From: moonfall@ix.netcom.com (Carol Halsey)
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 06:06:20 GMT
Organization: Netcom
Chee Wong
>I tried AOL a few months ago and then canceled after the
>Today I received a bill on my credit card for 9.95. When I
>I recently joined a PPP provider, which I am very happy with. No
>Ex-AOL subscriber,
>Chee Wong
About 6 weeks ago, 'someone' from AOL called me on the phone and asked
me to come back. I thought it was strange. I didn't even use up the
first 10 'free' hours I had, so it wasn't like I was a customer for
years and cancelled. I didn't join again and after reading your post,
I'm glad I didn't. Now all I have to do is find an Internet Provider
that doesn't lose connection every 15 minutes! Whoever yours is, I'm
glad you're happy with it because my experiences have been nothing but
aggravating. ;-)
Gene (gene@aol.com) wrote:
: > She said, "10 free hours"...I tried AOL again and canceled after a week.
: if you ran over your 10 hour limit, you are obligated to pay the monthly
Gene, where are you GETTING this?
The post says they cancelled within a week.
You're assuming they must've gone over ten hours, thus incurring a
membership fee. But if they used EXACTLY ten hours, they owe AOL nothing.
If they used more than ten hours, why is the bill only $9.95--the monthly
membership fee with NO hours?
Or are you going to tell us AOL didn't charge a monthly fee, but
charged for going over ten hours by exactly three and 22/59 hours?
I mean, I would think in trying to defend AOL, the author of "Using
America Online" could at least construct a plausible scenario... (Maybe
you should rename your book, "Being Used by AOL".)
: most of the messages in this newgroup consist of flames and erroneous,
Like "You weren't erroneously charged by AOL; there must be some other
explanation I have no evidence for?"
And coming from someone who received an AOL book contract....
: Peace,
Get a job, ya hippie.
Okay... let's set the record straight since Gene is obviously
unable to comprehend a basic concept. Here's some common sense that
even Gene should be able to understand. I'm starting with the base
assumption that AOL is a reputable company.
Let's assume that Chee went over 10 hours of time (which he didn't but
that's okay). AOL charges by the minute at a rate of $2.95/60. He was
charged $9.95. The closest he could get to $9.95 was $9.93 with usage
of 202 paying minutes, or $9.98 with usage of 203 paying minutes. Since
AOL charges by the minute, there is no way he could be charged $9.95
if he went on over time or (inclusive or, that is) if he wasn't charged
the monthly fee. So we know his usage of time was under 10 hours, but
he was still charged.
Based on what Chee has told us and my own experience with these "please
come back" people, they said that he would get 10 hours free and didn't
mention any charges. However, he was charged. Since he didn't go on
over time the only way that he could have been charged was by being
charged the monthly fee. A contradiction arises since he was told he
would have the service free of charge. Thus, it is NOT the case that
AOL is a reputable company.
I suppose this is a little too strong... maybe they made a mistake (with
people like Gene working for them, I'm not suprised).
Let's all just shut the fuck up about this, okay? Gene, you're wrong,
accept it as fact and move on with your life. *sigh* This thread has
gone on long enough.
PS: Who's willing to bet that Gene will come up with some sort of
conspiracy theory or (inclusive again) that we're lying? I'll bet
you all $9.95 that he will.
Gene (gene@aol.com) wrote:
: In message <3sg6nb$ah@warp.cris.com> Curtisr@news.cris.com (Curtis
First, I think implying that Curtis was not using "a little common sense"
is itself "mighty insulting," so you might look to the tone of your own
responses before criticizing others.
Second, I believe that your position has become somewhat muddied and that
you need to clarify it. In your first post to this thread, you
said that a previous AOL user who took advantage of the offer of an
additional 10 "free" hours "resubscribed to America Online." You said
that under those circumstances "if you ran over your 10 hour limit, you
are obligated to pay the monthly fee."
(I should note that I am relying on quotes of your post; the original
is no longer on my ISP's news server.)
I may be wrong, but it seems to me that you have backtracked from this
position in subsequent posts. Have you? Is this still your position?
More importantly, is it to your knowledge the official position of America
Online? If you do not know the answer to the latter question, could
you find out?
I am curious because I have received similar offers both from a telephone
solicitor and by mail. The mailed offer includes a note from Steve Case
saying that AOL wants to "invite [me] to come back." After describing
some "new" features of AOL, it says that I should "[j]ust pop in the disk
and take a look around for _5_hours_free_." [Emphasis in original.] Later
there is a description of the installation process which concludes with
the statement that "[n]ow you're ready to explore America Online for 5
hours FREE!" [Emphasis once again in original.] I have read the entire
packet and could find nothing in coarse or fine print suggesting that I
could become obligated to pay the $9.95 monthly subscription charge during
my first month of usage by accepting this offer.
(BTW, I wonder why AOL offered Curtis 10 free hours and me only 5? I
feel a little insulted myself.)
I had been thinking of taking advantage of this offer to examine AOL's Mac
web browser and compare it to Netscape and Mosaic. However, I had been
operating under the assumption that if I did so and went over the 5 hour
limit during the first month, I would only be obligated to pay the hourly
charge. So a sixth hour would cost me $2.95. Your original post seems to
say that a sixth hour would in fact cost me $2.95 + $9.95 = $12.90.
That's an expensive hour, even by AOL standards.
If that is the true nature of AOL's offer, it would give me -- and I'm
sure many other people considering the offer -- pause. And I personally
do not believe that the terms of the offer reasonably convey this meaning.
You have written that you are not an AOL employee. Nevertheless, you have
voluntarily enterred into this discussion, and you seem well-placed to
obtain a definitive answer to this question, if you do not already have
one. So I think it fair to ask you for this information.
And just so it's clear, let me restate the question one more time:
If a former AOL member accepts an offer of 5 or 10 additional "free" hours
and then uses more than the allotted "free" hours during the first month,
what will that person be obligated to pay for the month: (A) $2.95 per
excess hour or (B) $2.95 per excess hour + $9.95?
--
sburr@primenet.com (Steven J. Burr) wrote:
Excellent way to pose the question, Steve ! Using the same format, I
would like to pose a similar question to Gene :
If a former AOL member accepts an offer of 10 additional "free" hours
and then uses around 5 hours during the first month, what will that
person be obligated to pay for the month: A) nothing, (B) $9.95 for a
hidden resubscription charge, or (C) whatever new billing error that
AOL can cook up.
...chee....
In article <3sm3ns$qbn@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, Gene (gene@aol.com) wrote:
> Since most people who have responded here are more interested in being
As I pointed out in my previous post, I don't think anyone who has
responded has been any more insulting than you. I did nothing more than
ask you what I thought was a simple question, and still have not gotten a
direct answer. Here it is again:
If a former AOL member accepts an offer of 5 or 10 additional "free" hours
and then uses more than the allotted "free" hours during the first month,
what will that person be obligated to pay for the month: (A) $2.95 per
excess hour or (B) $2.95 per excess hour + $9.95?
Since you did not see fit to answer me directly, let me see if I can
derive an answer from the following:
> 2. I expect the very few complaints we've had here about the alleged
Here you seem to be saying that if a former member accepts an offer of
"free" hours he is "resubscribing" and is obligated to pay the $9.95
monthly fee _whether_or_not_ he cancels before he uses up the "free"
hours. I believe this represents yet another change of position on your
part. In your original post, you stated that "_if_ you ran over your 10
hour limit, you are obligated to pay the monthly fee." (Emphasis added.)
> I don't see anything indicating that such a fee is being waived,
Where? What are you looking at? The mailing that I quoted extensively
I am sorry, but to the non_AOL universe, $9.95 != "free."
> even if you get additional hours free.
If your interpretation of these offers is correct, then I am not being
offered any "additional hours free," since $9.95 is the normal charge for
the first five hours of any month on AOL. Again, however, the mailing
states repeatedly that the offer is for "5 hours free."
> If someone wishes to provide
I'll be happy to fax you a copy of the mailing that I have described.
Please e-mail me the telephone number. In return, however, I would like
the answer to some additional questions: Does the position you advance in
your most recent post reflect the official position of AOL? Is AOL in
fact charging former members who accept the offer described in the mailing
that I will fax to you the $9.95 fee for their first month back on-line?
If so, is this charge imposed even if the members cancel before using all
of the allotted "free" hours.
> Now back to the children and their fun and games :)
Indeed.
--
FYI, I received the following e-mail from AOL today. Note that their
position is that it was a billing error. I called AOL billing dept.
and found out that even though I specifically asked for a refund for
that month in question (and even though they claim it was an error),
they had not (and apparently were not planning to) credit my account.
When I told them I was not interested in resubscribing, then the
billing representative removed Steve Case's offers (see below), and
then applied the credit. (Something fishy about that, but I don't
care as long as I get the refund.)
I urge everyone who was billed for the 10 "FREE" hour "trial" to write
and get their money back. Don't take any of their offers, by phone or
otherwise. (Who knows what other "billing errors" may occur). Steve
Case's e-mail address is SteveCase@aol.com.
I think Gene was wrong after all, and in believing him, I was wrong as
well. I'm still not completely clear as to what happened here. It's
simply best to stay away from them as far as possible.
(the AOL response is quoted verbatim, no editing has been made)
Dear chee@carroll.com (Chee Wong),
Thank you for your recent E-mail to Steve Case. Mr Case has asked me
to respond to your inquiry.
We apologize for asking you to reactivate your account so close to
your billing date. The marketing department is supposed to credit
accounts one month also to avoid charging a member a monthly
membership fee. Again we apologize for our oversight.
I have waived your membership fee for two months. This means if you
reactivate your account you will not be charged a membership fee for
two months but will still recieve five free months each month.
If you want to reactivate you account now please call our toll free
number.
Our hours of operation are as follows: 8 am to 12 am EST, Monday thru
Friday, and 12 pm to 9 pm Saturday and Sunday. If you need to contact
our Billing Department, you may do so by dialing 1-800-827-6364.
Note: You might want to wait until after the 29th of June to
reactivate your account otherwise you will use one your credits for a
waived month.
If you have any additional questions or concerns, please let me know.
Lewis Haycraft Office of Steve Case America Online, Inc.
Gene@aol.com:
Speaking of unsubstantiated charges....
Gene Friday
Chee Tuesday:
Let's watch Gene shift his position.
Gene Monday:
Gene Tuesday:
Billing mistakes are so frequent on AOL, I've heard talk of class actions.
From: destiny@crl.com (David Cassel)
Chee Friday
Gene Saturday:
Chee three days before that
Finally... .
That statement would have alot more impact if you hadn't changed my name
from Destiny to "EmailCafe@aol.com"
>first month. Last month I received a phone call offering me 10
>free hours for me to try AOL again. I said, "Really, free?".
>She said, "10 free hours". So I said yes. I tried AOL again and
>canceled after a week.
>called AOL, they said I had actually resubscribed to AOL, which
>is news to me. Their customer service is terrible, but that is
>another story. The point is, if AOL calls you offering free
>hours, don't believe them. This is just another deception on
>their part to try to milk more money from you!
>more holding on the phone just to talk to incompetant AOL staff!
>chee@carroll.com
From: destiny@crl.com (David Cassel)
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 23 Jun 1995 20:32:36 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest]
: fee
: unsubstantiated charges against AOL.
destiny@crl.com /\ alt.aol-sucks FTP site
/ \ ftp://ftp.crl.com/users/ro/destiny/aol/
==============================================================================
/__________\ Now featuring 400K year-end review!!!
From: tfinley@en.com (Tom Finley)
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 26 Jun 1995 00:15:33 GMT
Organization: The Q Continuum
--
Tom Finley, tfinley@en.com
http://www.en.com/users/tfinley/aol-sux/aol-sux.html
Kidding about the bet, of course.
From: sburr@primenet.com (Steven J. Burr)
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 25 Jun 1995 19:13:22 GMT
Organization: Primenet (602)395-1010
: Reynolds) . . . writes:
: > Now, as for my situation, when I received the phone call, I, like Chee,
: > was told "I'll give you 10 free hours, if you will reconsider." Now, I
: > can see where you are coming from about reactivating my account, the
: > fact is that the offer was misrepresented, if what you say is true. You
: > see, I never signed back on after the phone call, and I was still billed
: > the $9.95.
: One has to assume one uses a little common sense in accepting such an
: offer. . . .
. . . .
: I'm not going to answer each and every comment (some get mighty insulting
: and aren't worth a response).
Steve Burr
Kids' Web: http://www.primenet.com/~sburr/index.html
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service
From: chee@carroll.com (Chee Wong)
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Nntp-Posting-Host: poseidon00.carroll.com
Organization: none
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 00:46:02 GMT
>And just so it's clear, let me restate the question one more time:
>
>If a former AOL member accepts an offer of 5 or 10 additional "free" hours
>and then uses more than the allotted "free" hours during the first month,
>what will that person be obligated to pay for the month: (A) $2.95 per
>excess hour or (B) $2.95 per excess hour + $9.95?
>--
>Steve Burr
From: sburr@primenet.com (Steven J. Burr)
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 27 Jun 1995 05:20:52 GMT
Organization: The Sensible Party
> insulting, I'll just address the issues in general, so folks who do want
> to be informed rather than engage in childish flamefests can be aware of
> what's really going on:
> telephone offer can be easily explained by various sorts of accidental or
> deliberate misunderstandings of the reality of the situation. Clearly if
> AOL wants you to resubscribe, you would be paying your $9.95 monthly fee
> again.
in my previous post does not mention the monthly fee at all. It also
says nothing about "resubscribing" to AOL. Rather the note from Steve
Case says that AOL has added many new features and that I am being
offered the chance to "come back online and try them out." It says
_four_ times that the offer is for "5 hours free." The mailing is
consistent with what I recall of my conversation with the telephone
solicitor.
> written evidence otherwise, send me e-mail and I'll give you a number to
> which you can fax this evidence (why do I feel reasonably certain nobody
> will take me up on the offer?)
Steve Burr
Kids' Web: http://www.primenet.com/~sburr/index.html
Newsgroups: alt.aol-sucks,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service
From: chee@carroll.com (Chee Wong)
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Nntp-Posting-Host: poseidon12.carroll.com
Organization: none
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 1995 01:19:42 GMT
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: AOBStaff99@aol.com
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 1995 02:27:24 -0400
To: chee@carroll.com
Subject: Re: e Fwd: deceptive phone practices
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: destiny@crl.com (David Cassel)
Newsgroups: alt.america.online,alt.online-service,alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service.delphi,alt.online-service.genie,alt.online-service.prodigy,alt.online-service.well,alt.aol-sucks,alt.aol.rejects,alt.internet.services,alt.internet
.access.wanted,,alt.netcom.sucks
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 28 Jun 1995 20:25:54 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest]: I hate to be the one to state facts, since most of the messages in this
: newgroup consist of flames and erroneous, unsubstantiated charges against
: AOL.
: You agreed to accept AOL's 10 free hour offer, which means, in effect,
: that you actually resubscribed to America Online--
: I just wanted to set you straight about what you did here.
> FYI, I received the following e-mail from AOL today. Note that their
> position is that it was a billing error.
: I expect the very few complaints we've had here about the alleged
: telephone offer can be easily explained by various sorts of accidental or
: deliberate misunderstandings of the reality of the situation.
:The offer was misinterpreted, or AOL made a billing mistake.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ destiny@crl.com /\ alt.aol-sucks FTP site
/ \ ftp://ftp.crl.com/users/ro/destiny/aol/
==============================================================================
/__________\ Now featuring 400K year-end review!!!
Newsgroups: alt.america.online,alt.online-service,
alt.online-service.america-online,alt.online-service.compuserve,alt.online-service.delphi, alt.online-service.genie,alt.online-service.prodigy,alt.online-service.well, alt.aol-sucks,alt.aol.rejects,alt.internet.services,alt.internet.access.wanted, alt.netcom.sucks
Subject: Re: BEWARE: AOL deceptive phone practices
Date: 28 Jun 1995 20:20:57 -0700
Organization: CRL Dialup Internet Access (415) 705-6060 [Login: guest]
> For your information, I used up less than 5 hours before canceling.
: He doesn't state how many hours he used beyond the 10 hours.
Gene Tuesday:
: As to the rest of the discussion: Until I hear from the person who posted
: the original complaint and have a chance to question him about the details
: of the offer (not what you folks determine what it is for the sake of your
: various conspiracy theories), I will leave it as what I originally said.
: Let me set the facts straight once and for all :
:
: 1) I tried AOL the first time via the 10-free-hour-trial. I went over
: 10 hrs by about a half hour. Was charged a dollar something. Paid.
: Cancelled AOL.
:
: 2) About a month later, AOL called to ask me to reconsider their
: service (new features etc). The saleslady's exact words were " We'll
: give you 10 more free hours to try AOL again". I said yes. Logged on,
: searched around for about 5 hours, then cancelled again because I
: haven't found anything new or substantially different from what they
: had before. The other day, I received a bill for $9.95. Called
: customer service and was told that the fee was for resubscription.
: In message <3snebc$7ja@newsbf02.news.aol.com>
: emailcafe@aol.com (EmailCafe) writes:
:
: > That's the problem with AOL. Their Usenet reader debutted with a bug
: > that reposted EVERY SINGLE MESSAGE to the Usenet SEVEN TIMES!
: > And that wasn't even a beta.
: >
:
: Like most of your other responses, you are totally wrong.
^^^ ^^^ ^^^^^^^ ^^^^^ destiny@crl.com /\ alt.aol-sucks FTP site
/ \ ftp://ftp.crl.com/users/ro/destiny/aol/
==============================================================================
/__________\ Now featuring 400K year-end review!!!
Coming soon:
New Content Every Day!
A reader comments on Gene Steinberg
Conspiracy theorist history
Conspiracy Theorist's Vendetta
alt.aol-sucks on Time's article
"You're wrong! You're lying!"
Go to Netizens React
Return to Main Page
Send comments to destiny@crl.com. All comments are assumed for publication.