<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://consumerist.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:consumerist.com,2010:/1/tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-</id>
  <updated>2010-01-24T16:18:12Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for <![CDATA[AT&amp;T Introduces Pro-Rated Termination Fees]]></title>
  <subtitle>Shoppers bite back.</subtitle>
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.32-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://consumerist.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=374493" title="AT&amp;T Introduces Pro-Rated Termination Fees" />
    <published>2008-04-01T17:51:29Z</published>
    <updated>2008-04-01T18:28:40Z</updated>
    <title>AT&amp;T Introduces Pro-Rated Termination Fees</title>
    <summary>--&gt; It&apos;s finally official: as of May 25th, AT&amp;T will join the ranks of the pro-rating carrier crowd (which so far just includes Verizon) and start reducing their early termination fees (ETFs) by $5 per month on both one and two-year contracts. This only applies to new customers and those renewing contracts on or after May 25th, so if you can, try to hold off on entering into a contract with AT&amp;T for the next two months. What up, Sprint and T-Mobile? Why is it taking so long for you to pro-rate your ETFs? We guess you&apos;re too busy going out of business and suing creation, respectively.</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Chris Walters</name>
      
    </author>
    
    <category term=" Early Termination Fees" />
    
    <category term="AT&amp;T" />
    
    <category term="Other Shopping" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://consumerist.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><!--<img alt="con_attlogo.jpg" src="http://consumerist.com/images/resources/2008/04/con_attlogo.jpg" width="300" height="227" class="left" />--> It's finally official: as of May 25th, AT&T will join the ranks of the pro-rating carrier crowd (which so far just includes Verizon) and <a href="http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/consumersmarts/archives/135443.asp">start reducing their early termination fees (ETFs) by $5 per month</a> on both one and two-year contracts. This only applies to new customers and those renewing contracts on or after May 25th, so if you can, try to hold off on entering into a contract with AT&T for the next two months. What up, Sprint and T-Mobile? Why is it <a href="http://consumerist.com/368244/carriers-promised-congress-theyd-pro+rate-etfs-senator-asks-them-when">taking so long for you to pro-rate your ETFs</a>? We guess you're too busy going out of business and suing creation, respectively.</p>

<p><a href="http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/consumersmarts/archives/135443.asp">"AT&T to pro-rate early termination fee"</a> [Seattle PI] </p>

<p>RELATED<br />
<a href="http://consumerist.com/368244/carriers-promised-congress-theyd-pro+rate-etfs-senator-asks-them-when">"Carriers Promised Congress They'd Pro-Rate ETFs; Senator Asks Them, 'When?'"</a></p>]]>
      
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4978824</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4978824" />
    <title>Comment from dragonfire81 on 2008-04-02</title>
    <author>
        <name>dragonfire81</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>AS a former Sprint employee, I'm glad I got out of there before proration came in.</p>
<p>The day the program is announced, people with a year or less left are going to be banging the doors to get out. I'm guessing Sprint is trying to delay the flood as long as possible.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-02T08:56:44Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4964732</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4964732" />
    <title>Comment from tme2nsb on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>tme2nsb</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p><p>@<a href="http://consumerist.com/374493/att-introduces-pro+rated-termination-fees#c4961410" rel="nofollow">Bodgy</a>: We have two. CARE and Telegence. And yes, it's auto proration. Sucks that people in EXISTING contracts are not affected by this.</p></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T21:16:26Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4964490</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4964490" />
    <title>Comment from noasalira on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>noasalira</name>
        <uri>http://</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://">
        <![CDATA[<p>I was already -- months ago -- informed by At&amp;T that my termination fee was pro-rated, I had a tendency to ask just to check when I was particularly irritated with the company.</p>
<p>However, yesterday I was informed by a customer service agent that At&amp;T will be charging to make payments via a customer service agent by phone, or in person at the store.</p>
]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T21:06:17Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4963620</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4963620" />
    <title>Comment from mikecolione on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>mikecolione</name>
        <uri>http://112sites.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://112sites.com">
        <![CDATA[<p><p>@<a href="#c4962853" rel="nofollow">Anks329</a>: Yea that makes sense, go to a carrier that hasn't even announced when it will prorate cancellation fees...  If you want ot switch to another carrier, you really don't have to whine about anything, just do it.</p></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T20:32:47Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4962853</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4962853" />
    <title>Comment from Anks329 on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Anks329</name>
        <uri>http://www.anksconsulting.com/news/</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.anksconsulting.com/news/">
        <![CDATA[<p>so as a current customer under contract, I'm stuck without a pro-rata ETF? Yet another reason for me to jump ship as soon as I can... and vote for AT&amp;T as the Worst Company EVAR.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T20:02:59Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4962105</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4962105" />
    <title>Comment from CRNewsom on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>CRNewsom</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p><p>@<a href="http://consumerist.com/374493/att-introduces-pro+rated-termination-fees#c4961927" rel="nofollow">iEddie</a>: The first step is admitting you have a problem.</p></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:32:17Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961927</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961927" />
    <title>Comment from iEddie on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>iEddie</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#c4961280" rel="nofollow">JustaConsumer</a>: I'd love to drop them, since their coverage is less than great (compared to T-Mobile which I used to have), but being an iPhone developer that uses the iPhone SDK, I need AT&amp;T now, otherwise the tools will bitch. And I also want the 3G iPhone, whenever it comes out. I'm a fanboy :D</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:25:11Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961878</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961878" />
    <title>Comment from iEddie on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>iEddie</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#c4961410" rel="nofollow">Bodgy</a>: Hey, at least they're not as bad as the Verizon CSRs!</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:23:32Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961741</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961741" />
    <title>Comment from webwbr on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>webwbr</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Maybe I'm missing something (sorryif I am), but I'm not sure if I'd call this a "pro-rate" as the balance never gets as low as it should.</p>
<p>i.e. Termination fee on 24 month contract is $175... if you cancel on month #23, assuming it has been pro-rated by $5/month, my math says the termination fee would be $60 (less the $115 of 23 $5/month).</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:16:58Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961677</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961677" />
    <title>Comment from Daniel-Bham on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Daniel-Bham</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Verizon tried to put the screws on me last week.</p>
<p>I have had a cell phone contract (2 year) from 2005 - 2007.  I went on a month-to-month billing cycle.  I called in to cancel one of the two lines on the phone after I was off contract in 2007.  I specifically told the guy I wasn't interested in an upgrade to my phone, that I just didn't use the second line and wanted to cancel.</p>
<p>He told me (and I double-checked) that I would continue on month-to-month billing.  (This was June 2007).</p>
<p>Flash-forward to last Friday, I called in to cancel the remaining phone.  I was told that a $135 ETF would apply because I had accepted an 'upgrade' to my account in 2007.</p>
<p>I told the CSR that I had no intention of paying, that I had been with them since 2005, rarely used the phone, and had never been late in nearly 3 years on any bill.  I also told her that I had specifically requested not to continue on contract the previous time I'd called in, and was told that I would continue on month-to-month billing since I wasn't upgrading my phone.  She didn't put up too much of a fight, and told me that "the system had done it automatically and I can take that off for you." and that my final bill will be this month.</p>
<p>So stand by for my story if they somehow 'forgot'.  I followed up with their online chat CSR and took screen shots to verify that I was told what I was told.</p>
<p>I still think it is bullshit that a company can arbitrarily enter you into a contract without your approval.  Even if it was in my original contract or in fine-print on a bill - I had explicitly asked and was told no.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:13:37Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961602</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961602" />
    <title>Comment from Bladefist on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Bladefist</name>
        <uri>n/a</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="n/a">
        <![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#c4961229" rel="nofollow">JustAGuy2</a>: a quick google search confirms what you just said. Dang. Maybe sprint should be worried.  Although I do know a lot of businesses use sprint. They make a lot of deals and relationships, whereas I would guess the other vendors have more non-commercial customers. Just a guess.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T19:08:13Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961410</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961410" />
    <title>Comment from Bodgy on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Bodgy</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>This is gong to be great for the CSRs who are already math challenged.  Hopefully their billing system, Telegence, will pro rate for them.  Otherwise, good luck with that.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:57:24Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961291</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961291" />
    <title>Comment from JustaConsumer on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>JustaConsumer</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Can I vote for them for worst company?</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:50:49Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961280</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961280" />
    <title>Comment from JustaConsumer on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>JustaConsumer</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>Do yourself a favor.  Drop AT&amp;T as soon as possible.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:50:24Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961243</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961243" />
    <title>Comment from iEddie on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>iEddie</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>I see why they're not adjusting current contracts - it'd give people a get-out-of-contract-free card, even though the chance is beneficial. And, of course, typical corporate greediness.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:47:31Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4961229</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4961229" />
    <title>Comment from JustAGuy2 on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>JustAGuy2</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p><p>@<a href="http://consumerist.com/374493/att-introduces-pro+rated-termination-fees#c4960909" rel="nofollow">Bladefist-안녕</a>:</p><br />
<p>Not any more - the other businesses were spun off into Embarq. Sprint=wireless.</p></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:46:29Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4960909</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4960909" />
    <title>Comment from Bladefist on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Bladefist</name>
        <uri>n/a</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="n/a">
        <![CDATA[<p>Sprint in in other markets, so no matter how badly their wireless does, the money from the other markets can sustain them.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:25:25Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4960863</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4960863" />
    <title>Comment from Pro-Pain on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Pro-Pain</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p><p>I can assure you that Sprint isn't going out of business anytime soon.</p></p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:22:16Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493-comment:4960844</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:64.14.177.195,2008://1.374493" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://consumerist.com/2008/04/att-introduces-pro-rated-termination-fees.html#c4960844" />
    <title>Comment from Snowblind on 2008-04-01</title>
    <author>
        <name>Snowblind</name>
        <uri></uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="">
        <![CDATA[<p>April fools?</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2008-04-01T18:20:53Z</published>
  </entry>


</feed>



