Bell Canada to pay a penalty of $10 million for making misleading advertising claims

the 10 Commandments are still applicable today for all, corporations and business persons included

but still

Greedy, immoral Bell Canada  lies, misleads, is crooked

http://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2009/09/21/bittorrent-p2p-sites/

Bell and Telus misleading approach adds it’s unrealistic management expectations of making more money, price gouging consumers…

see also https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2011/05/23/liars-is-what-we-seem-to-know-describes-too-many-of-our-politicans-civil-and-public-servants-police-and-rcmp-included-and-not-just-the-phone-companies/

  and now Bell pays in part only for making it’s misleading advertising claims.

Bell Canada pays $10M over misleading ads

CBC.ca -Bell Canada has agreed to pay a penalty of $10 million for making misleading advertising claims, the federal Competition Bureau announced ..The Bureau found that Bell had, since December 2007, charged more than advertised for many of its services, including home phone, internet, satellite TV and wireless. Additional fees, such as those related to TouchTone, modem rental and digital television services, were hidden from consumers in fine-print disclaimers and were mandatory, on top of the advertised prices. Customers purchasing any of the services individually were also faced with the same misleading information, as additional fees were excluded from those advertised prices as well, the bureau said.

Bell to pay $10-million for misleading ads Globe and Mail This is not the first time Ms. Aitken’s bureau has targeted big telecom companies: Late last year, the bureau said it was taking Rogers Communications Inc. to court seeking a $10-million penalty over “misleading” advertising related to Rogers’ new wireless rivals, such as Wind Mobile. The telecom sector is infamous for burying additional costs or contractual obligations in fine print, particularly in wireless, where consumers are often hit with extra fees when they try to switch providers. Ms. Aitken said.

Bell Canada to pay $10M fine for misleading ads Toronto Star

Vancouver Sun – National Post (registration) – MobileSyrup.com – Canada NewsWire (press release)

..

This penalty money is still a drop in the bucket as to what Bell should even pay now for it’s unacceptable sins, consumer abuses….

https://thenonconformer.wordpress.com/2011/04/01/it-should-be-an-election-issues/

also

“Canada’s Worst Cell Phone Bill” BELONGS TO BELL.

..

 The country’s competition watchdog is asking an Ontario court to levy a record $10-million penalty to Rogers Communications Inc.for “misleading advertising” that criticized new competitors Wind Mobile, Mobilicity and Public Mobile. The Competition Bureau of Canada is seeking the highest possible penalty from the country’s largest wireless player after a two-month investigation into claims that Rogers had been making since late July..  The bureau said that based on “an extensive review of technical data, obtained from a number of sources,” there was “no discernible difference in dropped call rates between Rogers/Chatr and new entrants.”“We won’t hesitate to seek the maximum penalty against companies that are engaged in misleading behaviour,” Melanie Aitken, the commissioner of competition, said on Friday. “It distorts competition and hurts consumers.” “We take that as a very strong signal that Parliament and Canadians expect us to use the tools they’ve given us, and when there are cases of clear misleading advertising, those penalties are there for a reason,” Ms. Aitken said. The penalty, a civil matter, is different than a fine, a term reserved for punishments levied in criminal cases. The bureau attempted to negotiate a settlement between Wind Mobile, which filed the complaint, and Rogers, as it usually does in cases like this, but said Rogers had refused to address their concerns, leading them to seek action through the courts. The Competition Bureau has asked the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to order Rogers to pay the penalty, to stop making the claims, and to “issue a corrective notice to inform the general public about the nature and provisions of the order issued against them.” The bureau also recommended Rogers pay restitution to customers who chose the Chatr service over that of another because of the ad campaign. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/misleading-wireless-ads-put-rogers-in-hot-water/article1806112/

In a lawsuit brought against BCE’s Bell Mobility by Rogers Communications Inc., Mr. Justice Austin Cullen yesterday issued a temporary injunction under the Competition Act forcing Bell Mobility to stop claiming it operates the “most reliable” wireless network. Bell must begin to remove the bulk of its advertisements with the “most reliable” claim by Dec. 22, and have all such material out of the marketplace by Jan. 19, 2010.  “This highlights that companies have to be careful and cautious when making performance claims,” said Steve Szentisi, a Vancouver-based competition lawyerhttp://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/ban-on-bells-most-reliable-claims-redefines-what-it-means-to-be-the-best/article1403330/

see also http://postedat.wordpress.com/2011/07/05/primus-ca/

Majority of Canadians they still just want  all pricing to be simple and fair — and Bell, Rogers, Telus, Shaw and Videtron etc., so far have they all undeniably too done now  anything but that… they give out lies, misleading adds instead  and practise unfair business competetion behaviors..

 

…….