Skyetel auto enables billable services without notice
-
I understand that this is frustrating and I apologize for the confusion here. When you port in a number onto our network, we activate the number with the PSTN, bring it into service, and enable our default services (Caller ID and Spam Block). It is our goal to make that phone number route immediately so that you can use it immediately. We assume that by porting in a number, you want it active.
When we activate a phone number and establish PSTN routing, we have to send the call somewhere - sorta like an IP Address. We can't activate the number and not route it - so we end up sending it to a Skyetel server that plays our version of "Phone Number not in service." This serves as a sorta of middle-ground; the number is "Active" with the PSTN but the experience callers have is that it is not in service.
By keeping a phone number "Active" with the PSTN we do have to have reserved capacity, and it does cost us money - Idle numbers aren't actually Idle. Again, like IPs, if they've been issued, they have to route somewhere. Therefore, because idle numbers do have a cost, we do charge for the call time to play that not in service message.
Lastly, it's important to note that keeping a number in our inventory without ever routing it is not how our network was designed to work - its designed to have an Endpoint assigned and routed.
-
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
and enable our default services (Caller ID and Spam Block).
In exactly zero locations during the sign up and port in process is this ever mentioned.
On top of that, these are absolutely unwanted services. Maybe for uneducated residential consumers, but SIP trunking isn't for uneducated residential consumers.
I don't want to pay you for Caller ID, I pay zero carriers for that in fact.
I most emphatically do not want you to randomly block phone calls. You have no idea what my business considers an unwanted call.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
Now that I have been informed that the port in fee was not directly billed as I expected, that explains that.
$0.11 or $500 does not matter when it is for services never asked for.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
Lastly, it's important to note that keeping a number in our inventory without ever routing it is not how our network was designed to work - its designed to have an Endpoint assigned and routed.
I do know how this works. I don't even argue that you cannot charge me to play your message.
I 100% argue that I should not be charged for some default services I was never told about and did not consent to, nor ask for.
-
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
Now that I have been informed that the port in fee was not directly billed as I expected, that explains that.
$0.11 or $500 does not matter when it is for services never asked for.
Please note that we do disclose that there is a Port In fee on the Port In Page:
-
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
Now that I have been informed that the port in fee was not directly billed as I expected, that explains that.
$0.11 or $500 does not matter when it is for services never asked for.
Please note that we do disclose that there is a Port In fee on the Port In Page:
No one is arguing a port in fee.
-
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Bra, if you feel that strongly, just cancel your service.
-
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Bra, if you feel that strongly, just cancel your service.
If you had any clue on how services worked, even if I wanted to, I cannot simply do that.
The number would have to be ported back out to some other provider first. That takes weeks (potentially).
I call it as I see it. I have never been shy about it. Just because someone like to fanboy on something doens't mean the problems are not there.
As far as this process. You heard about it live as I found out about it. I logged in today to add this service as a SIP trunk to a PBX and was welcomed by the screen at the top of the post.
-
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Please note - we add the phone number to your Skyetel account several days prior to completing the port request. Typically our customers modify phone number features and establish routing before the port completes. By not modifying that number, and not logging in again after submitting your port request, the default services were left enabled.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Please note - we add the phone number to your Skyetel account several days prior to completing the port request. Typically our customers modify phone number features and establish routing before the port completes.
Please note, how am I supposed to KNOW these features were enabled without looking at every single option?
Will I do so no matter what? Sure.
Had I logged in to this account and setup the SIP trunk on day one I would have posted here complaining about being auto-opted into services as soon as I found them enabled.
-
I think that the situation here is that Jared has discovered a fringe use case that just isn't foreseen and was overlooked (and is eleven cents so no one has thought about it before.) No one is scamming over eleven cents, that's ridiculous, and if any of us posted this, Jared would be the first to tear into us.
Should those services be mentioned somewhere so that in this bizarre edge case there is a warning that you might lose a few cents for services you didn't check? Sure, I'll bite and say that that might make sense to have it somewhere so that people aren't surprised on an edge case like that by a few cents that they had not anticipated or to know to look to go turn it off in case they aren't going to want it.
But what needs to be understood is that this is a port of active numbers. Porting an active number that you don't want to use is really odd. Nothing wrong with doing that, just totally bizarre. If you don't care about the number why bother porting it? Because this is so weird, I think it has fallen through the cracks of simply being a use case no one anticipated. I certainly would not think of it, the nature of porting a number creates the assumption (which is almost always correct) that you also plan to use it. Otherwise we'd expect that you'd get a new, immediate number rather than doing an "expensive" port.
But jumping from "someone made a mistake and didn't anticipate that anyone wouldn't want this situation because everyone else probably does, I know I do" to "it's a giant scam trying to get my eleven cents" is a crazy leap that just doesn't add up.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Please note - we add the phone number to your Skyetel account several days prior to completing the port request. Typically our customers modify phone number features and establish routing before the port completes. By not modifying that number, and not logging in again after submitting your port request, the default services were left enabled.
Hah, replied before you edited. to blame me.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Skyetel is a scam:
I think that the situation here is that Jared has discovered a fringe use case that just isn't foreseen and was overlooked (and is eleven cents so no one has thought about it before.) No one is scamming over eleven cents, that's ridiculous, and if any of us posted this, Jared would be the first to tear into us.
Correct at this point because now, I only argue that they enable services without consent causing that billing.
That said changing the post title will not fix all the replies.
Also, that said, it does not fix the fact that they are little better (if at all) than Nutanix by not letting anyone post numbers. Even if they themselves refse to post them.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Skyetel is a scam:
I think that the situation here is that Jared has discovered a fringe use case that just isn't foreseen and was overlooked (and is eleven cents so no one has thought about it before.) No one is scamming over eleven cents, that's ridiculous, and if any of us posted this, Jared would be the first to tear into us.
Should those services be mentioned somewhere so that in this bizarre edge case there is a warning that you might lose a few cents for services you didn't check? Sure, I'll bite and say that that might make sense to have it somewhere so that people aren't surprised on an edge case like that by a few cents that they had not anticipated or to know to look to go turn it off in case they aren't going to want it.
But what needs to be understood is that this is a port of active numbers. Porting an active number that you don't want to use is really odd. Nothing wrong with doing that, just totally bizarre. If you don't care about the number why bother porting it? Because this is so weird, I think it has fallen through the cracks of simply being a use case no one anticipated. I certainly would not think of it, the nature of porting a number creates the assumption (which is almost always correct) that you also plan to use it. Otherwise we'd expect that you'd get a new, immediate number rather than doing an "expensive" port.
But jumping from "someone made a mistake and didn't anticipate that anyone wouldn't want this situation because everyone else probably does, I know I do" to "it's a giant scam trying to get my eleven cents" is a crazy leap that just doesn't add up.
@scottalanmiller this edge case was never really considered. We'll be adding the following to our port in page ASAP:
- Once your number finishes porting, usage and feature costs will begin billing immediately
- Caller ID Lookups & Spam Prevention is enabled by default.`
-
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
@FATeknollogee said in Skyetel is a scam:
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
But this is just theft. Also why is is -$10.11? Terminating those calls most certianly does not cost that much.
@JaredBusch please note that the Port In Fee was $10, the actual usage for this number was only $0.11. So you only spent $0.11 in usage for this number for the month of April thus far.
I wasn't going to be the one that pointed that out...but calling some a "thief" without fully vetting (aka understanding) the charges...that's why I said this thread is just a "pissing" contest.
Theft. 100%. They enabled services with no authorization.
Bra, if you feel that strongly, just cancel your service.
If you had any clue on how services worked, even if I wanted to...
I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I do have a decent idea how these things work.
Again, if you feel (like you've said) that @Skyetel is a thief & scam, simply re-port the DID somewhere else. No need for the bitchfest & name calling.
In the grand scheme of the world, neither you or I are that important, life will go on...man, these are first world problems, bitching over 11 cents.
Ever seen a kid that doesn't know where/when their next meal is coming...them are real problems. -
@JaredBusch said in Skyetel is a scam:
Also, that said, it does not fix the fact that they are little better (if at all) than Nutanix by not letting anyone post numbers. Even if they themselves refse to post them.
Secret pricing is pretty common. I don't like it either, but it is totally different than not being allowed to report call quality issues, outages, or such. Not even related. One is something you know before you get a service (even when secret to others) and agree to. The other is hiding something you find out that you aren't getting after you are stuck with a service.
There is really no comparison here. Totally different situations. And the pricing is only not "public", but it's not exactly "secret". You can find out my pricing simply by clicking on the Skyetel account and selecting "chat" and asking. That's open to everyone reading this and to people who aren't. So while they prices are definitely not public, they are open to all.
-
@Skyetel said in Skyetel is a scam:
@scottalanmiller said in Skyetel is a scam:
I think that the situation here is that Jared has discovered a fringe use case that just isn't foreseen and was overlooked (and is eleven cents so no one has thought about it before.) No one is scamming over eleven cents, that's ridiculous, and if any of us posted this, Jared would be the first to tear into us.
Should those services be mentioned somewhere so that in this bizarre edge case there is a warning that you might lose a few cents for services you didn't check? Sure, I'll bite and say that that might make sense to have it somewhere so that people aren't surprised on an edge case like that by a few cents that they had not anticipated or to know to look to go turn it off in case they aren't going to want it.
But what needs to be understood is that this is a port of active numbers. Porting an active number that you don't want to use is really odd. Nothing wrong with doing that, just totally bizarre. If you don't care about the number why bother porting it? Because this is so weird, I think it has fallen through the cracks of simply being a use case no one anticipated. I certainly would not think of it, the nature of porting a number creates the assumption (which is almost always correct) that you also plan to use it. Otherwise we'd expect that you'd get a new, immediate number rather than doing an "expensive" port.
But jumping from "someone made a mistake and didn't anticipate that anyone wouldn't want this situation because everyone else probably does, I know I do" to "it's a giant scam trying to get my eleven cents" is a crazy leap that just doesn't add up.
@scottalanmiller this edge case was never really considered. We'll be adding the following to our port in page ASAP:
- Once your number finishes porting, usage and feature costs will begin billing immediately
This is expected, I cannot think of anyone that could intelligently claim otherwise
- Caller ID Lookups & Spam Prevention is enabled by default.`
This is huge IMO.
@Skyetel add one more thing:
- Any port in charges will not be billed until the first bill cycle completes
