Has anyone upgraded iPhones recently by purchasing the phones remotely from Apple.com and activating service on the phones directly? I upgraded to two new iPhone 6's this week and continued service with a 2 year contract agreement. ATT is trying to tell me that the onscreen contract acknowledgement, which appears on the phone itself when activating service remotely, both disclosed and quoted the dollar amount of a monthly rate increase that would accompany the upgrade. However, I scrolled through that onscreen acknowledgement and did not see any such disclosure or quote.
Now, ATT is sneaking in a 35% increase in my monthly bill - AFTER THE FACT - that's an extra $760 over the 2 year contract period!! I was notified BY TEXT MESSAGE of this increase the day AFTER I upgraded and activated service on the new phones. The one-time $40 upgrade fee for each phone, the 2 year contract agreement, and the cost of the phones were highlighted and made very clear BEFORE AND DURING the upgrade and activation processes. But NO MENTION was made of a monthly rate increase – unless it was buried obscurely somewhere in an endless block of text – and there certainly weren’t any dollar increases quoted. Now, ATT directs me to the Customer Service Summary online, which of course does include and highlight the rate increase, but this should have been shown to me BEFORE upgrading – not AFTER. Apparently, this is only shown to customers upgrading in-store; not those upgrading remotely. Quite an odd policy given that customers increasingly shop and conduct business online rather than waiting in long lines at a brick and mortar store.
In my opinion, "starting over" now under the buyer's remorse clause (not to mention paying a ridiculous $35 re-stock fee for each phone that I would then turn around an immediately re-purchase) is flatly unacceptable and ridiculous for ATT to even suggest as a possible solution. So, after 20 years, this will be my last stint as an ATT customer unless the company somehow sees fit to honor the contract that I agreed to (a continuation of existing service at existing prices), rather than the one it has sprung on me after the fact.
Sure seems to me like ATT is using a deceptive - if not illegal - billing practice here. Just curious if others have had a similar experience?