Story 2016-07-02 1K43Y Senate report calls out Time Warner, Charter cable for over-billing customers

Senate report calls out Time Warner, Charter cable for over-billing customers

by
in legal on (#1K43Y)
story imageA U.S. Senate hearing last week examined billing practices for five major pay-TV companies serving some 71 million subscribers. Senators honed in on overcharges from Time Warner Cable and Charter Communications. Charter estimates it has annually overcharged 5,897 customers a total of $494,000 each year. “And rather than correct the mistake by refunding the overcharges, the company just kept the money,” said Sen Rob Portman.

Sen. Claire McCaskill commented: “We found that customers are being charged a host of fees that are not included in advertised pricing, some of which are for programming that used to be included in a customer’s video package. We also found that, just as many customers have long believed, some of these fees, like the HD and DVR service fees, aren’t a true reflection of the cost to the company of the service, but rather are based on the revenue goals of the company, and the price a customer is willing to stomach. In fact, some of these fees are charged to old customers while new customers get the same services free of charge.”

“As a result of this investigation, both Time Warner Cable and Charter have taken steps to address these issues. Time Warner Cable will not, however, investigate when it began overcharging customers unless customers bring specific concerns to the company’s attention, nor will it provide a full refund dating back to when the overcharge began.”
Reply 1 comments

Not the first time this has happened. (Score: 0)

by Anonymous Coward on 2016-07-04 02:00 (#1K6V0)

A few years ago, I believe Telecom (New Zealand) were convicted of setting their clocks several minutes slow, so they could charge people for phone calls made outside their "free calling" time.

Given that I'm not from the US, does this particular hearing mean that Time Warner and Charter will be forced to return the money, or will there need to be a prosecution and conviction first?