There's way too many things to have to scrutinize nowadays. Everything you come into contact with has to be examined with a fine-toothed comb. And if you miss something, you get the pleasure of being told it's your own damn fault. Don't you know that life itself comes with small print that you have to read and memorize? Blargh.

I really don't know how I feel about this.

what is premium texting?

"Since it's not really "Sprint" that's billing you"

Their name's on the bill, the "remit to" goes to Sprint ...

Sprint's billing you.

@INconsumer: I found this link from Seattle P-I that you might find helpful:
[seattlepi.nwsource.com]

I guess asking for some parental oversight is too much lately as well. (I'm just generalizing here.) It's too hard to say "No. Let's look at the plans and what it costs." first, rather than "OK, here's your free phone, have at-it."

God bless you for providing some perks to your kid, but you're the parent, and at the same time, she's now an adult. So it takes 2 to tango. I'm not excusing a 72 page contract disclosure either, but still "caveat emptor" should be your first thought in most things you want to sign up for. If it looks like you can't figure out the terms with a law firm to interpret the small print, it's a bad deal; Walk away from the offer.

New users should be able to call the provider after the first weeks use and see what allotment has been charged, and either cancel the service, change a plan, or lay the law down to the offspring. (there's that responsibility thing again....)

I'm a geeky sort of guy, but for the life of me I can't see the value (except to the companie$) of texting...just my .02

@INconsumer:
Texting that has an added billing component - 99c for each message or something like that. Or $$$/mo for them to send you backgrounds, ringtones, games, etc.

Pay bill on your credit card, then try a chargeback?

Also, what I don't understand is that there isn't (to my knowledge at least) a way to disable premium texting services on phones. All they offer is to disabled texting period which isn't an option for teens.

@Buran: Actually, it's more like taxes. Best Buy technically doesn't charge tax - they collect on behalf of the government (for free might I add). However, the bill and receipt say "Best Buy" on them. Similarly, Sprint bills say "Sprint, now together with Nextel" on them, but they are still collecting on behalf of the content provider. And some content providers charge up to $9.99/mo and $4.99/premium message.

I can imagine if the poor girl sent in a text message to some TV show she saw, with T&C in one point font, flashed on the screen for 1/30th of a second.

This isn't an issue with a prepaid carrier like Cricket. Sign up for unlimited minutes and texting and they won't allow you to do anything that costs more than what the unlimited plan allows unless you prepay the necessary funds. Thus, no surprises.

Big established US cell carriers ~= Teh Evil

Sean, try contacting the Mobile Marketing Association at [www.mmaglobal.com]. According to readers who have commented on this post, they carry considerable weight in the mobile marketing industry and may be able to help void the fees, especially if the company tried to enter into a business agreement with a disabled youth (depends, I guess, on age when she agreed to the service, + type and level of disability—IANAL).

All they offer is to disabled texting period which isn't an option for teens.

Correct. It won't be an option when my daughter gets a cell phone as a teen.

I'm guessing this disabled kid doesn't have much guidance from dad/mom??

I think this fellow is lucky that he got them to cut the bill in half. I think it's time to disable text messaging on the kiddos phone.

Also, I'd like to know what kind of disabled we're talking about here. If the kid is mentally disabled, I might cut the situation a little slack .. however, if this is just a physical disability, I have no pity for this dude.

At 18 you should know better and pay your bills. But, if the kid "ain't right", well ... shit .. I dunno.

According to the Mobile Marketing Association (mmaglobal.com), the body that regulates text messaging campaigns, by replying "stop" or "help" to any subscription message, premium or otherwise, will either opt you out of the campaign or at least give you information about how to get yourself out.

Easiest way to keep your kids from running up the SMS bill is to have SMS disabled on your phone by calling your carrier.

Also, this is a carrier issue and an issue for Sprint, many of them have a limit to how much total you can charge to your bill per month. I know for a fact that that number is significantly lower than $10k. Get a lawyer and talk to Sprint, go to the CSCA (usshortcodes.com) and find out who owns the short code these premium campaigns are being delivered over and contact them.

@doormat:

Why shouldn't that be an option for teens? Kids don't need to text. The only reason a teen needs a cell phone is for emergencies and to keep mom/dad informed of where they are and what they're up to.

I love the parental supervision stuff. Just because an 18-year old child is disabled doesn't make it any easier to supervise than any other 18-year old child. They need some privacy and ability to do stuff. You give them the cell phone so you have some reassurance that they will be "okay". I can't tell you how difficult it is to realize that your 18 year old disabled child knows more about cell phones than you do... including how to charge $10,000 worth of text. That's why my stepson has a pre-paid cell phone that isn't linked to our plan.

i can not conceive how can i be billed for something i did not use? Is this legal? I just do not get it...

@gorckat: Why not? Go for a prepaid monthly text option and have her pay for it out of her allowance. That's what I'll do when I have kids. (and if they run over, they lose their allowance until the overage is paid, and texting will be shut off until that time) - OR - I'll buy them a prepaid phone that they can fill with their own allowance money.

what sort of disability does she have? I mean, if she has Down's or something, OK, but if she's 18 and just can't walk, I'm not sure how this is Sprint's problem.

@NoWin: Texting is quite useful in Europe, where calling is very, very expensive, and texting is just cheaper on both ends, if you're utilitarian about it. However, here, kids mostly use it so they can "talk" to their friends and not have their phones ringing (although I can't figure out how to turn off the sound on MY phone -- there's not a texting alarm option I can find!).

Also, re: the Nickelodeon thing; Why are kids young enough to watch Nickelodeon given phones for things other than "emergency ONLY!"? Students as young as 3rd grade at my school have phones, but their parents make sure to impress on the kids how VERY VERY VERY important it is to only use it to call Mom and Dad.

@doormat:

Actually there is a way to disable 'Premium' text messaging, at least through Sprint. I had it disabled on all phones for my family after my daughter was sending a text for a 'Free' ring tone, not knowing she was signing up for a monthly service, she paid for it, it was taken care of, but I found out that I could request that Sprint block 'Premium' messaging. Now, if my daughter texts to one of thos offers, when the provider tries to send her a reply saying welcome or whatever, it is blocked by the Sprint server, if it doesn't get through, they can't begin billing. I have had zero trouble with ridiculous "Premium' texting since. I wish they would make this known to all customers somehow.

@spiderjerusalem:
"what sort of disability does she have? I mean, if she has Down's or something, OK, but if she's 18 and just can't walk, I'm not sure how this is Sprint's problem"

That was my question. If it's only a physical disability .. well, he's only mentioning it for added sympathy.

I think if I got a $10k bill I would have a heart attack far before I could call anybody.

This is the revenge of the Crazy Frog. I think part of the problem lies with the carriers and another portion of the fault lies wtih the "service" providers. I can't understand why Sprint or Cingular or anyone else for that matter would allow a company that charges you the low low price of $30/month for texting some lame joke to your phone once a day to piggy back off of them. All it is going to do in the end is aggravate their actual customers. These are generally predicated on people being duped into signing up and then making it difficult to cancel.

Everyone talking about prepaid credit is good in that it keeps the cost from running to high, but what happens when one of these scams hits, takes all the credit off and your kid can't make an emergency call. I doubt it would be the end of the world, people have survived emergencies without cell phones before but the solution is not to limit one's options but to pressure the carriers to not bill for this crap.

@Buran: @remusrm: This has nothing to do with the rate plan, this is the service advertised in commercials such as "Text 321Joke to 89943 to receive a joke per day" whilst flashing two paragraphs of disclaimers in microscopic print at the bottom of the screen every 5 or 10 frames of video.

The disclaimers of course read something along the lines of "Must be 18 or older, 4.99 for the first joke and 1.99 for each successive one, repeating automatically four times a day" or something not as exaggerated as that, but still quite ridiculous.

I think this can be disputed on the grounds of the kid being incapable either by age or by disability of signing a contract and the terms of the contract moving by so quickly you couldn't read them without a DVR.

Either way it goes, the parent should have been more diligent and the kid should be downgraded to a cell phone with two buttons 'Call Mom' and 'Call 911.'

When I was a kid I ran up a $3k Compuserve bill; there was no disputing it with the company, but I was in no condition to sit comfortably at a computer for several weeks after that bomb hit the mail and I never racked up a charge like that again.

"I'm guessing this disabled kid doesn't have much guidance from dad/mom??" You're guessing that because?

"I mean, if she has Down's or something, OK, but if she's 18 and just can't walk," So unable to walk is the preferable alternative? Good Lord.

You're right, there is the entire possibility that this person is unethically using his daughter's disability to give traction to the story. Until there's reason to believe that, let's give the guy the benefit of the doubt on disabilities, for crying out loud, and assume that the disability complicated the issue.

*cough*

[www.fireflymobile.com]

*cough*

@RowdyRoddyPiper: I had completely forgotten the crazy frog ( If forcibly pushed from the waking mind could be forgotten ) thanks for a lovely day of ba-ding-ding-ding-ding-ding-ding-ding-ding-ding ringing through my head instead of the dogs barking all the time.

@lightaugust:

"I'm guessing this disabled kid doesn't have much guidance from dad/mom??" You're guessing that because?"

Well, the kid ran up a TEN THOUSAND DOLLAR phone bill. It's just a guess that no one is keeping an eye on the kid.

@Charles Duffy: Amen. The easy answer to half of the problems that people have with cell phone companies is "Pre-paid phones." The worst case scenario, your child blows through $32.10 for text messages and THEN you can have the discussion about "why they have a cell phone."

Sean, I feel for you. I really do. Cell phone companies will nail you, and premium texting is no different than the old 900/976 phone numbers from the late-80s/early-90s. They're a scam and they're designed to screw parents out of money through their kids.

Sprint offering 50% off is probably the best they can do. Essentially, they're not making any money off of you, but their other customer is. Suing Sprint won't help you. Before your credit takes a knock, I would take their offer and set up a payment plan. Then, look for a lawyer who has experience with these kind of cases ([www.handelonthelaw.com] look at the attorney directory).

huh. did the article change? this isn't the same entry i replied to originally...

I've have previously discussed the scam that is LEC billing...where services are billed from a third party on your home phone bill. Pretty much, the phone companies didn't like the complaints. As such, the third party company doesn't want any complaints getting to the phone company or the Atty General. I don't know how it works in the cellular industry, but you might have better luck w/the third party and threaten to complain to Sprint (who might block this third party from their network if they get too many complaints) and threaten to complain to the Atty General. When I worked at one such third party LEC billing company those were the magic words to get a full refund credited to your account.

10k in text charges??? that is absolutely ridiculous. i dont even understand how that could happen.

I tire of the "my disabled relative" angle the consumerist loves so much. What is the relevance of someone being disabled? It shouldn't matter with regard to whether/how much someone is charged for something.

@Draconianspark: You are not even exaggerating. Some of the horoscope/survey based "premium texting" services can cost $14.99 a pop.

I think at some point this will have to become regulated better in terms of making sure people know that there are costs associated with these services (more so than blurry text at the bottom of the screen), and some control, either legislative or voluntarily by the industry, to limit advertising of this sort that targets children.

We already have laws that dictate the kinds of ads that can target children, and some industries, like breakfast cereals or fast food (can't recall which one), is taking steps to self-restrict how they advertise to kids.

My daughter signed up for a Premium Texting service, to send her a weekly customized horiscope. Trick is, the ad didn't state what the weekly cost was. I found it the second month of billing buried at the back of the Sprint bill, for $9.99/week. The first time I called, I got the runaround that Amy "had to sign up for it, so we're responsible". The second time, I escallated it to a supervisor, and proceeded to rip about how unethical this situation was, how it made me question if I wanted to continue my business relationship with Sprint, etc. At the point I started discussing contract termination fees and immediate termination, they figured out how to credit me for the charges.

I've seen several responses that "parental supervision" is to blame. Right. People without kids with cellphones would say this. Signups are very easy, advertising is deliberately misleading, and teenagers these days are both very tech savvy and hopelessly clueless about the marketplace. I would rather see the phone companies adopt elective restrictions which enable the account holders to preemptively block additional fee services, toll calls, or other uses that Parents do not want their child to indulge in. The current situation is roughly akin to dropping your kids off at a bakery / candy store, and telling them to not eat any of the free samples being offered throughout the day.

Final thought. When I got annoyed, I learned that Sprint can block all paid im/premium services if you are insistant enough. May want to consider this for future reference.

@mike1731:

Come on! What about personal responsibility? Surely you have taught your daughter that products/services are never free, right? Your daughter should know, at the very least, that the phone is paid for by you, and not given by a magic phone fairy.

There is no reason for this stuff to still be happening. Premium text services have been around for several years now. Parents should be informed, and should then inform there kids. There is no excuse for ignorance at this point.

This parental supervison stuff is a joke. You can't oversee a child 24 hours a day.

If you are cooking dinner in the kitchen and the kid is watching TV where one of those commercials comes on saying text "joke" to 123456 and get jokes sent to your phone every day, and they do it not knowing the cost, how can you as a parent stop that.

You can't. You can't tell you kid to turn off a TV because I am cooking dinner, or get off the computer because I have to put in a load of laundry.

A person can not be watched constantly. And all these people who say it's possible, don't have kids.

My son signed up for some sort of service online for downloading MP3's. The charges were attached to my Verizon bill "as a service to ESBI or Enhanced Service Billing. It is on behalf of a New Service Provider". In this case www.unitedtel.com. I called a toll free number provided and explained to the CSR that I had no idea what this was. She gave me plenty of information to confirm it was my son. I haven't talked to him yet but I'm guessing he didn't know there was a fee attached. Anyway the CSR was really nice, cancelled the service and credited me the amount. Granted $16 is much easier to credit than $10K. I would guess that contacting the Enhanced Service provider directly is the way to go. I'm also guessing that you can make a case that the girl doen't have authority to do this and therefore is not a legal contract. Being disabled should especially negate the service provider from legally entering into a contract with her.

@DojiStar:

Nope, you can't watch them 24/7/ However, you can teach your kids to be aware of these kinds of advertisements. Teach your kids that they cost money. These ads are prevelant enough to require parents to discuss them.

Have any of you jumping all over yourselves about the disabled relative, parental guidance, etc thought that the reason she might be texting is that she is deaf? Kind of hard to use a cell for something other than texting IF YOU CAN't HEAR! Now, I have no idea if this is the case, but I know deaf people do buy cell phones so they can communicate away from home. The dad still should have monitored things, but come on. I sometimes dread reading the comments on this site because so many people want to prove how frugal/smart/holier than everyone else they are. Although I'm sure it isn't nearly as fun, how about not judging until you get the entire story?

@duncanfj:

If she's deaf, how does that change the situation? Being deaf doesn't make you mentally deficient. At 18 years old, she should be smart enough to know that premium texting isn't free.

As for being deaf, many cell phone companies have calling plans designed specifically for the deaf. These are plans that have no calling features, only texting.

How does one even come close to $10k in charges? How?!! It's just unfathomable. I once racked up a $250 bill for going over in minutes and text messages, but $10,000??

@duncanfj: Learn to read the post. This wasnt from SENDING TEXT cause she was deaf (Leap anyway). She racked up 20k in PREMIUM texting, as in, incoming text from a 3rd party.

Is this 10k all in one month, or was this something that was unnoticed at first? I ask because, even at the insane fees they charge, its got to be tough to sign up that many services.

I remember back in the early 80s being unable to sit for days after my folks got the $100+ phone bill from me calling one of those "Talk to your favorite cartoon" phone lines.

@mike1731:

Thats good to know about being able to disable premium texting (at least with Sprint) if you're a stick in the mud and wont get off the phone.

I'm seriously trying to wrap my brain around how many premium services his daughter must have signed up for to rack up 10 grand in charges in one month. Any way the submitter can send a scan of the phone bill with identifying information blacked out? I really have to see this to believe it. I hope this works out for him somehow (although I have a hard time believing Sprint will wipe out the charges completely). $10,000... Jesus.

that sounds as a bogus bill... i do not think there are that many services to make for that... just really odd

It doesn't sound like it applies in this situation (since the 'kid' is 18) but what about the whole legal premise that kids can't sign contracts.

@ radleyas: So you have to be mentally deficient for the above to happen to you? So the majority of people who post stories on this site are mentally deficient? Nice.

@ artdonovanslovechild: Sorry, didn't see the description of 'premium texting' in the story. Oh, that's right, there isn't one.

Thank both of you for proving my point.