Double Trouble

Last year, when the Federal Communications Commission reviewed rulemaking in Truth-in-Billing consumer protection regulations, the nation's state attorneys general told the FCC that based on the consumer complaints they receive, there is "significant consumer confusion related to misleading practices in billing for telecommunications services" and that, over the past five years, telecommunications-related complaints ranked "in the top four of all consumer complaints."

No surprise to Tom Allibone, who never gives the telephone industry a ringing endorsement. "These systemic, chronic-type billing problems, they exist all over the place," said the director of auditing at TeleTruth, a New Jersey telecommunications watchdog group, and former member of the FCC's consumer advisory committee.

Allibone said typical billing discrepancies include jacked-up Federal Universal Service Fund surcharges (he calls this a phone company "slush fund"), double-dipping on taxes and "overcharging or overbilling." Verizon and other telecommunications companies typically fall back on the "honest billing glitch" excuse when caught doing it, he says. "There was a systemic error . . . it's funny how they come back and say that."

James Hood, chief executive of Consumeraffairs.com, a consumer-advocacy organization, has little patience for companies that nickel-and-dime consumers with erroneous or stealth charges. "This is exactly the tactic that is used by low-life scam artists -- you put a small charge on a customer's credit card or phone bill each month in hopes that the consumer won't notice," he said. "Those who are exceptionally alert can usually get the charges removed, but most consumers never notice. For a company of Verizon's stature to remain quiet about a billing error is disgraceful."

Mitchell said errors occur ". . . and, when that happens, we work with affected customers to make the bill right." He recommends that customers review all of their bills for accuracy. "If they have a question or see a discrepancy, they should contact us. We will be happy to work with them to answer those questions and ensure their bill is accurate."

But Stevenson wonders what might have happened if he hadn't caught the error: "I just don't like to see big businesses take an apathetic approach to taking care of their customers," he said. "I wouldn't want my family or friends to be bilked because they simply didn't pay attention to the detailed breakdown of their bill."

Thanks, Ms. Camer

Resolution No. 2 from last week's New Year's resolutions for retailers, manufacturers, etc., advised Safeway to give its cashiers a break and not make them address credit card or check-paying customers by name. But Dorothy Camer of Takoma Park e-mailed this week to object, saying the name-game "breaks up the 'assembly line' character of the process and encourages both the checker and the customer to look at each other."

She thinks the practice accomplishes Safeway's desire to establish a connection to the store. "I much prefer having my name pronounced incorrectly than have them talking on a cell phone while they hand me the receipt," she said.

Got questions? A consumer complaint? A helpful tip? E-mail toconsumer@washpost.comor write to Don Oldenburg, The Washington Post, 1150 15th St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071. Because of the volume of mail, personal replies are not always possible.