The Consumer Complaints Blog

On May 22, 2010 I contacted Bell Express Vu loyalty department regarding an offer I had received from Rogers. The idea was to get my $103 bill down. After talking with them I accepted a deal that was offered. Imagine my surprise when my first bill was $481.80.

The deal I was offered included bundling with my home phone. The following is what I was told on May 22, 2010.
· My current TV package would be reduced to $73.00 including taxes
· My home phone would continue to be $34.15 plus taxes
· A free rental HD PVR for 12 months

· A purchased HD receiver at $199.00 of which I would receive a $100.00 credit on my first bill. Total cost $99.00

The above would be approximately $225.00 for the first month bill.

When my bill arrived for June, I contacted Bell on June 18 to discuss the amount of $481.80. After 45 minutes of being told that I should pay the $481.80 and it would be fixed later I asked for the cancellation department. Instead of cancellation I was passed to the loyalty department. Agent 6033286 told me that I shouldn’t pay the $481.80 and that the billing errors would be fixed on the next month’s bill. She agreed with the approximate price of $225.00

On July 20, 2010 my July bill arrived. The amount on this bill was $431.57. If you add the approximate $225.00 that the first bill should have been to the approximate $107.00 for satellite and land line the total should be around $332.00.

On July 21, 2010 I proceeded to call Bell and asked for Express Vu cancellation. After 20 minutes of speaking to a person and explaining the situation I was told they couldn’t help and that I had to talk to the people in bundling. After 10 minutes with bundling, where I had to repeat the entire saga again I was told they couldn’t help and that I had to talk to the people at Express Vu. At this point I asked for cancellations. I was transferred to the loyalty department. The person who took this call did not want to listen to what I had to say. She had no interest in the June bill and only wanted to talk about the July bill. She repeatedly stated that she didn’t want to discuss “past problems”. After 45 minutes on the phone she finally said she would look into the problem and call me back within 30 minutes.

One hour later I got a call back. I was told that the bill was accurate and that the “purchased” HD receiver was $199 with no discount. Also the line item on bill that says “refund” is actually a deposit charge. A very strange use of the English language. Once again I asked for the cancellations department.

This time I spoke to somebody to whom I once again had to start at the beginning. After telling them I did not want to speak to anybody else and that I no longer trusted the word of Bell employees he actually gave me a cancellation date for the account of August 21. I asked for two boxes to return the rental HD PVR and the “purchased HD receiver”. I was told that they would send me a box for the rental HD PVR but I now owned the second receiver at a price of $199.00. I explained it was a purchase at $99.00 and not $199.00. This seems to be an extreme version of ‘bait and switch”.

I am extremely disappointed with Bell as a corporation if they feel this is an acceptable way to treat customers.

I have no issue paying the agreed costs for Express Vu and the landline, but under no circumstances will I pay for an HD receiver that was sold to me at one price and then billed at another.

Dave (last name protected for privacy)

Disclaimer
This article was submitted by one of our readers. Penciltrick cannot make any claims as to its authenticity but the article was accepted on a good faith belief that it is an accurate and truthful account of the events listed.

I found your site because I needed to tell someone about the experience I had dealing with Toronto LX Limousine. I booked a reservation online with this company and then found out that I no longer required their service. I felt that not confirming the reservation was enough to cancel the deal, as is the case with most services.

After receiving a phone call the day before the day I originally intended to use this company’s services, I was told I had to cancel by responding in an email. So I did this, 24 hours in advance.

Despite this, I was billed $261.61 for not canceling 72 hours in advance. I hardly think that the administrative costs of 5 minutes worth of phone calls totals $261.60!!! I called to try and resolve the issue and tell the owner “Joseph” that he was stealing from me and that his business practice was a very short term strategy. He basically told me there was nothing I could do because he had my credit card information already. He then continued to say he doesn’t need to worry about my business, and brag that his company is worth $2.5 million. Well Joseph, that’s because you’re stealing from people Joseph! Shame on you!

I know other people have probably experienced this same situation and I don’t think it’s fair that companies take advantage of the “fine print” to steal from customers with good intentions. If anything, I hope I’ve at least succeeded in warning others not to make the same mistake in having good faith in transportation companies like Toronto LX Limo.

Sincerely,
Andrea (last name protected for privacy)
< !adsense-->
Disclaimer
This article was submitted by one of our readers. Penciltrick cannot make any claims as to its authenticity but the article was accepted on a good faith belief that it is an accurate and truthful account of the events listed.

I sent the e-mail message below to Davewood Mazda in Newmarket regarding my windshield that was damaged by a wiper blade installed at there dealership. The response from the manager Marilyn was that she had spoken to the service advisor Troy who had responded that “there’s only one way to put on a wiper.” I responded that he is either wrong or the wiper blade provided to me was defected as it HAD caused the damage to my windshield.

In the end Marilyn made it clear that there was nothing they could do not only because it was installed almost a year ago but mainly because I will not be purchasing another Mazda. The bottom line was that since I was no longer going to be there customer they’ve washed their hands of me.

Well I’m glad now that I decided not to get another Mazda as they do not deserve my business or loyalty.

Thanks,

Lidia (last name protected for privacy)
=====================================================================
I bring my CX7 (Plate # AZAY 058) to your dealership regularly for service.

Last year I had my wipers replaced using my points at your dealership. My left wiper (when siting in the car) was not installed correctly and made what appeared to be a”streak” on my windshield. This streak would appear to be gone when wet and would reappear when dry so I assumed it was something that could just be cleaned.

I had my end of lease inspection today and it turns out this “streak” is actually a scratch and have been quoted $471.69 to replace the windshield.

I have been coming to your dealership for service over the last three years and hope that there is something you can do to rectify this incident that has left me with damage that is not my fault.

Please forward my concern to the appropriate person who can deal with my situation. I can be contacted either at work at the number below or on my cell phone at (phone number protected for privacy).

Thank you,

Lidia (last name protected for privacy)

Disclaimer
This article was submitted by one of our readers. Penciltrick cannot make any claims as to its authenticity but the article was accepted on a good faith belief that it is an accurate and truthful account of the events listed.

I was completely mislead by two different sales associates into thinking I qualified for an incentive that they knew I did not qualify for. They neglected to tell me I didnt qualify until conveniently 24 hours after I picked up the vehicle. I explained that as a result I did not want the vehicle and I was told to bad the deal was already done. I expressed my concern to the manager and he arrogantly told me that I was out of luck and that I should have known the details of a program that Ford was offering. The associates knew I did not qualify prior to the deal being completed they even asked to see information to verify that I qualified prior to completion of the deal, I provided them with all the info and they clearly looked at it and even photocopied it but did not tell me that I would not qualify. Then they asked for a 3000$ down payment and told me I would get it back in a couple weeks when they clearly knew I wouldnt. My experience at Brock Ford was the worst purchasing experience I ever had. I would not recommend this place to anyone.

Disclaimer
This article was submitted by one of our readers. Penciltrick cannot make any claims as to its authenticity but the article was accepted on a good faith belief that it is an accurate and truthful account of the events listed.

I first wrote TicketMaster on June 28th. I received just an automatically generated acknowledgement but was otherwise ignored.

On July 7th I wrote to BBB and they said its outside their purview.

Am I alone in getting such a bad treatment from TicketMaster?

I am sure you have a better take on this than me but if you are getting other complaints add mine to them.

Here’s the original complaint:

Better Business Bureau of Mid-Western and Central Ontario
COMPLAINT ACTIVITY REPORT Case # 1213844

Consumer’s Original Complaint:
This is what I wrote Ticketmaster on June 28th, 2010:

Hi, I am writing to inform you of the very bad service we received from TicketMaster yesterday. My son lost his ticket for the Sanatana concert and we went to the Ticketmaster Retail Outlet at Oakville Place Mall Guest.

The persons who attended us were courteous and helpful and tried to do the best they could in the circumstances. They had to call Ticketmaster centre five times to resolve the issue however. On three of those times they explained the problem and they told them to hold on only for the line to be cut. On another occasion they were cut off as soon as they mentioned the lost ticket.

On the last we got a lady on the phone who said that we had to pay $15 for the replacement ticket (when the original costs $28.75, that’s more than 50%). Not only so, though, but I, his father, had to pick it up personally before the show rather than the replacement ticket being mailed to me ! And this even though my son showed them the proof of payment via his bank account statement. (I got in the picture because I had a credit card and Ticketmaster would not accept my son’s driect debit card for the extra $15.) This took us more than one hour to resolve.

The lady on the phone was also generally rude. I told the lady I was going to complain in writing about this and she told me I can do whatever I wanted. You can check our phone calls between 2PM and 3PM Sunday June 27th from that retail outlet to verify.

I am writing this because I feel that customers should be treated much better: (1) no hanging up from Ticketmaster’s side, (2) the replacement fee should be much less, (3) replacement tickets should be sent by mail, (4) direct debit cards should be accepted especially when proof of payment for the original ticket is presented, and (5) courteous service. Finally, in this day and age, since every ticket has a number, I don’t know why Ticketmaster don’t just cancel the first ticket and issue an new one once they see proof of payment.

I am writing because I would like an apology within 48 hours from a senior manager at Ticketmaster. I also want a promise that management would look into this case as a case study so that they improve their customer service especially as regards replacement tickets. It’s in your own best interest, after all.

If I don’t get an apology, I am going to take this further so that the public at large and the concert organizers would know what service is being meted out to paying customers.
Regards, Paul (name hidden for privacy)

Since writing I received nothing back except that the email has been received (and other info which was not relevant to this case). As expected, I received no apology for the inconvenience nor any indication that the company cares or wishes to improve customer service. But I guess one expects this from Ticketmaster.

Consumer’s Desired Resolution:
Just an email from a senior executive apologizing for the inconvenience caused and a promise from his or her that they would look into customer service in order to improve it.

BBB Processing
2010-07-07 web BBB Complaint Received by BBB\par 2010-07-07 BEA BBB CASE JUDGED TO BE OUT OF BBB PURVIEW : Under $20. bk\par 2010-07-07 Otto BBB INFORM CONSUMER – CASE CLOSED OUT OF PURVIEW : May we suggest contacting the Ministry of Consumer Services at 1-800-889-9768 or 416-326-8800. bk\par 2010-07-07 Otto BBB Case Closed as BEYOND PURVIEW
========================================================================
BBB Complaint Case#1213844(Ref#32-1090941-1213844-3-11010)

> Complaint ID#: 1213844
> Business Name: Ticketmaster Canada Ltd
>
> Thank you for contacting your BBB regarding your complaint.
>
> The complaint was received by your BBB on July 7, 2010 and has been assigned case# 1213844 in our files.
>
> We regret to inform you that your BBB cannot process your complaint. The case has been reviewed by one of our Complaint Administrators and was found to contain issues that are out of your BBB’s purview.
>
> It is our policy to process only those complaints that fall into your BBB’s scope. Items such as landlord/tenant issues, criminal allegations, requests for punitive damages, pricing issues, employer/employee disputes, cases already involved in litigation, civil right violations, business to business collection issues, cancellation of contracts, complaints under the value amount of $20, anonymous complaints, remove collection reports, etc, are not handled by your BBB.
>
> Thank-you for contacting your BBB.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Bea Krieschneider
> Consumer Consultant
> BBB Complaint Department
> bea@mwco.bbb.org

Disclaimer
This article was submitted by one of our readers. Penciltrick cannot make any claims as to its authenticity but the article was accepted on a good faith belief that it is an accurate and truthful account of the events listed.