Comcast Incorrectly Charged 2,000 Customers For Exceeding Data Cap (arstechnica.com) 49
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Comcast's data-usage meter gave thousands of customers inaccurate readings for two months because of a software bug, causing the broadband provider to incorrectly charge about 2,000 users for exceeding their monthly data caps. Comcast has admitted the error and told Ars it is giving refunds and additional credits of $50 each to customers who paid data overage fees that shouldn't have been assessed.
Comcast engineers found that the problem began after the company started rolling out a new billing system in early August. The data meter was apparently still collecting accurate data, but the numbers were being reported in the new billing system incorrectly. Comcast said it's still trying to figure out if the bug is in the meter software, the billing software, or in the interaction between the two. What Comcast knows for certain, the spokesperson said, is that the problem was fixed when it rolled back to the previous version of its billing software on October 2. Comcast's statement to Ars said: "While updating our data usage meter to a new system, a software error occurred resulting in a small number of our customers being billed incorrectly. We're very sorry for inconveniencing our customers and here's what we're doing to address it: We fixed the technical issue, we're proactively crediting the accounts affected, and we're giving those customers an additional $50 credit to make it right."
Comcast engineers found that the problem began after the company started rolling out a new billing system in early August. The data meter was apparently still collecting accurate data, but the numbers were being reported in the new billing system incorrectly. Comcast said it's still trying to figure out if the bug is in the meter software, the billing software, or in the interaction between the two. What Comcast knows for certain, the spokesperson said, is that the problem was fixed when it rolled back to the previous version of its billing software on October 2. Comcast's statement to Ars said: "While updating our data usage meter to a new system, a software error occurred resulting in a small number of our customers being billed incorrectly. We're very sorry for inconveniencing our customers and here's what we're doing to address it: We fixed the technical issue, we're proactively crediting the accounts affected, and we're giving those customers an additional $50 credit to make it right."
Strange (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
It seems an amazing coincidence how these random "bugs" at companies always result in customers being overcharged and almost never in them being undercharged.
My cable company some times has planned outages of their account website. During these they don't track data usage and anything used during that time period isn't counted towards my cap. So its not always in their favor but you're right, it is pretty damned often.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems an amazing coincidence how these random "bugs" at companies always result in customers being overcharged and almost never in them being undercharged.
Fear and outrage is incompatible with undercharging. Nobody cares about an article that says Comcast undercharged 2000 customers.
Unless of course Comcast planned on doing something outrageous about it then it could certainly be news. For example collecting interest or charging late fees on undercharged amounts. Perhaps sending people to collections or expecting customers to dish out significant cash to make up for persistent mistakes Comcast made over a series of years.
Re: (Score:2)
Fear and outrage is incompatible with undercharging.
Not really: you just hear about it slightly later when the same shitty company figures out they made an error in your favour and then fix it retroactively and try to charge you interest and/or penalties. Besides, when I lived in the US many moons ago certain telecom companies would make a billing error about once every 2-3 months and it was ALWAYS in their favour. Five years of that and it's pretty clear what is going on.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It is amazing. I've always felt if these companies where required to pay interest on their over charges, or some kind of fee, then there wouldn't be so many damn bugs in their software.
Re: (Score:2)
Once upon a time stuff was designed to fail elegantly, now it's just designed to fail in favor of corporations.
One other great example is the "smart meters" used by PG&E. Not all smart meters are crap, but the ones they chose are. When the old power meters failed, they read low, so PG&E was motivated to identify such and replace them. The smart meters fail in ways that result in overcharging the customer. (They also sometimes burst into flames, literally.)
Re: (Score:1)
trump did this ;.; trump did that ;.; trump did this ;.; trump did that ;.;
Shocked! (Score:1)
I'm shocked, I say! Simply shocked! Look at this face! This is my shocked face! /sarcasm
Do data caps exist in any place with multiple ISP (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Technically more than one or functionally more than one? Where I live there are technically two maybe three choices. Technically I could get AT&T and/or maybe Verizon wifi. Wifi as a whole is far too unreliable for my purposes and AT&T DSL requires phone lines that are younger than me near a CO to not be shit. So, Functionally there is only one and it's Comcast.
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, and yes there are data caps. I have 150 mbps for $80 a month right now. They sell 225 mbps for $80 with a TV package lock-in but I don't want the fucking TV. My only other option is $100/mo for 1 Gbps, but the data caps don't change so there is no point.
Re: (Score:2)
Just to be clear, you see no benefit in faster internet service - right?
Faster download speeds are a benefit, even when data caps don't increase - you can download exactly the same data, but faster
Re: (Score:2)
If we were still talking about dialup, yea, but not in this instance. It just means I can do the same things, only a few of which would be modestly faster, but not more things themselves.
It would only count on big downloads which aren't that common for me and with the cap no benefit at all. It doesn't make any of my streaming services better, etc. It doesn't add any headroom to do more with my connection.
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a rare spot with Optimum and FiOS. No data caps and some minor competition. Compared to a relative with no FiOS, we get better service for less. Is there any place with more than one broadband ISP that HAS data caps ?
I get Comcast. My other option is two tin cans and some twine: ATT DSL at not-quite-1.2 mbps. Neighborhood's from the early 70's. Just butted up against the Everglades almost. Kinda the land that time forgot, and I kinda like it that way.. mostly. Except for this. Ugh.
But 20 minutes away, my friend in his early 2000's house has ATT fiber at 1 gig, no datacap. Pays less than what I pay Comcast.
Ther'es Flicker Power and Light selling the bit (huge bit) of fiber left over from networking your smart met
Re: (Score:2)
I've got Comcrap business service, 150/25 for $130/month, 13 statics, it would be more without the TV that I don't use.
The rest of town has some competition, I don't really where I am. ATT has 12Mbps available. Planning the 100th birthday party for the house next year.
It mostly works, no data caps. It's probably really good that I don't have any, I'd have hit just about any cap. I know I've downloaded at least a few hundred gigs in the last week or so.
Re: (Score:2)
FPL likely has limitations on what services it can provide it's customers...
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a rare spot with Optimum and FiOS. No data caps and some minor competition. Compared to a relative with no FiOS, we get better service for less. Is there any place with more than one broadband ISP that HAS data caps ?
I live in Silicon Slopes, but residential broadband is still quite limited. My tier at Comcast (1 Gb /down, 25 Mb up) has 1024 MB data cap. Anything above that is $10 / 50 GB.
I kinda doubt it (Score:3)
I first heard of Comcast in the 80s, when Usenet had stories of the most hated companies in the US. Good for me, they were about as far from me as they could be and still be in the same country. Now that they have spread and influence my media options, all I can say is TGFPB (Thank God For Pirate Bay).
Re: (Score:2)
comcast was hip in the 90's
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
''all I can say is TGFPB''
And what.. no RIP Usenet... you ungrateful bastid.
Re: (Score:2)
Comcast has 27.2M customers, this impacted 2,000 customers and it is costing Comcast $100K in lost revenue in the form of credits.
Error or a test? (Score:1)
meter certification is needed with it at the home (Score:2)
meter certification is needed with it at the home
just like power , water and gas meters
the local grocery store has to have their scales (Score:1)
the local grocery store has to have their scales periodicially certified and they can face fines for over billing. But will comcast be fined for over billing on an metered service ?
Re: (Score:2)
No.
Is the local grocery store fined for not having their scales certified on a regular basis, or are they protected from lawsuits by keeping their scales in compliance?
This issue impacted 0.007% of their 27 million internet customers, this is far from a major problem, they admitted their error, they are making it right, and they are giving those impacted a $50 credit - those bastards.
Comcast incorrectly charged _all_ customers (Score:2)
FYFY.
Also, by all accounts Internet access costs between $15-$30/mo [broadbandnow.com] for the access they sell for $70-$150/mo. We're getting robbed blind, and I never understand why we're all just OK with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow.
This affected 2,000 customers, a tiny fraction of a fraction of their total customer base - a far cry from "all" customers. In 2018 Comcast had over 27 million internet customers [statista.com], that's 0.007 percent of their customer base (2,000 / 27.2M * 100).
And your exciting revelation that Comcast sells it's products at a profit is fascinating - I wonder if any other industry is based on selling it's products above cost, can you think of any that do that?
The reason we are all "OK with that" is because most people
Re: (Score:2)
We all expect companies to sell at a profit, but the amount of profit is very much an issue. If you are a capitalist, you should understand that real competition is necessary and that pushing cost towards the marginal cost of production is a desired outcome. 100% markup is not consistent with that goal.
You might want to read the page you linked to (Score:2)
It might be enlightening to actually READ the page you linked to.
The page you linked vastly over-complicates it, but it darn sure doesn't say their total costs are $15-$30!
It's actually really simple to know the profit margin of any major company. It's part of their annual report to stockholders, and it's widely reported in the business news. Note that the reports are prepared for stockholders (owners), so management is incentived to make profit look good.
In 2018, Comcast had a decent year, $11.7 billion
Ps it costs them more than what you pay (Score:2)
I actually just looked a little more at their annual report.
If you have internet and TV with Comcast, it costs them about $171 / month to serve the average customer. Meaning their costs are higher than your bill, but the ads on the TV make up the difference.
Seriously (Score:2)
What more could Comcast have done? This mistake impacted 0.007% of their customer base, an extreme minority of a minority of their customer base.
"While updating our data usage meter to a new system, a software error occurred resulting in a small number of our customers being billed incorrectly. We're very sorry for inconveniencing our customers and here's what we're doing to address it: We fixed the technical issue, we're proactively crediting the accounts affected, and we're giving those customers an additional $50 credit to make it right."
They are refunding the over-charges AND issuing $50 credits on top of the refund, seems perfectly reasonable to me.
Demand calibrated meters (Score:5, Funny)
Want to get any ISP to drop a data cap?
Realize this - everything that is billed by a measured unit has to be calibrated to ensure that they're accurate. This goes for everything - electricity, gas, water, gasoline, scales, etc. If you look carefully, there's a calibration sticker that tells you when it was calibrated, who calibrated it, and when a new calibration is required. Stuff like meters in your house generally are replaced rather than recalibrated since they have to be removed anyways, so it's easier to just install a new one than replace with a new one, recalibrate, and exchange it back.
Thus, if you want to charge by the byte, then Weights and Measures should define a standard of what it is, and ensure that meters provided for them are calibrated so things like this can't happen. If you want to charge by a unit, then the unit has to be properly defined and meters tested to ensure they are accurate.
Demand this, and the added cost of those calibrated meters will probably just kill the whole thing.
And yes, a byte is not necessarily a byte - after all, what is a byte? Does it include Ethernet headers and trailers? Medium specific headers and trailers (DOCSIS, DSL, etc)? Do you include the synchronization bits as well? It needs to be defined so people know what is being measured.
Re: (Score:2)
Realize this - everything that is billed by a measured unit has to be calibrated to ensure that they're accurate. This goes for everything - electricity, gas, water, gasoline, scales, etc. If you look carefully, there's a calibration sticker that tells you when it was calibrated, who calibrated it, and when a new calibration is required. Stuff like meters in your house generally are replaced rather than recalibrated since they have to be removed anyways, so it's easier to just install a new one than replace with a new one, recalibrate, and exchange it back.
Thus, if you want to charge by the byte, then Weights and Measures should define a standard of what it is, and ensure that meters provided for them are calibrated so things like this can't happen. If you want to charge by a unit, then the unit has to be properly defined and meters tested to ensure they are accurate.
Demand this, and the added cost of those calibrated meters will probably just kill the whole thing.
Counting bytes is a bit different than normal utilities. There are some unique concepts such as lost packets that never make it to you being counted against you anyway. Comcast did have an independent third party review their system.
http://www.netforecast.com/wp-... [netforecast.com]
Re: (Score:2)
There is an easier way. Just start sending a steady stream of unsolicited UDP packets to Comcast customers.
Damn Comcast sucks! (Score:2)
I have Spectrum (formerly the beast known as Time Warner) and there are no fee based data caps. They'll rate limit you for "unreasonable usage", but there's still no cost involved.
Re: (Score:2)
I have Spectrum (formerly the beast known as Time Warner) and there are no fee based data caps. They'll rate limit you for "unreasonable usage", but there's still no cost involved.
That will be the case only until their merger agreement with the government expires.
Data caps? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Was I a Victim? (Score:2)
My Comcast bill shows that I averaged about 200GB / month then jumped over 1 TB for September. We didn't add any new devices or change our internet habits. I received a letter saying I used one of two courtesy overage months. If this truly was a software bug on their end, I want my courtesy month back!
Re: (Score:2)
You'll probably never see it. Money you could get back eventually, but "soft" value items like courtesy months are probably gone forever.
Isn't it odd... (Score:2)
This has been happening for over a year (Score:1)
Comcast charged me for 6 months with no service (Score:2)
I had a squirrel or something eat my coax line that Comcast never buried. I couldn't get a tech to actually show up and fix it. I had no service for at least 6 months and they acknowledged it. I finally called to cancel unless they credit me the 6 months service I'd paid @ $79.99 and they said that seemed fair but couldn't do it. At one point the "retention" expert told me they were only authorized to credit me $20 but was willing to do $30. I told them that was an insult and to just cancel.
They had someone