'I've been cheated,' says senior with $1,400 Bell prepaid cellphone credit

An 88-year-old Nova Scotia woman's battle with Bell Canada over credits on her prepaid cellphone account has prompted more complaints about the company and questions about inconsistencies in how Bell treats its customers.

Theresa Smith of Milford, N.S.,accumulated almost $1,000 in credits on her cellphonebecause her plan provided her with a regular number of minutes each month for $17.25. If the minutes went unused, the money was rolled over into the following month.

Bell refused to refund Smith,offering instead to stop the automatic withdrawals from her credit card, and use the existing credit to pay for her prepaidcellphone going forward. The credit was expected to cover the next 4 years.

After CBCNews contacted Bell, the company said as a goodwill gesture it would allow Smith to use the credit to pay for her home Bell services. A Bell spokesperson pointed out that the terms and conditions of prepaid service clearly state that credits are non-refundable. The spokespersonalso said since those accounts are prepaid, customers do not receive statements or bills.

West Ship Harbour, N.S., resident Edna Baker, 88, can relate to Smith's situation. She carriesher cellphonein case of an emergency while driving andmakes her payment by automatic debit each month. Baker's credit totals $1,402.

"I should be eligible because a precedent has now been set," Baker said.

She said she first discovered the credit on her bill when she got a notice from Bell that her existing phone would soon be obsolete. She called the designated number and was offered a more expensive package, which she declined. At that time, Baker was told she had accumulated over $1,000 in credit on the account.

She said she asked for the credit to be applied to her landline and was promised a call back, but never heard back from the company.

After reading Smith's story, Baker said she was shocked and called Bell immediately.Over the next day and a half, she spoke to eight different people, none of whom could help her.

"I just feel it's really unfair and I've been cheated," Baker said.

'It could take forever to get that money back'

She said Bell did offer to stop the automatic debits and apply the credit to her cellphone, but she said no.

"The credit is so high and I'm 88 years old. It could take forever to get that money back," she said, adding she'd be 92 before it was used up.

Bakerasked, like Smith, to have the credit applied to her home Bell service, but she was told that wasn't possible.

"I don't think you can treat one person one way and somebody else another," she said. "We're all customers and we're all paying very dearly for the service."

Dartmouth, N.S., resident Terry Fraser can sympathize with Baker. His parents are 86 and 91, and both havea cellphone for emergencies. They've had them for 10 years and seldom use them.

Their credit card is automatically debited $11.50 per month for each phone.

When they received a notice their phones were becoming obsolete and they needed to contact Bell, Fraser called on behalf of his parents. He learned they had combined credits amounting to over $2,800.

"I was floored by the amount," Fraser said.

He was offered another plan that included services his parents don't need, so he declined. He was told they might be able to offer a 12-month payment holidayon the automatic monthly withdrawals. Fraser then asked that the credit be applied to the home Bell service for his parents.

Fraser said the answer was an emphatic no, and he received the same response when he asked for a partial refund.

Fraser acknowledges the family should have been aware of the terms surrounding the phones, which were purchased 10 years ago.

"I understand they pay for the privilege to have a phone, but a portion also goes to pay for their minutes and they're not using them," he said.

'Lack of empathy'

Frasersaid it's Bell's unwillingness to reach a solution that upsets him most.

"I just can't get over the lack of empathy for two elderly, loyal Bell customers and no desire to offer solutions and come to a reasonable outcome," Fraser said.

On Monday, Bell told Fraserthey would suspend the monthly charges and use the credits until they were all used up.

Frasersaid this option is better than the 12-month payment holiday that was previously offered by Bell.

Will Muir had a very different outcome dealing with Bell when he took over power of attorney for his aunt, Margaret Goosen, who suffers from dementia. He discovered Bell had been charging her on amonthly basis for over 12 years. She had a credit of $3,403.11 on her prepaid cellphone, which began what he called "a long fight."

"My main complaint was that they couldn't tell me when the phone was last turned on, which I suspect was over 10 years ago," Muir said.

He notes that when he took over his aunt's finances, he was unable to pay her Bell landline for two months. During that time, he said Bell sent three letters, the last of which threatened to terminate service if the bill wasn't paid.

"I miss two payments on her landline and they sent me three letters.A phone isn't used in over 10 years and they don't send one notice. That was my complaint to Bell," Muirsaid.

In the end, Bell refunded the entire amount by cheque.

Bell's response

Bell did not respond to a CBC Newsinterview request and instead issued a statement.

"All goodwill gestures are handled on an individual basis, and take into account a variety of factors including unique customer circumstances," spokesperson Isabelle Boulet wrote.

She said many customers choose to top up their prepaid accounts with pre-authorized payments as a convenient way to ensure they have seamless access to their service. Bouletsaid that allows customersto use any leftover funds from the previous month for future usage. She reiterated that credits for future usage are not refundable as outlined in the terms of service.

"Topping up prepaid accounts before the expiry date each month is voluntary," Boulet said.

"Customers can always top up after the expiry date, but any unused funds from the previous month would not be rolled over for future use."

Concern over prepaid cellphone credits with Rogers

Bell isn't the only telecommunications company immersed in controversy over credits on prepaid wireless accounts.

Last year, the Public Interest Advocacy Centre (PIAC) filed an application with the CRTC questioning Rogers' proposal to cap credits on prepaid cellphones to $150, meaning any amount over $150 would be wiped out. Rogers recently indicated it will not implement that measure at this time and PIAC is waiting for the CRTC's ruling on the matter.

"The problem is, unfortunately, starting to get chronic and I would encourage the CRTC to give us a ruling because that will help clarify what happens to balances," PIAC's executive director, John Lawford, told CBCNews.

His group has been waiting for more than a year for the CRTC to issue a decision.

Lawford said PIAC believes customers who carry a balance on prepaid cellphones should receive written statements on a regular basis. He also said there should be a cap on how much credit can be built up. When it reaches a designated amount, Lawford believes the automatic debits should stop until the credit is used.

He noted the CRTC's previous position was that customers with prepaid cellphone plans regardless of the companywere paying for monthly access to a service and they should use their credits or lose them.

Lawford suggests people who are upset about their credit buildup file a complaint with CCTS, anindependent, industry-funded agency set up by the federal government to resolvecomplaints from consumers about their phone, internet and television services.