Just a word of caution to anyone out there with an itchy credit card finger: signing up for a contract with Verizon just became a considerably more binding affair thanks to a big boost of its contract early termination fee from $175 to $350. Rumored for a few days now, the change became official as of yesterday, which means that anyone who bought an "advanced device" prior to the 14th is in the clear. The advanced device list can be found on Verizon's site, and as you might expect, it's a little broad and ridiculous -- winners like the Versa, Exilim, and Glyde are on there, so they're obviously not just referring to smartphones. They throw you a bone by reducing the ETF by a stout $10 for every month of the contract you successfully hurdle, but that still leaves you with a $120 ETF 23 months into a 24-month deal... so yeah, just be careful out there and don't do anything rash, alright?

You know what's worse than showing your Bitter Beer Face to the world after you passed on Apple's iPhone and let AT&T enjoy the spoils? Raising your early termination fee to stratospheric heights. Just over a year ago, we honestly though this whole ETF thing was headed in the right direction, as most of the major carriers (VZW included) sought to prorate contracts in order to lessen the charge as one's contract drew closer to an end. Now, however, Big Red is evidently gearing up to pull a 180, with the slide above showing a $350 ETF for "advanced" devices (read: probably anything deemed a smartphone). The newly hiked rate will go into effect on November 15th, and while that $350 will decrease by $10 per month over the life of the agreement, this pretty much guarantees that you won't be adding a line, disconnecting and then flipping that phone on eBay.

It's a far cry from the $1.2 billion number that was bandied about at one point, but it looks like Sprint could still be taking a fairly sizable hit over those pesky early termination fees, at least if a proposed class action settlement plays out as it seems likely too. As Sprint itself announced today, the company's reached a $14 million settlement in the case, which will be placed in a common fund to be distributed accordingly to all the parties involved, which is where you come in (assuming you're a current of former Sprint, Nextel, or Sprint Nextel customer, that is). The short of it is that you can either sign on to the class action suit or opt out of it by hitting up the site linked below, and then you'll have to wait for the final approval hearing now scheduled for October 21st, which should actually settle the settlement once and for all. Details on the exact payout amounts to customers are buried in the documents on the settlement website, but it looks like the majority of customers will be receiving between $25 and $90 depending on their contract, plus some free bonus minutes.

Read - Sprint ETF Settlement website
Read - Sprint statement

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

We told you it wasn't over, and now, that once "manageable" $73 million payment could possibly balloon to upwards of $1.2 billion. As predicted, the prior suit -- which was held in a California state court -- has led to a far reaching class-action lawsuit that could "potentially cost the company as much as $1.2 billion." The suit alleges that the $150 to $200 fees violated the Federal Communications Act and laws in every state of the country, and when summed from 1999 to 2008, they total a magical $1.2 billion. Things aren't looking great for Sprint on this one either, as lawyer Scott Bursor is running the show. Who's he? Just a guy who was involved in getting Verizon to fork over $21 million for the same thing earlier this year.

[Via textually]

While the other big boys in the US have already enacted prorated early termination fees, Sprint has still been holding out on its promise to follow suit. In fact, we've been waiting nearly a full year for its talk to be walked, and according to a recent interview with CEO Dan Hesse, the change could be made as early as December. Unfortunately, that's hardly concrete, as he also noted that the implementation was reliant on its billing software being updated, and anyone in the corporate world could tell you that something such as this could slip back for eternity with ease. We hate to make you rethink your decision to ink that new Sprint contract on the very same day the Touch Pro is released, but maybe a little patience would pay off in the long run. Or not -- hard to say.

[Via phonescoop]

Man, Sprint just can't catch a break lately -- the beleaguered wireless carrier was just told that it would have to pay some $73M in refunds to customers for improperly charging early-termination fees. The ruling, from a California state court, will basically set off a flood of similar cases if it stands -- but Sprint still has two weeks to respond to the ruling before Judge Bonnie Sabraw, and you can bet Yellow Swoosh will appeal if it loses in the end. Interestingly, Verizon was facing a similar lawsuit earlier this year and chose to quickly settle -- a lesson Sprint, with far less revenue and shrinking profits, might do well to learn from.

[Thanks, Roger A]

Why those T-Mobsters couldn't just fall into line with the rest of their national US carrier brethren, we don't know, but here's the skinny: yes, T-Mobile's going to prorate its early termination fees just as it promised to do last year, but the discount schedule is a little shady. Not until the last six months of a contract do you start to see any cash come off that $200 charge, when the ETF drops to $100. At three months it drops to $50, and with less than 30 days left on the contract, you pay the lesser of $50 or your remaining bill. In other words, assuming you're on a two-year plan, you don't see any benefit from this little arrangement until it's already three-quarters of the way spent. That's a far cry from the monthly discounts calculated by some of T-Mobile's competitors -- and likely a far cry from what Kevin has in mind, for that matter -- so with any luck this little scheme will fix itself eventually.

[Via Phone Scoop]

Following prior comments that he supported standardization of early termination fees imposed by carriers, FCC head Kevin Martin went into detail last week at a public hearing on exactly what the Fed has in mind. As he's said before, he wants ETFs to be prorated -- which many carriers are now doing anyway -- and would like customers to be able to go over their first bill before deciding whether they want to slide out of their contract penalty-free. He also raises a point that the fee for breaking a contract on an expensive phone should be higher than that on a cheap or free phone; at first glance that seems logical, though we'd imagine that some of those "free on contract" phones actually end up costing more for a carrier to subsidize than handsets in the $50-and-up set. There's no indication yet that the FCC will actually end up wresting control of the nation's ETF policies, but the way Martin's talking, it certainly seems like they want to.

[Via Phone Scoop]

We really, really hope you didn't ink a contract with AT&T over the weekend. If so, casually close your browser and attempt to avoid this post forever. Right on cue, AT&T has implemented its consumer-friendly prorated early termination fee, which enables new and renewing subscribers to have their $175 ETF drop by $5 each month they stick with the carrier and pay their bill. Yeah, the burn rate isn't exactly the greatest -- after all, you'll still owe $60 if you cancel with a month remaining -- but it's certainly a move in the right direction.

[Via phonemag]

Most of the major US carriers have put forth efforts recently to improve the early termination fee situation for their customers, but FCC head Kevin Martin wants to take it still one step further by standardizing the contract provisions at the federal level. The wireless industry is in the midst of proposing a standardized ETF policy, too, and while Martin hasn't indicated whether he likes the existing proposal, its terms make sense and closely match what many carriers have already put together: prorate ETFs over the course of the contract and allow customers to back out within 30 days or 10 days after the first bill is received. At issue, though, is an additional provision that steals regulatory capability from individual states, a line item that many consumer groups don't support -- and for good reason, considering that a number of ETF lawsuits are underway at the state level. It sounds like the FCC is still a while off from forming a meaningful opinion on how this should exactly work, so for the time being, the carrier's own terms are still your bible for jumping out early.

[Via RCR Wireless News]

Cellular South, which is headquartered in Jackson, Mississippi and provides service to around 5 million folks in its home state, coastal Alabama, the Florida panhandle and portions of Memphis, really wants your business. So much so, in fact, that it's willing to pay your early termination fee that'll undoubtedly bite you in the wallet as you attempt to port your number over from your current carrier. Of course, there are some strings attached: it will only pay up to $200, and that cash will be applied as credits towards your bill rather than bills towards your pocket. Still, the premise alone here is extraordinarily fantastic, and we'll go ahead and wish that more mainstream carriers would get the notion that they too should adopt such a consumer-friendly policy (and fast).

[Via Phone Scoop]

Nearly half a year after AT&T followed the crowd and announced that it too would be transitioning to a prorated ETF, the details have finally emerged. Starting on May 25th (read: don't ink a new AT&T contract on May 24th), new and renewing subscribers who enter into one- or two-year service agreements will "no longer be required to pay a single, flat early termination fee." Rather, the $175 charge will be lowered each month that one stays in contract by $5, which doesn't exactly zero out after 12 / 24 months, but we reckon it's better than being forced to cough up the full $175 with two months left on your deal. Oh, and those eying a month-to-month / prepaid plan will still find what they're looking for -- sort of a win-win, yeah?

So Sprint busted out this really lovey-dovey press release today basically going over all the ways it takes care of its customers -- how you can upgrade your phone at a discounted price if you've stuck with 'em for a while, how they monitor your plan to make sure you're on the best one for your usage, and so on -- but there were a couple gems in there that are new and notable. First off, Sprint has announced here that they're moving to prorated early termination fees, bringing it inline now with all three of the US' other national carriers. Like T-Mobile, it intends to flip the switch on that action in early 2008. Secondly, starting next Monday, customers won't need to re-up their contracts to switch plans (why this was ever a requirement with any carrier simply bewilders us). Finally, the carrier says it plans to announce some "reward programs" next year for subscribers that've stuck with Sprint through thick and thin. No details there, but if they're gonna do up some crazy awesome plans and upgrade discounts (even better ones than it already has, that is), we're all for it.

[Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Yep, sure enough, the prorated ETF craze is sweeping the nation. T-Mobile is the latest national US carrier to announce that customers will see their early termination fees decline over the length of their contracts, an obvious effort to stem a groundswell of hate getting launched in carriers' directions lately regarding contracts, ETF policies, and other miscellany regarded as unfair in consumer advocacy circles. One little snag, though: T-Mobile's just announcing its intention to move to prorated ETFs here; they're still crossing their T's and dotting their I's on the new legalese, it seems, and it's expected to take effect in the first half of next year.

Looks like someone doesn't want their free-on-contract handset too badly! The California Supreme Court has thrown down its seal of approval to proceed with a lawsuit challenging a couple basic principles of carrier subsidies -- locked handsets and early termination fees -- with T-Mobile begin named as the lucky defendant this time around. The carrier had previously tried to get the case thrown out (as all good corporate lawyers should) by pointing out that its contracts require customer disputes to be arbitrated rather than taken to court, but the plaintiff's legal team successfully argued that the claims they were bringing against T-Mobile weren't arbitrable. So help us out here: what does a "win" for the public good constitute in this case, court-compelled unlocks and penalty-free contract terminations or the continued availability of heavily-subsidized handsets? Is the prorated ETF a good compromise?