My complaints are three-fold: unused data is not rolled over, the usage monitor is not accurate because it is not timely, and the overage charge is punitive in that it bears little relation to the cost of actually providing the extra bandwidth.
My situation is an example. I typically used half of my allotment so one month I decided to try to use it all. The usage monitor was more than 24 hours behind so I couldn't tell how close I was to the limit. I ended up going over by about 140 MB, which cost $35. I signed up for service just a month before the overuse charge was reduced from $.25 to $.05, so I can safely say the overuse fee I am paying is too high by at least a factor of 5. Then consider, at $.25 per MB, the second 5 GBs of data costs $1280, while the first 5 GBs costs just $60. That is a factor of about 21.3. I'll go out on a limb and state that I don't believe it costs Verizon 21 times as much to supply me with an additional MB of data than it did the first 5120 MBs. Those overage fees don't reflect Verizon's cost, they are to punish their customers and line their pockets with easy money.
Now, if Verizon were to allow unused bandwidth to roll over, my problem would be solved. Instead, Verizon keeps unused bandwidth for itself to sell to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?
If Verizon were to provide me with timely usage data, my problem would be solved. Instead, Verizon keeps me guessing with usage data that, at times, is more than 24 hours old. I can risk going over and paying 21 times as much for the data, or I can be conservative and back off my usage when I get to 80%. Then Verizon can sell my unused bandwidth to someone else. Shouldn't I get a cut of that?
If Verizon were to reduce the cost of overuse to a reasonable level, my problem would be solved. Enough said.
Verizon suggests they cap usage at 5 GB per month to ensure everyone gets equal access. Is that really true? Has anyone seen the data to prove that assertion? They don't really cap the usage, though, do they? All they do is make it very expensive to exceed 5 GBs. That gives their customers incentive to limit their own usage. In that way Verizon has shifted the burden of ensuring their network is not overloaded to us. If that is their scheme for keeping their network healthy, the least they could do is provide better usage monitoring so we can do their job better without overusing. (I think ensuring their network is healthy is their job.) I see that Cricket broadband throttles back the speed to their customers who go over 5 GB, but they don't charge extra. In that way Cricket takes responsibility for the health of its own network and doesn't make its customers keep an eye on the usage guage all the time, nor does it punish them monetarliy. I like that business model better and it seems a lot more honest.
