 11:57:20 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

The City of Maryland Heights is not charging Verizon, they are charging you
the ultimate user. Verizon has no other choice than to pass this tax onto
you. It doesn't matter if this tax was listed on the contract or not, a
municipality can vote in a new tax at any time and you, the user is
responsible. You can complain to Verizon, the Better Business Bureau, God
himself and nothing will change. By the way, if you change carriers, you
will still owe the tax.

Now your other question. Yes, Sprint has a lot of new phones but Verizon
still has them beat hands down. I was in Saint Lewis, and then drove to
Rock Island, IL and then to Peoria, IL and I had service all the way with
Verizon. My partner has Sprint and had to borrow my phone several times to
make a call.

Bruce D. Brown


"Harvest 314 via CellPhoneKB.com" <forum@nospam.CellPhoneKB.com> wrote in
message news:a84b89097c80447b91eb928f9a4df329@CellPhoneKB.com...
>I live in Maryland Heights, MO, a suburb of St. Louis. I first got a cell
> phone 20 months ago. I went with Verizon and signed a 2-year contract,
> which is up this Sept. All of a sudden, Verizon added a charge of $1.96 to
> my invoice.
>
> I immediately called Customer Service. They told me the charge was "beyond
> their control" because it's for some sort of tax the City of Maryland
> Heights is now charging Verizon. IE, Verizon is passing this tax on to me.
>
> I'm appalled Verizon is apparently expecting their customers to pay their
> taxes, regardless of when or if it was levied by the town I live in. I've
> filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business Bureau. I'm
> also
> wondering if what Verizon has done is legal. Obviously, this charge was
> NOT
> in my original contract price.
>
> Has anyone here had this done to them by Verizon?
>
> Secondly, I'm now considering switching to Sprint in September when my
> contract expires. Does anyone have any thoughts on Sprint vs. Verizon for
> the St. Louis area? My general understanding is that Sprint has better
> phones, better sound quality, and better prices. Verizon, though, has
> better coverage nationwide. Currently, I'm in Verizon's America's Choice
> plan. I'm a low to average cell phone user, so don't need tons of minutes.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 2:48:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

I would also sue Verizon. They are getting way to big and arrogant.

Bubba

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113445049.538157@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Peter Pan wrote:
>> Quick wrote:
>>>
>>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>>
>>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better
>>> Business Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has
>>> done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT in my
>>> original contract price."
>>>
>>> -Quick
>>
>> Read your contract again.. something about applicable
>> state and local taxes....
>
> O jees, I've got to work on my presentation. smilie faces
> or something...
>
> When I said "some nuisances should be taxed" the
> "nuisance" I was refering to was the OP... His city
> is imposing a tax directly on the users of that *particular*
> city. It's not clear if he realised that. Even if he did I
> think it a bit extreme to expect VZW to eat that. Kind
> of like expecting GM to pick up the state imposed road
> use tax for driving your Chevy. In any event, he fired
> off to the BBB, and is looking into if it's actionable...
> Sure, maybe, eventually, all that could be justified after
> pursuing the issue to a greater extent through less
> extreme/more normal channels but it struck me as
> an initial, knee jerk, over reaction ...nuisance...
>
> anybody pick that up from my first reply?
>
> -Quick
>
>
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 7:00:45 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Harvest 314 via CellPhoneKB.com wrote:

> I immediately called Customer Service. They told me the charge was "beyond
> their control" because it's for some sort of tax the City of Maryland
> Heights is now charging Verizon. IE, Verizon is passing this tax on to me.
>
> I'm appalled Verizon is apparently expecting their customers to pay their
> taxes, regardless of when or if it was levied by the town I live in.

....

You're kidding, right?

So, if the city you live in decides to increase its sales tax, this is
Verizon's fault?

I think you're directing your anger to the wrong entity here.

IF however, this was a "fee," separate from the "taxes" line, then I'd
be more inclined to agree with you. But if it's specifically labeled as
a tax, then Verizon really diesn't have control over it.


> Secondly, I'm now considering switching to Sprint in September when my
> contract expires.

Sprint customers aren't exempt from those same taxes. How does moving
to Sprint allow you to avoid this tax?

> Does anyone have any thoughts on Sprint vs. Verizon for
> the St. Louis area? My general understanding is that Sprint has better
> phones, better sound quality, and better prices.

Better VARIETY of phones, yes. Better sound quality? Unlikely, Sprint
uses the same CDMA technology as Verizon, so they should be on-par with
each other. Better prices, yes, and the Free & Clear plans allow for
greater flexibility.

> Verizon, though, has
> better coverage nationwide. Currently, I'm in Verizon's America's Choice
> plan.

If you get the "America" add-on to a Sprint plan for $5 a month more,
you can use up to half of your minutes every month while roaming, and it
would be billed just as if you were in-plan, in-coverage. So if at
least 50% of your time on the phone is in a Sprint area (which is no
sweat in nearly every major metro area), then I wouldn't worry about
coverage.

But again, you won't get away from those taxes. :) 



--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
Anonymous
April 14, 2005 8:38:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

You can sue all you want but you would be wasting your money suing about
this matter. Verizon is doing nothing wrong. Yes, there are some attorneys
who would sue over anything but no attorney would take this case without
receiving money up front. Go ahead, put up the money and sue and see how
much this legal action would cost you?

Bruce D. Brown

"Bubba DeBub" <BubbaDeBub@rRideUmCowboy.com> wrote in message
news:lun7e.9447$%c1.261@fed1read05...
>I would also sue Verizon. They are getting way to big and arrogant.
>
> Bubba
>
> "Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1113445049.538157@sj-nntpcache-3...
>> Peter Pan wrote:
>>> Quick wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>>>
>>>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better
>>>> Business Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has
>>>> done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT in my
>>>> original contract price."
>>>>
>>>> -Quick
>>>
>>> Read your contract again.. something about applicable
>>> state and local taxes....
>>
>> O jees, I've got to work on my presentation. smilie faces
>> or something...
>>
>> When I said "some nuisances should be taxed" the
>> "nuisance" I was refering to was the OP... His city
>> is imposing a tax directly on the users of that *particular*
>> city. It's not clear if he realised that. Even if he did I
>> think it a bit extreme to expect VZW to eat that. Kind
>> of like expecting GM to pick up the state imposed road
>> use tax for driving your Chevy. In any event, he fired
>> off to the BBB, and is looking into if it's actionable...
>> Sure, maybe, eventually, all that could be justified after
>> pursuing the issue to a greater extent through less
>> extreme/more normal channels but it struck me as
>> an initial, knee jerk, over reaction ...nuisance...
>>
>> anybody pick that up from my first reply?
>>
>> -Quick
>>
>>
>
>
April 20, 2005 1:00:06 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

O stop getting your panties in a bunch. Don't you hate being misunderstood,
then you have to write double the next time trying to explain yourself? You
were so worried no one wouldn't understand you...you started a little book
to "clear" yourself up. God forbid.

"Quick" <quick7135-news@NOSPAMyahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1113445049.538157@sj-nntpcache-3...
> Peter Pan wrote:
>> Quick wrote:
>>>
>>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>>
>>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better
>>> Business Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has
>>> done is legal. Obviously, this charge was NOT in my
>>> original contract price."
>>>
>>> -Quick
>>
>> Read your contract again.. something about applicable
>> state and local taxes....
>
> O jees, I've got to work on my presentation. smilie faces
> or something...
>
> When I said "some nuisances should be taxed" the
> "nuisance" I was refering to was the OP... His city
> is imposing a tax directly on the users of that *particular*
> city. It's not clear if he realised that. Even if he did I
> think it a bit extreme to expect VZW to eat that. Kind
> of like expecting GM to pick up the state imposed road
> use tax for driving your Chevy. In any event, he fired
> off to the BBB, and is looking into if it's actionable...
> Sure, maybe, eventually, all that could be justified after
> pursuing the issue to a greater extent through less
> extreme/more normal channels but it struck me as
> an initial, knee jerk, over reaction ...nuisance...
>
> anybody pick that up from my first reply?
>
> -Quick
>
>
May 2, 2005 8:50:42 PM

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.verizon (More info?)

Alphageek wrote on [Wed, 13 Apr 2005 15:50:53 -0700]:
>
> "Peter Pan" <PeterPanNOSPAM@AkamailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
> news:3c5ktoF6lqolhU1@individual.net...
>> Quick wrote:
>>>
>>> Then again some nuisances should be taxed... -:) 
>>>
>>> "I've filed a complaint against Verizon with the Better Business
>>> Bureau. I'm also wondering if what Verizon has done is legal.
>>> Obviously, this charge was NOT in my original contract price."
>>>
>>> -Quick
>>
>> Read your contract again.. something about applicable state and local
>> taxes....
>>
> Look at all of the other miscellaneous bull*&$^ charges on your phone bill.
> Also look at your gas, water, electric, cable, trash, etc bills and you'll
> see a whole bunch of local, state, and federal charges and surcharges (read:
> taxes) that your providers all pass on to you, the consumer.

And some that are added on... ala Ameritech/SBC
!