Mom takes on Rogers policy

Mom takes on Rogers policy


A Coquitlam mother of three text-happy teenagers is angry with her cellphone provider for altering their contract, but Rogers Wireless said the customer was given advance warning that some terms of their agreement would change.
.
.
.
"It’s wrong for Rogers to be able to change anything they want,” she said. “I want them to honour our original deal. I have no control over who texts my children.”

A spokesperson for Rogers said they notified customers in June 2009 that their contracts would be changing.

Edward Bukszar, a Simon Fraser University business professor, said the move is legal but risky for Rogers.

“You always risk alienating customers when you change things like this regardless of the strategy they put behind it,” Bukszar said. “Customers feel distanced from a company they’re expected to be loyal to.”


Welcome to the wonderful world of the Non-Contract Contract.

That would be the part where you're stuck with a two year contract and they can change the terms any time they like and there's nothing you can do about it. Giving notice that they're about to rip you off doesn't help if you don't get the opportunity to cancel , etc etc.

The day of signing contracts is over, if you ask me. Since you're bound by them and the other party is not , and you gotta know this has legs and is going to spread, there is no point to it. It's now become another form of advertising. Reel them in with a great deal then hit them hard with a fee hike afterwards.

I will sign nothing with Rogers anymore. Or bell, but thats another matter.