Cell phone companies find new revenue stream: 911 calls

By adamg on Thu, 07/31/2008 - 9:10am

Michele McPhee reports a friend found a 30-cent charge on his cell-phone bill for dialing 911 to report an East Boston traffic accident (Ed. question: Which phone company?).

Topics:

Annoying companies

Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Ad:

Comments

I thought cell phones were

By ShadyMilkMan
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 9:38am

I thought cell phones were supposed to be able to dial 911 even if they are not active. If companies start charging for 911 calls then what happens to those inactive phones?

Also 30 cents depending on the length may be a bit high, why would a 911 call cost more than a normal call , assuming they charge at all?

That is a monthly surcharge

By dirtywater77
Thu, 07/31/2008 - 10:41am

This report is highly questionable, since 30 cents is the exact amount of the *monthly* surcharge that all wireless customers must pay to fund the E911 system:
http://tinyurl.com/59hq4t

Customer probably just misunderstood his bill.

Jeremy

Michelle was wrong about yet another something? Color me shocked. Just wait until McPhee hears that her friend's cell bill might go up to $0.75 soon for that same 911 call! We'll never hear the end of it. From the Somerville Journal:

ENHANCE 911 EMERGENCY SYSTEM AND INCREASE MONTHLY TAX ON CELL PHONES (S 2808) Senate 36-0, approved and sent to the House a bill enhancing and improving the state's 911 emergency system and increasing the monthly "911 Tax" on cell phones from 30 cents to 75 cents. This tax is charged to all cell phone owners to help fund the state's emergency 911 response system. The hike would make the tax on cell phones equal to the one currently imposed on landline phones. Another provision, effective in July 2009, would impose the 75 cent tax on prepaid cell phones that are exempt from the tax under current law. Supporters said that cell phone users get the same benefits from the 911 service as landline phone users and should pay the same tax. They argued that estimates indicate that the increase could generate $25 million that would enhance the system and save countless lives. Although no senators voted against the bill, critics say that this alleged "fee" is simply another unwarranted tax increase that would hurt overburdened taxpayers who are already struggling.

Honestly, I don't really care if it's 30 or 75 cents so long as the money is invested in improving the service.

Now, as for McPhee, she's a moron. Not just for this, but because I used to read her editorial column weekly in the Metro and her over-sensationalized schlock about "crime" usually only focused on the Media Case of the Week rather than something meaningful or useful. It was always chocked full of complete misinformation or huge illogical leaps in thought. She's the Boston print version of Nancy Grace...only not as good at being that crazy. She lets her conservative politics get in the way of her "crime reporting" so that she acts as a poor man's Bill O'Reilly. End that with the fact that she has a face for radio, but a voice for print.

bashing?

By LipeeTheLion
Sat, 08/02/2008 - 2:53am

Wow Kaz, this seems like an awful way to go just to bash McPhee.

This was supposed to be about 911 calls costing $.

You turned it into "bash McPhee" post.

But what if she deserves it?

By adamg
Sat, 08/02/2008 - 9:20am

If that 30 cents is a regular monthly fee, and she didn't check that (as opposed to bloggers who link to other bloggers without checking their facts, arrgh), then that's further proof of his contention.

OK but.....

By LipeeTheLion
Sat, 08/02/2008 - 11:57am

OK, if that's the point, you made it in one sentence.

If someone makes an error, it's hardly an excuse to question their entire work ethic. (expecially if it's because you don't like someone's style...i.e...Nancy Grace, Crime of the week, etc.

From my dealings with her, she is a nice person, hard worker, smart...and brings with her a lot of experience.

ask if you can look at her bill, then

By sheenaspleena
Sat, 08/02/2008 - 12:42pm

she's complaining publicly about a potential misunderstanding, that's not professional