Cox Communications is telling customers if they exceed the company’s usage caps three times over the lifetime of an account, they either must upgrade to a more expensive service plan, make sure they never exceed plan limits again, or face an indefinite loss of their Internet service if they exceed Cox’s limits a fourth time.

Stop the Cap! reader Adam found out about Cox’s Three Strikes Program for himself in an online chat with Claudia, a Cox customer service representative:

Adam: I am concerned with the messages I got about a usage cap. I was told by the salesman that there was no bandwidth cap on our Internet, however this message is very troubling. Please explain this cap to me.
[…]
Claudia: I am really sorry for the lack of information provided to you by our Sales representative.
Adam: Is there a hard cap coming? Is that why we’re getting these messages?
Claudia: That is correct.
Claudia: At the fourth message your services will be blocked, on the previous one they will suggest you to upgrade your plan.
Adam: Fourth monthly, or fourth cumulative?
Claudia: Your Data Usage is reset each month, so it will be your fourth monthly message if exceeding the allowance.
Adam: So four months of going over. Does that counter ever reset?
Adam: Like if I’m bad three months, then good for three. Is it reset?
Claudia: Unfortunately, it is not reset.

Cox, like Comcast, does not charge overlimit fees, but the company does encourage customers who want to use the Internet more than their arbitrary allowances permit to upgrade to a more costly service plan.

Cox’s limits are detailed in an earlier piece Stop the Cap! brought readers a few weeks ago.

Internet Service Providers claim usage caps are important to protect the customer experience from “excessive users” slowing down service in your neighborhood, but as companies like Cox upgrade to DOCSIS 3, the broadband pipeline that results has increased so exponentially, it eliminates the excuse that came with the limits.

Now, ISPs increasingly see another reason to retain usage allowances: fatter profits from tiered usage plans that inevitably drive video-hungry Internet customers into costly upgrades.

Konrad Von Finckenstein

Konrad von Finckenstein, the head of Canada’s telecommunications regulator who initially rubber-stamped a Bell proposal to force Internet providers in Canada to charge usage-based pricing will not be back for a second term.

Von Finckenstein broke the news himself in a memo sent to staff at the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission, stating he would end his leadership of the CRTC when his five-year term concludes in January.

The CRTC has made uncomfortable headlines for Canada’s Conservative government, primarily by approving an Internet pricing plan submitted by Bell that would require virtually every Internet provider in Canada to end unlimited, flat rate pricing for broadband service.

The CRTC is hardly a hotbed of headline news for most Canadians.  The sleepy agency regulates telephone, broadband, television, and radio in the country with an increasingly light touch.  Ten years ago, the CRTC was regularly accused by some broadcasters of meddling in their private business.  These days the Commission, packed with members who formerly worked for the companies they now oversee, has gotten considerably more friendly with those they regulate.

That policy blew up in their faces when Bell got most of what it wanted in a wholesale pricing change that was so wide-reaching, it would potentially impact every Canadian Internet user.  Nearly a half-million of them registered their displeasure in a petition sponsored by Openmedia.ca.

Von Finckenstein’s resolute attitude towards the correctness of that decision was soon tempered when Industry Minister Tony Clement found himself overruling the CRTC in a Twitter message, telling Canadians the decision to impose usage-based billing “would not be allowed to stand.”

Opposition members in Parliament had a field day over Clement’s repeated distancing of the government from CRTC policies, particularly the one involving Internet pricing.

Liberal MP Marc Garneau seized on the fact Clement tweeted his intentions to the public at large before sharing them with von Finckenstein himself.  That, Garneau claimed, was the latest example of the government’s lack of clear policy on issues such as usage-based billing that has left the CRTC in what he called a “giant policy vacuum.”

The announcement by the CRTC chairman comes at the same time the Commission is finalizing a re-evaluation of its earlier decision on usage-based billing.

While hundreds of thousands of Canadians upset with the CRTC may be glad to see the back of von Finckenstein, his colleagues were considerably more generous with their praise:

Former CRTC executive Richard French credits Von Finckenstein, saying he sped up the commission’s decisions, improved the atmosphere around the offices and rarely left anyone guessing what he thought, “which I think is a virtue in a regulator.”

“He balanced the desire for more market forces with a recognition that for most of the industries in question, the Canadian market is sub-economic, it’s just not big enough to sustain enough players in this capital intensive business to create real competition so regulation is required,” French said Monday.

“He’s done an excellent job and he deserves the respect and appreciation of the industry and of the population,” French said.

Heritage Minister James Moore’s office issued a statement thanking von Finckenstein for his service as CRTC chair and said a process to select a new chair would be announced in the coming weeks.

Still Not Measuring Usage Correctly

Bell Canada’s Internet usage meter is still giving wildly inaccurate measurements of Internet usage, some customers allege.

Eleanor White, a Bell broadband customer, found Bell measuring some 30-44GB of usage, despite the fact the biggest bandwidth application in use by the account holder is a 16kbps audio stream running regularly throughout the day.

White estimates the monthly usage from that radio stream can’t be more than three gigabytes for the entire month, even leaving the stream running 16 hours a day.

“I hardly ever watch online video, and I estimate my usage from the radio stream and doubling it to account for e-mail reading and web browsing to be no more than 5.6GB a month,” White says. “But Bell measures at least 6-8 times as much, month after month.”

Bell’s usage meter has been implicated repeatedly for being inaccurate, occasionally by the company itself.  But the tool remains online and Bell continues to maintain its Internet Overcharging schemes, even for customers on its hybrid fiber-copper Fibe network.

Customers accuse Bell of overmeasuring usage on Fibe broadband as well.

“From the moment I got switched to Fibe, my traffic [measurement] went through the roof, at least according to the traffic monitor,” says Jurjen.  “[But that measurement doesn’t reflect] what we were actually using the Internet for.”

“Don’t try to get this solved; Bell won’t do anything (trust me, I tried for about five months),” Jurjen says. “The only solution: switch ISPs.”

Jurjen thinks the day holding Bell accountable for their broken usage meter is long overdue.

“For every service that you get billed by a unit, you must be certified by Measurements Canada. Just check your local gas station, it’ll have stickers all over. Same for your electricity provider,” Jurjen says.

“However, Bell is not certified by Measurements Canada. If you have a lot of spare time and money, do us a favor and start a trial against Bell.”

A snake in the grass?

Cogeco customers trying to avoid usage-based overlimit fees are finding that difficult when the cable company’s online usage measurement tool is offline or misreads their usage.  But the real trouble comes when customers find themselves arguing over wild usage measurements with Cogeco’s customer service representatives, who believe their meter is sacrosanct.

Two Ontario customers report Cogeco’s meter is registering some wild usage numbers this week — measurements those customers say count against their monthly usage allowance, drive them into overlimit fees, or force them to try and convince Cogeco employees they didn’t use as much as the company claims they did.

Take “Jubenvi,” a Cogeco customer in Sarnia.  His efforts to check on his usage through Cogeco’s online measurement tool was an exercise in futility until Monday, when Cogeco claimed he used 36GB of usage the day before.

“Not a chance,” he argues on Broadband Reports‘ Cogeco customer forum.  “No warnings either and [the tool] says I’m at 153 percent [of my allowance].”

That means one thing: overlimit penalty fees of $1/GB + HST.

“Ya, I won’t be paying that,” he declares.

Petawawa customer RJBrake also found last Sunday a “heavy traffic day” for him as well, at least according to Cogeco’s usage meter.

“This is completely stupid,” he shared. “There’s no way I downloaded 14GB in a day.”

Jubenvi called Cogeco to complain and to demand the overlimit charges be waived for usage he never actually used.

That opened the door to a customer service investigation which could send shivers up some customers’ spines.  Cogeco tracks customer usage over several months, and claimed Jubenvi‘s past usage regularly exceeded their arbitrary usage allowance, so it’s a safe bet he downloaded 36GB in a single day.

Unwilling to concede their meter might be inaccurate, a representative issued a one-time “loyal customer courtesy credit.”

Surprise! Nearly 15GB of usage last Sunday, whether you used it or not.

Jubenvi was unimpressed with small favors.

“She [said] that a few times a month, someone in [my] family rents a few movies from iTunes store, [but] never 36GB a day,” Jubenvi explains.  “I [wondered aloud] what if this happens again and [asked] why I didn’t receive any 85% and 100% [usage allowance] warnings.”

Cogeco didn’t have answers for either question, content on placing the blame entirely at the feet of the customer.

“She just goes into how I should upgrade my computer — it could have a virus, [and] make sure I’m not using Netflix,” he says.

Unfortunately, Canadian ISP usage meters are largely unregulated.  A Hamilton customer notes:

The CRTC along with Weights and Measures Canada won’t do anything to help you. I along with others here have already tried to file complaints about Cogeco’s usage meter and they both say that this doesn’t follow under there pervue of duties.

At the moment we are on our own and I don’t see anyone that’s going to help us until an MP or a Court get involved in this situation. I personally think that some time after Oct. 1 when there is no [longer a maximum cap on overlimit fees] for the Ultimate 30 and 50Mbps customers, someone is going to get hacked and get a huge bill and then lawyers and the news media will then find this topic interesting.

Anyone that’s on an Ultimate 30 or 50Mbps account could easily download anywhere from 60GB to over 100GB’s a day. It’s simple. I can grab 1GB worth of data in under 10 minutes on my Ultimate 30 connection so multiply that by 24 hours and you get 72GB.

Better days: AT&T's BlackBerry Curve, circa 2007

The prevalence of unlimited wireless data plans may have been an important factor in the American consumer’s move away from Research in Motion’s (RIM) former superstar BlackBerry, according to a company official.

Responding to questions about its falling market share in the U.S., Patrick Spence, the managing director of regional marketing at RIM pointed to unlimited usage plans as one potential way the competition got a leg up on their devices.

“In the United States, they’ve had flat rate data pricing for a long time, which has meant users haven’t had to worry about how they are using their smartphones,” Spence said.

He noted Americans love for wireless data has forced carriers to launch 4G upgrades in advance of other markets where 3G remains the fastest available standard.

The Guardian’s Charles Arthur gave RIM’s Patrick Spence a challenging series of questions about RIM’s ongoing loss of market share, and why the company is forcing BlackBerry owners to cope through two major platform upgrades in the coming months. (11 minutes)
You must remain on this page to hear the clip, or you can download the clip and listen later.

Spence said the dynamics of unlimited data have inspired a change in the types of devices used in the United States, namely not necessarily those carrying the BlackBerry brand.

As carriers end unlimited data, Spence predicts users will likely change their behavior in concert with new data plan limits as low as 200MB per month.

Where data limits prevail, BlackBerry devices seem to do better.  Spence touted the fact BlackBerry phones have now achieved number one status in Africa and countries in the Middle East like Saudi Arabia, displacing troubled Nokia.

Spence warned tech reporters not to extrapolate American marketplace trends as foreshadowing developments in the rest of the world.  One reason for that, according to Spence, has been the unlimited data plan, now being replaced with usage based billing or usage-capped plans.

BlackBerry phones have had a difficult time competing with the iconic Apple iPhone, as well as Android-based smartphones on offer from virtually every wireless carrier.  BlackBerry devices, once deemed the most advanced phones in the market, have lost quite a bit of luster in the last four years, particularly after the arrival of iPhone.

As a result, RIM has been engaged in serious cost-cutting, announcing job cuts of some 2,000 employees recently.  The company hopes to spring back with a series of platform upgrades and new phones, dubbed “superphones” by RIM, to regain market share.

It cannot come soon enough, as RIM lost another four percent of market share in just the past four months.  comScore suggests RIM phones now have just 21.7 percent of the smartphone market.  Only Microsoft and Nokia are doing worse.  Most of the BlackBerry fan base are moving to Android-based smartphones instead as their contracts come up for renewal, particularly those made by Samsung.  The Korean manufacturer now manufactures one of every four smartphones Americans own.

As of July 2011, RIM has 7.6 percent of the market share in the United States.

BlackBerry phones have fewer challenges overseas, and the devices remain very popular among younger users in the United Kingdom, parts of western Europe, Africa, and the Middle East.  That has been a mixed blessing for RIM in England, where the phone has been  implicated as the device of choice for looters during riots earlier this month.