Just another WordPress weblog

We’re getting a bit deeper into the matter of government oversight of early termination fees. FCC Chairman Kevin Martin spoke up during hearings yesterday, and his sentiments, coincidentally enough, nearly matched the ideas of the wireless carriers, which were proposed last month. To me, this is a bad sign. Wireless carriers tend to rail against government oversight, except when it benefits them. So if their proposals are matched by a governing body, well, it’s not outlandish to think the worst.

Here’s a rundown of what’s proposed:

Early termination fees should be variable, based on the cost of the phone acquired. I think this should be taken a step further. ETFs should only be in place to cover a subsidy provided by the carrier. I actually think defining an early termination fee as the penalty for walking away from a contract on which a subsidized phone was acquired would solve a lot of these problems.

The fee should be reduced each month. Once again, this goes along with the first principle. Of course, if the government and the carriers want to get this right, which they probably don’t, they would simply take the subsidy and divide it by the number of months in the contract. That’s how much the ETF is reduced by each month. Makes sense, right?

A contract extension should not incur a new ETF if no phone is purchased along with it. I actually think this is a bit superfluous. If your contract expires and you’re not buying a new phone, there’s no reason to sign a new contract. Just go month to month, like you would after your initial one-year lease on an apartment ended. Remember, a two-year commitment is the trade-off for a phone subsidy. Don’t sign one unless you must.

Finally, consumers should be able to cancel their service within 10 days of receiving their first bill, without incurring an early termination fee. This is a simple and important consumer protection. There’s no way to know what you’re getting into until you get an actual bill. We might as well acknowledge that and enact this portion of the legislation.

Wireless carriers favor this oversight because they think it will reduce the number of lawsuits they face over early termination fees. And in a way, I agree. In no way should consumers be disqualified from suing if they were wronged in a matter regarding ETFs. But the sheer fact that carriers are facing these kinds of suits today suggests that there is a problem. This kind of legislation would empower consumers, and yes, would probably reduce the number of lawsuits faced by carriers.

Not that the government really cares. After all, they don’t pay early termination fees.

Share on Facebook | Add to De.licio.us | Digg This! | Technorati