Q&A on the unfair terms of telecommunications services!

[[129390]]

I read an article today. Liu Min, deputy secretary-general and spokesperson of the China Consumers Association, said in a video interview room of Chinanews.com that "when upgrading from 2G and 3G networks to 4G, telecom business premises will provide you with very convenient conditions and quickly get you a card. But you say you don't want to use 4G, the traffic is too fast, you don't have that much traffic, you don't need such a large amount of traffic, and you don't want such consumption. When you want to switch back to 2G or 3G, it's not allowed. In this case, this is a typical unfair clause." Unfair clauses are commonly known as "overbearing clauses." Therefore, the headlines used by the media are all "China Consumers Association: Not switching from 4G to 2G is an overbearing clause."

I was so angry that I posted the following on Weibo.

Micro-comment on "China Consumers Association: Not switching to 2G for 4G is an unfair clause": This is complete nonsense. Doesn't the China Consumers Association have anyone who knows 2G/3G/4G? Can't the operators teach the China Consumers Association? They haven't taught the media about common sense about telecommunications services? Another question is, "weak mobile phone signals, easy disconnection, poor network coverage, etc." This is also common in developed countries. Which operator promises 100% coverage? #微言传播#

First of all, let me say here that the fact that 4G cannot be exchanged back to 2G is not an unfair clause.

The reason given by the China Consumers Association is that "4G traffic is too fast, and such a large amount of traffic is not needed", so we have to switch back to 2G or 3G. This is not a good reason at all. At the beginning of last year, everyone was hyped that "the house belongs to China Mobile after turning on 4G for one night". Then when they saw that 4G was used, the video was very smooth and the traffic was "rushing", some people proposed to switch back. This is understandable. But this is not the best solution. No matter which 4G mobile phone, it provides such a function. You can choose not to use 4G and only use 2G/3G. At this time, although you are still using the 4G package, the actual service is 2G/3G. The speed is slowed down. Don't you need to switch back to 2G? Let's take a look at the tariff. From 2G to 3G and then to 4G, whether it is the tariff within the package or the tariff outside the package, the unit tariff is declining. In other words, it is getting cheaper and cheaper. Why choose to go back?

Of course, this cannot be entirely blamed on the China Consumers Association. The blame should also be placed on the lack of communication between the operators, the China Consumers Association, and the media.

So which are the unfair terms in telecommunications services and which are not?

I posted this on Weibo: I want to write about what are the unfair terms and what are not in communication services. Netizens are welcome to forward/comment and raise questions. If there are more than 10 complete questions, I will write them. #微言传播#

Now there are more than 10 valid questions. Let's write one.

1. Netizen Boyunmi Ri: The same operator cannot switch packages and the tariff cannot be changed

Operators can indeed add some restrictions to some packages to prevent switching, but if there are too many such restrictions, "tyrannical clauses" will appear. Especially for fixed-line broadband or mobile packages that are unchanged for two or three years, by then, your technology has been upgraded and the unit price of the package has become cheaper, so why can't you switch? Of course, since there is an initial agreement, you are not allowed to switch to a package with a lower monthly fee within the agreed period, which is fine.

2. Netizen Panda Military Industry: Clearing traffic to zero at the end of the month is really not an unfair clause!

This is really not the case. I have done an interview on Sina Weibo. The operators' data packages do have many problems and should be improved. However, the monthly packages will be reset at the end of the month, so there is no problem and the lawsuit can be won.

3. Netizen Yibelu_: For example, if you have budgeted phone charges and want to give away free phone charges, the operator will return the free phone charges on a monthly basis in order to bind users, and the rates must be changed to higher ones during this period.

This should not be considered an unfair clause, but if operators want to retain users, they should give a high enough "price". If you do not allow users to leave the network for half a year, you can give them less phone bills. If you do not allow users to leave the network for a year, you should give them more phone bills.

4. Netizens’ opinion: The contract period cannot be terminated early and the plan cannot be changed

Including not allowing number portability, just because an operator does not have a small contract specifically for concessions, this is an unfair clause. No matter what the contract is, it should be allowed to be terminated on the basis of paying an appropriate price.

5. Netizens’ opinion: Package binding forces binding of other services

This depends specifically on the bundling service. First, whether the user is willing, and second, whether the operator pays the price. If both are yes, it cannot be said to be a "unfair clause", otherwise it is.

6. Netizen Erdai Chen Erdai: The ownership cannot be transferred during the contract period. It's not like there is no reason to transfer ownership.

It is acceptable to have some restrictions during the contract period, but users should also be given the right to choose. Most transfers should be allowed if they meet the processing conditions (such as real-name information, etc.).

7. Netizen Lao Houzi: Telecom’s unpackaged broadband and broadband + mobile phone prices are the same, which is a disguised bundling sale.

To extend this, fixed-line operators China Telecom and China Unicom offer preferential promotions for mobile services in fixed-line advantageous areas, and China Mobile offers fixed-line broadband services to mobile services. Although virtual operators and private broadband operators have entered the market, this cross-bundling should be restricted. Otherwise, it is not a "tyrannical clause", but a violation of the Anti-Monopoly Law.

8. Netizen Weihai Yuer: The standard tariff has remained unchanged for many years. China Unicom's 2G is 10 yuan for 1M, and China Mobile's 2G is 5 yuan for 1M. Long-distance calls on fixed-line phones are 7 cents for 6 seconds, which has been the case for more than ten years. China Mobile has different tariffs for inside and outside the network.

This is really not an unfair clause, but the regulatory authorities have not done their job properly. The regulatory authorities should not leave the pricing of telecommunications services entirely to the market, but should set some restrictions. Continuously lowering the upper limit of charges is a good practice.

9. Netizen Hong 80046656: The base station in the rural area has been broken for half a month and cannot be repaired, and the monthly rent is not reduced or exempted! !

Regardless of whether it is fixed or mobile, users should be compensated if their usage is affected for a long time. However, it is difficult to judge for a single base station.

10. Netizen dy Happy Baby: There should be no arrears in prepaid services. If arrears are allowed, the overdraft amount must be clearly stated and an agreement must be signed, and real-time billing is required.

It is difficult to make billing completely real-time, especially in special situations such as international roaming. However, for prepaid services, if there is arrears, the amount should not be too high (the operator should also stop the loss in time). If a user abandons a prepaid number, a small amount of arrears should not affect the user's credit, and should be automatically erased after a certain period (confirming that the user is no longer using it).