Am I the only person concerned about the T-Mobile Price Increase??

gramps28 wrote:

If you post multiple times too fast or cut and paste a post from a previous thread you might get reviewed to make sure your not a bot.

Sort of like the post a few up from Bakingsmarty.

They cut and pasted that post on multiple threads.

Heard, that maybe it.

I did take part of another post and post In my post that is being reviewd. The main reason I was doing it was not to re-spam or anything, it was to ensure I would be posting the proper information correctly. 

I wanted to make sure the information I provided was accurate, I do not want to be misleading people as I was misled with the issues that I've been dealing with with T-Mobile. 

Thanks for the information Gramps 28!

I get reviews occasionally when there's multiple post about getting an unlock code.

I basically say the same thing in each post and the Tmobile link to the requirements.

Meowta wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

Meowta wrote:

Use your feet and your dollar to explore the marketplace of ideas and select another cellular phone service provider.

I Already have, looking to jump ship to Us mobile, and my current phone has the flexibility to work with US mobile’s Verizion warp 5g towers or the GSM T-mobile towers..  So in the end I can choose the Verzion one if want to be petty and make sure T-Mobile makes nothing off my new service.. I just need to confirm what service is available to the areas I usually travel to…

I also thought about Mint mobile, but after Finding out Ryan solid it to T-mobile, I do not want to have to keep dealing with the same bill issue's that I been dealing with since I have had a T-mobile voice line.  Then this may sound a little petty but I am also hesitate because I seen a few people point on some reedit post that Mint's current unbeatable pricing promotions came oddly enough time for this price upgrade.  Who knows maybe T-mobile had this in the works for a a while and knew they where going to have people jump ship and wanted to catch them with the Mint service, either way I do not want to support this craziness..

Right now I am working with T-mobile in regards to my issues because of everything that happen to me from the billing issues and this most recent price hike.  If they can come up with a a better plan then what they where trying to push on me I may stay or If I need to go I will be happy to go, the ball is in there court now… I told them I give them a little time but at the moment I am still set on US Mobile for my voice service.

 

 

As long as you’re not being coerced, the decision is freely yours to make.

Yes you are a 100% correct, it is mine to make. Out of the 6 to 7 people I spoke to at T-mobile 4 of them did not seem to care if I stayed with them or not.  So thanks for making me feel welcome T-mobile the un-carrier! 

This goes back to why this is happening in the first place…  When you advertise that you wont raise rates and you raise them it shows how much you care! When you speak to company representatives and they are 100%  cool with you dropping them, this shows you how much they care… So in the end does T-mobile not care? Or will they try to get to the bottom of all my problems and get me billed correctly for once…

If the answer is no… Then see you… That is why there is hardly any brand loyalty around in the world any more cause of brands acting this...

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

   

Even in the advertising there's still fine print that needs to be read.

Have you ever read the Tmobile Terms and Conditions you agreed to when you signed up? You will be surprised what you agreed to.

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

   

Even in the advertising there's still fine print that needs to be read.

Have you ever read the Tmobile Terms and Conditions you agreed to when you signed up? You will be surprised what you agreed to.

 

Oh I believe that, but there is also consumer protections for false advertisement practices whether what the fine print sees or not. I assuming that is why people are sending this over to the FTC, FCC, and there AG Office.. False advertisement is false advertisment, labeled for cases such as these.. So no matter what your fine print sees, if you are false advertising that print, well false advertisment is false advertisment!

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

   

Even in the advertising there's still fine print that needs to be read.

Have you ever read the Tmobile Terms and Conditions you agreed to when you signed up? You will be surprised what you agreed to.

 

Oh I believe that, but there is also consumer protections for false advertisement practices whether what the fine print sees or not. I assuming that is why people are sending this over to the FTC, FCC, and there AG Office.. False advertisement is false advertisment, labeled for cases such as these.. So no matter what your fine print sees, if you are false advertising that print, well false advertisment is false advertisment!

I hate to say this but I doubt much is going to come from this. If there's fine print people don't see that's on them. And all those agencies you posted won't do anything.

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

   

Even in the advertising there's still fine print that needs to be read.

Have you ever read the Tmobile Terms and Conditions you agreed to when you signed up? You will be surprised what you agreed to.

 

Oh I believe that, but there is also consumer protections for false advertisement practices whether what the fine print sees or not. I assuming that is why people are sending this over to the FTC, FCC, and there AG Office.. False advertisement is false advertisment, labeled for cases such as these.. So no matter what your fine print sees, if you are false advertising that print, well false advertisment is false advertisment!

I hate to say this but I doubt much is going to come from this. If there's fine print people don't see that's on them. And all those agencies you posted won't do anything.

 

I agree as far as class action law suits.. But as far as FTC and FCC complaints and states AG offices false Advertisements are false advertisements .. Will they attempt to put T-mobile out of business over this No, Will they force T-mobile to have to revert users back to there old rate plans, that is a toss up, Will they fine T-mobile probably (money is money), will it cause T-mobile very bad media attention, Highly likely and that is the most important effect from all of this!

*Here is what the FTC sees about false advertisement: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising  When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it's on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The FTC enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears - in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses. The FTC looks especially closely at advertising claims that can affect consumers' health or their pocketbooks - claims about food, over-the-counter drugs, dietary supplements, alcohol, and tobacco and on conduct related to high-tech products and the Internet.

*Here is what the FCC sees about false advertising: https://www.fcc.gov/general/consumer-deception-and-fraud-0    

Have you been "crammed" by your telephone carrier billing you for a product or service without your permission? Have you been "slammed" by a company changing your long distance carrier without your permission? Have you been deceived into buying a telephone service based on incomplete information or misleading advertising? Unfortunately, there are companies and individuals who engage in all of these kinds of deceptive and fraudulent practices, and the FCC receives a steady stream of complaints as a result.

The main vehicle the FCC has to address deception and fraud in the telecommunications marketplace is Section 201(b) of the Communications Act. This provision states that “ll charges, practices, classifications, and regulations” by telephone companies “shall be just and reasonable,” and that “any such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust and unreasonable” is unlawful. (Section 258 of the Communications Act y Sections 64.1110-64.1190 of the Commission’s rules also prohibit slamming.) The Commission can assess a forfeiture penalty against companies and individuals who violate Section 201(b) or any other rule the agency enforces, and the penalties can be as high as $150,000 for each violation by a telephone carrier, and up to $1,500,000 for a continuing violation.

If you’ve experienced deception or fraud in connection with telecommunications services, the FCC wants to hear from you. Presenta un reclamo to tell us what happened.

*Here is what my states AG office has to say about False advertising:

https://www.ag.ky.gov/about/Office-Divisions/OCP/Pages/default.aspx

​The Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection safeguards Kentuckians from unfair business practices by enforcing the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). The KCPA protects Kentucky's citizens from "unfair, false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce." The Office of Consumer Protection enforces the Act by bringing lawsuits in the public interest to obtain civil penalties and consumer redress, including restitution and injunctive relief aimed at changing bad business practices. The division acts in a wide variety of cases, including those involving unscrupulous auto dealers, pharmaceutical companies that understate risks or overstate benefits of their drugs, and for-profit colleges that misrepresent the value of their degrees. The Office of Consumer Protection has also taken action against telemarketers, home remodelers, mortgage lenders, and other types of companies when they do not compete fairly or engage in unfair practices. This enforcement protects not only citizens, but also ethical sellers of goods and services.

The Office of Consumer Protection is made up of three subdivisions - Litigation and Investigation, Registration and Compliance, and the Louisville Consumer Resource and Service Branch. The Litigation and Investigation group is responsible for investigating and litigating violations of the KCPA. The Registration and Compliance group provides administrative support required to ensure compliance with state statutes that require certain businesses, such as funeral homes, cemeteries, charitable solicitors, and health spas, to register and/or post bonds with the Attorney General's Office. The Louisville Consumer Resource and Service Branch mediates and investigates consumer complaints primarily related to businesses in the Louisville Metro area.

The Office of Consumer Protection is committed to protecting Kentuckians from bad actors in the marketplace. The Office has the power to civil investigative demands and civil subpoenas in order to investigate conduct alleged to violate Kentucky's consumer protection laws. In addition, the Office of Consumer Protection works closely with the Office of Senior Protection and Mediation in order to identify and prosecute businesses that engage in deceptive business practices.

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

FydorLytke wrote:

gramps28 wrote:

From what I have read was there was fine print about the price lock guarantee that said they could still raise the rates.

Also I posted in another thread that class actions  only will end up in the end raising prices. I got a class action check from State Farm for $33 so I'm expecting my premiums to rise to off set this class payment.

I never replied back to your main point here gramps, and do not take me the wrong way you seem to be pretty active on the forms and and always willing to cheerp things up, to get to the bottom of things.  I wanted to point out depending on when you signed on, the exact plan and ect, the wording differed here and there so…

The point is not so much the fine print, but the advertising.  Here is the thing T-mobile fans wanted to really like their provider T-mobile.  People looked at T-mobile in the US as the underdog that stood with consumer.  People wanted a celluar brand they could identify with, Sprint was on there way out even though they was always leading with the latest tech. Verizon well had amazing coverage especially in the 3g and 4g days but was slow to really understand its customers, gave that IBM corporate Vibe, and was always slow with the what is next. AT&T had became a dinosaur, just doing a little of what every one else was and never really standing out or trying too, and then making it hard for new customers to come to them by locking out most unlocked phones and ect. trying to ensure the new customer purchased a phone from them.

So when T-Mobile advertised things like the UN-Carrier promise (or whatever it was called) "you raise your rate not us" or the "Price lock guarantee" the consumers trusted this like a friend or family member giving there word. It would not had matter if T-mobile raised there rates b a quarter .25cents people are going to feel a certain way about it, cause it is breaking that bond of trust with something you identified with… Then poorly rolling out that rate hike, really made some damage...

   

Even in the advertising there's still fine print that needs to be read.

Have you ever read the Tmobile Terms and Conditions you agreed to when you signed up? You will be surprised what you agreed to.

 

Oh I believe that, but there is also consumer protections for false advertisement practices whether what the fine print sees or not. I assuming that is why people are sending this over to the FTC, FCC, and there AG Office.. False advertisement is false advertisment, labeled for cases such as these.. So no matter what your fine print sees, if you are false advertising that print, well false advertisment is false advertisment!

I hate to say this but I doubt much is going to come from this. If there's fine print people don't see that's on them. And all those agencies you posted won't do anything.

 

I agree as far as class action law suits.. But as far as FTC and FCC complaints and states AG offices false Advertisements are false advertisements .. Will they attempt to put T-mobile out of business over this No, Will they force T-mobile to have to revert users back to there old rate plans, that is a toss up, Will they fine T-mobile probably (money is money), will it cause T-mobile very bad media attention, Highly likely and that is the most important effect from all of this!

 

*Here is what the FTC sees about false advertisement: https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/topics/truth-advertising  When consumers see or hear an advertisement, whether it's on the Internet, radio or television, or anywhere else, federal law says that ad must be truthful, not misleading, and, when appropriate, backed by scientific evidence. The FTC enforces these truth-in-advertising laws, and it applies the same standards no matter where an ad appears - in newspapers and magazines, online, in the mail, or on billboards or buses. The FTC looks especially closely at advertising claims that can affect consumers' health or their pocketbooks - claims about food, over-the-counter drugs, dietary supplements, alcohol, and tobacco and on conduct related to high-tech products and the Internet.

*Here is what the FCC sees about false advertising: https://www.fcc.gov/general/consumer-deception-and-fraud-0    

Have you been "crammed" by your telephone carrier billing you for a product or service without your permission? Have you been "slammed" by a company changing your long distance carrier without your permission? Have you been deceived into buying a telephone service based on incomplete information or misleading advertising? Unfortunately, there are companies and individuals who engage in all of these kinds of deceptive and fraudulent practices, and the FCC receives a steady stream of complaints as a result.

The main vehicle the FCC has to address deception and fraud in the telecommunications marketplace is Section 201(b) of the Communications Act. This provision states that “ll charges, practices, classifications, and regulations” by telephone companies “shall be just and reasonable,” and that “any such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust and unreasonable” is unlawful. (Section 258 of the Communications Act y Sections 64.1110-64.1190 of the Commission’s rules also prohibit slamming.) The Commission can assess a forfeiture penalty against companies and individuals who violate Section 201(b) or any other rule the agency enforces, and the penalties can be as high as $150,000 for each violation by a telephone carrier, and up to $1,500,000 for a continuing violation.

If you’ve experienced deception or fraud in connection with telecommunications services, the FCC wants to hear from you. Presenta un reclamo to tell us what happened.

*Here is what my states AG office has to say about False advertising:

https://www.ag.ky.gov/about/Office-Divisions/OCP/Pages/default.aspx

​The Attorney General's Office of Consumer Protection safeguards Kentuckians from unfair business practices by enforcing the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). The KCPA protects Kentucky's citizens from "unfair, false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in trade or commerce." The Office of Consumer Protection enforces the Act by bringing lawsuits in the public interest to obtain civil penalties and consumer redress, including restitution and injunctive relief aimed at changing bad business practices. The division acts in a wide variety of cases, including those involving unscrupulous auto dealers, pharmaceutical companies that understate risks or overstate benefits of their drugs, and for-profit colleges that misrepresent the value of their degrees. The Office of Consumer Protection has also taken action against telemarketers, home remodelers, mortgage lenders, and other types of companies when they do not compete fairly or engage in unfair practices. This enforcement protects not only citizens, but also ethical sellers of goods and services.

The Office of Consumer Protection is made up of three subdivisions - Litigation and Investigation, Registration and Compliance, and the Louisville Consumer Resource and Service Branch. The Litigation and Investigation group is responsible for investigating and litigating violations of the KCPA. The Registration and Compliance group provides administrative support required to ensure compliance with state statutes that require certain businesses, such as funeral homes, cemeteries, charitable solicitors, and health spas, to register and/or post bonds with the Attorney General's Office. The Louisville Consumer Resource and Service Branch mediates and investigates consumer complaints primarily related to businesses in the Louisville Metro area.

The Office of Consumer Protection is committed to protecting Kentuckians from bad actors in the marketplace. The Office has the power to civil investigative demands and civil subpoenas in order to investigate conduct alleged to violate Kentucky's consumer protection laws. In addition, the Office of Consumer Protection works closely with the Office of Senior Protection and Mediation in order to identify and prosecute businesses that engage in deceptive business practices.

 

 

OH BTW Here is where all of the big three careers had been fined about there false advisement of “Unlimited” plans and we all know what the fine print sees for unlimited:  https://www.pcmag.com/news/t-mobile-verizon-and-att-required-to-pay-102-million-over-false-unlimited

Please folks do not give up out there let T-mobile know you do not approve there tactics.  When you say something is going to be something you stick with not change it no matter how many years!!

Keep the ball rolling on this Call you states AG office or go online and file a complaint if available!

Contact the FCC: https://www.fcc.gov/general/consumer-deception-and-fraud-0

Report Fraud to the FTC : https://reportfraud.ftc.gov/assistant?orgcode=FB01

It is the only way you are going to stop T mobile from all this nonsense