When executives from Verizon were summoned to California’s capitol Friday to sit for a tongue lashing by an Assembly Committee, the company announced that just hours before, they had changed their policy about limited vs. “unlimited” data for cell phone accounts used by emergency first responders. They had attracted an enormous amount of criticism after the Verizon account used by a Command and Control vehicle working on the Mendocino Complex of Fires in Northern California was victim to having their data rate reduced to 1/200th of their regular rate.
According to The Verge:
The company says it has since removed all speed cap restrictions for first responders on the West Coast and in Hawaii, with the plan to continue doing so during future disasters. Verizon will also launch a new service plan next week that’ll cater to first responders and will feature unlimited data with no caps on mobile solutions. That plan will include priority access.
The Command and Control vehicle’s primary function is to track, organize, and prioritize routing of resources from around the state and country to the sites where they are most needed. OES 5262 relies heavily on the internet to do near-real-time resource tracking.
The Santa Clara Fire Department that operates OES 5262 had a Verizon plan advertised as having “unlimited data”. However the fine print in the contract allowed Verizon to throttle the Fire Department’s data to a fraction of the regular rate after a limit was reached.
While fighting the fire, one of the captains operating the equipment complained to Verizon that the command and control unit had been so hobbled that “it has no meaningful functionality”. The battle with the fire morphed into a fight with Verizon as fire department personnel fought with the company about restoring their “unlimited” data rate. Eventually after getting various sections in Verizon and the Fire Department involved, the cell phone plan in OES 5262 was upgraded to a more expensive plan that had more capability.
In a perfect world the fire department might have known in advance that their “unlimited data” was a gross deception by Verizon and could have switched to a more expensive plan that perhaps didn’t have such severe throttling issues. Or, Verizon would not have described the plan as unlimited, since it wasn’t. Or, Verizon could have un-throttled them very quickly after receiving the department’s first complaint and worked out the details later. But none of that happened.
On August 22 in our article about the throttling, we wrote:
The intentionally misleading use of the term “unlimited” by the four cell phone carriers is part of the problem here. The FCC and the Federal Trade Commission should do their job and stop this practice.
The issue has also fired up politicians in Washington. In a letter to the FTC signed August 24 by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco and 12 other representatives, they wrote.
…Unfortunately, with its repeal of the 2015 Open Internet Order, the FCC has abdicated its jurisdiction over broadband communications and walked away from protecting consumers, including public safety agencies. We, therefore, call on the FTC to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive acts or practices stemming from this incident.
It is unacceptable for communications providers to deceive their customers, but when the consumer in question is a government entity tasked with fire and emergency services, we can’t afford to wait a moment longer. The FTC must investigate whether Verizon and other communications companies are being unfair or deceptive in the services they’re offering to public safety entities, and if so, to determine what remedies are appropriate to ensure our first responders have adequate service when lives are on the line.
For everyone saying that they should have read the fine print.
1. I agree that reading the fine print is important but companies write them in a way that you would need a lawyer to understand and so long that it discourages complete comprehension in a simple reading.
2. How many of you read every one of every agreement you make when you sign up for a bank, phone, internet account? Some companies try hide contracts until after you’ve purchased their products. Go into a Verizon store and ask for the full contract so you can look it over before you even think of purchasing a plan, you’ll have a hard time
I’m not saying the fire department is not at some fault but deceptive practices from these late organizations need to be shut down quickly and in a highly public way or they will continue to push the boundaries to see how much they can get away with.
These long contracts are to protect the company from abuse AND for you to understand the limitations and expectations of the service; they are *not* written in lawyer language. I have had no problem reading them, and yes, they do take time to read. If you are a good consumer, you will take the time to read them. These services aren’t like switching on a light bulb. You could bring down their network, or parts of it, and the company would have no legal recourse against you (such as slowing down the speed) without limits in place.
And to the other posters: Unlimited does mean unlimited. It does not mean that you will be granted an unlimited firehose all of the time. If you keep the fire hose on too long, they will restrict the amount of water to a garden hose rate unless you subscribe to a *professional level of service*. If you stayed for eight hours at an old Country Buffet, you would be charged twice for two “plans”, even though the food is “unlimited” for both.
I am sure that Verizon and the other three cell service providers are very pleased with what you wrote for them.
I am sure that it is OK to agree with something that a company is doing. Especially when it is all laid out. People complain all the time that a company does this and that and “they weren’t told”.
They were told.
Not their problem.
Don’t buy a Tonka toy when you need a real truck. And do your homework. That’s your job.
I have been on a first responder team after other disasters in Canada. Our military police would have somebody in jail within 2 or 3 hours.
Thank you very much for the clarification and helping us understand ISP service.
So….basically they should have just read the fine print? Sounds like OES is whining about what’s really a lack of care on their part for not reading the fine print.
Naturally, Verizon had to be “pressured” before it did what it should have done.
I learned recently that what the dictionary definition of “unlimited” and Verizon’s definition are NOT the same.
“That plan will include priority access.”
This, presumably, would be forbidden under full net neutrality.
This article has seriously incorrect information. First, Verizon did not “grossly deceive” the fire department; if the fire service/EMA had read and understood the contract fully when they bought it (if you don’t, you are foolish at best for ANY recurring service you buy!), data was and still is unlimited, but speeds were greatly lowered after 20 GB of use, a commonality to most *consumer*, not professional plans. This also has absolutely nothing to do with “net neutrality”. Net neutrality is the concept where an Internet Service Provider throttles bandwith and/or access to servers on the Internet for personal gain or interest. This has only happened a few times by Internet service providers. And, each time, the FCC has fined the wrongdoers, and forced them to unblock them…without “net neutrality”. Why? Because there are already laws on the books about that!
Now, Verizon‘s customer service did blow it when they switched them to the professional/commercial service and didn’t grant them immediate access to it. So, yes, they are not innocent in this. However, the biggest issue was that somebody didn’t understand that reductions of speed would occur with high usage. It wasn’t hidden from them, that’s utterly wrong. Know and understand exactly what you are buying before you purchase it! I’ve been there, done that in my life, and it was a great lesson learned. And maybe it’s time to review your plans to see if you are in the same boat with your provider, and if you need that much bandwidth.
What most likely happened is that the fire department’s data plan was established by the county’s IT department based on the department’s NORMAL data usage. Obviously the current fire situation is anything but that and the department burned thru their data allotment at an exponentially faster rate and reached the throttle threshold. Im sure there have been changes made in communications capabilities and implementation policies to accommodate future emergencies. ISP’s for their part, need to understand that their services are absolutely essential to command and control during a public emergency. They are just as much a part of the team as the guys wielding hoses on the front line and need to have protocols in place to seamlessly meet increased data and bandwidth needs for government agencies during emergency situations.
Doesn’t say anything about a cap. Just that it might be slowed down temporarily when congested.
I’m sorry. But back in my day….”Unlimited” meant unlimited. We shouldn’t have to read through 6 pages of fine print to realize that an obviously greedy company determined to make profit has now change our normal lexicon to suit their needs and OBVIOUSLY mislead people.