|
407- its a scam! (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| dallastar |
| quote: | Originally posted by Cro_Addict
how are apples and beer similar? |
well, there is an apple beer!:)
;)
 |
|
|
| 2famous4u |
407ETR in MARCH changed their policy... one transponder per plate..bc they noticed in the past when customers moved transponders between vehicles they were charged the VIDEO TOLL CHARGE of 3.50 bc the plate wasnt registered to the transponder they got it for... if the customer has one car.. and one transponder on separate accts they need to consolidate their vehicles into ONE SIMPLE BILL... so everything is together (associated) and then lease an additional transponder for an extra 1.00 per month or 10.50 for the year.. one transponder is 2.15+gst+pst per month, or 21.00+gst+pst for the year.. another factor for VIDEO TOLL CHARGES.. is a METALLIZED WINDHSHIELD.. or a REPLACED WINDSHIELD.. in that case... a customer can provide their VIN # on the back of their ownership and place a VIDEO TOLL CHARGE SUPPRESSION on their plate.. end of story... that is how to solve this problem.. if you consolidate your vehicles.. and have a transponder.. then you can use that trans in the one vehicle.. tell them to state that on the acct.. a consolidation takes 1-2 billing cycles to go through.. and you can lease an additional trans on the website i hope this helps...
ps. Jayx1-- a customer service rep will never hang up on the customer.. they arent allowed to.. if they do that is automatic dissmisal.. id like to know who did that though.. lol |
|
|
| dallastar |
| quote: | Originally posted by 2famous4u
ps. Jayx1-- a customer service rep will never hang up on the customer.. they arent allowed to.. if they do that is automatic dissmisal.. id like to know who did that though.. lol |
as abercrombie said a TOTA work in the customer service department - I bet it was them, because knowing Jay he probably said "I have a problem, do you know who I am? I am Jayx1 and I am the TOTA priminister. . . . ." and before he could get another word in he heard the dial tone!:haha: just a lil joke to spice the thread up;) |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| quote: | Originally posted by 2famous4u
407ETR in MARCH changed their policy... one transponder per plate..bc they noticed in the past when customers moved transponders between vehicles they were charged the VIDEO TOLL CHARGE of 3.50 bc the plate wasnt registered to the transponder they got it for... if the customer has one car.. and one transponder on separate accts they need to consolidate their vehicles into ONE SIMPLE BILL... so everything is together (associated) and then lease an additional transponder for an extra 1.00 per month or 10.50 for the year.. one transponder is 2.15+gst+pst per month, or 21.00+gst+pst for the year.. another factor for VIDEO TOLL CHARGES.. is a METALLIZED WINDHSHIELD.. or a REPLACED WINDSHIELD.. in that case... a customer can provide their VIN # on the back of their ownership and place a VIDEO TOLL CHARGE SUPPRESSION on their plate.. end of story... that is how to solve this problem.. if you consolidate your vehicles.. and have a transponder.. then you can use that trans in the one vehicle.. tell them to state that on the acct.. a consolidation takes 1-2 billing cycles to go through.. and you can lease an additional trans on the website i hope this helps...
ps. Jayx1-- a customer service rep will never hang up on the customer.. they arent allowed to.. if they do that is automatic dissmisal.. id like to know who did that though.. lol |
had the people on the phone been this helpful this post wouldnt exist! Thanks!
However you do realize that by disallowing people to swap transponders you will be losing a tonne of business. How many times have i said to my friends "dont worry ill cover the toll" when i brought along the transponder in their car. Those people NEVER take the 407. Or in rental cars or for business.
Its a very bad policy |
|
|
| zokissima |
A little OT, but Jayx1, I appreciate your posts for one reason and one reason only: you do a great job of at least raising some awareness of the multitudes of issues around this city.
Its just a shame that you're the one to do it more than anyone else, and most have focused on your negativity.
As for the 407...It is far too expensive for what you get, but you have a choice. What pisses me off is the way the whole project was handled, from inception, and what really pisses me off is that it was privatized. Government made money from the sale, then they made even more money from leasing officers to patrol and enforce fines and rules(which they get cuts of) for a privately owned highway...
A buddy at work scams them right back. He drives a nice big SUV with his spare tire mounted to the back of the truck. The tire is mounted in such a way that cameras placed on the 407 can never get the angle to actually register the license plate, resulting in over 2 years of free 407 usage :D |
|
|
| malek |
| zokissima: it sounds like the government is making alot of cash! can I buy some shares? what is their ticker symbol.:D |
|
|
| mute79 |
| quote: | Originally posted by exstasie
I think paying to use a road is pointless. Isn't that what taxes are for in the first place?
I'd rather sit on the 401 then pay to drive on a highway...I just can't understand paying... |
what? why should someone who doesn't drive a car have to pay for others that do?
drivers are supposed to pay, always! be it through tolls or taxes on gas... |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by mute79
what? why should someone who doesn't drive a car have to pay for others that do? |
Do you honestly believe that because one does not drive a car they derive no benefit from the existance of public highways? |
|
|
| mute79 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Do you honestly believe that because one does not drive a car they derive no benefit from the existance of public highways? |
there is benefit for goods transportation, etc, not for daily commuters who choose to live in the suburbs and drive to the city, which is what he was talking about in terms of tolled highways being stupid... if someone chooses to get rid of a car altogether and take public transport, reducing pollution, congestion, etc, then it's not fair that one person has to pay taxes so others continue to drive their cars |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by mute79
there is benefit for goods transportation, etc, not for daily commuters who choose to live in the suburbs and drive to the city, which is what he was talking about in terms of tolled highways being stupid... if someone chooses to get rid of a car altogether and take public transport, reducing pollution, congestion, etc, then it's not fair that one person has to pay taxes so others continue to drive their cars |
Continuing with your argument.... is it fair that I (as someone who does not utilize public transit) subsidise your use of public transit. You are aware that your fares cover only a fraction of the cost to get you from point A to B right? I pay for your bus, your streetcar, your subway, and the roads and tracks that they run on. So I'll tell you what... when transit users volunteer to pay the full cost of transit then we can consider charging commuters for using the highways.... fair?
FYI, the ammenities you enjoy by living in the city are made possible by those that commute as without that additional work force the economy of this city would grind to a halt. Please don't think for one second that businesses, especially the big ones in toronto like finance and insurance wouldn't go with smaller offices in more locations if they had trouble attracting workers downtown. Also, you should realize that if barriers to commuting were made you'd have people looking for work closer to home rather then looking for homes closer to work. |
|
|
| mute79 |
perhaps if more people used public trasport, the money generated by that entity would help to pay for costs of road maintenance (which would be far less due to less vehicles on roads), etc.. the fact is that the traffic generated by public transport is a tiny fraction of that generated by drivers, so yes, it's very fair that drivers pay for maintenance through gas taxes and tolls, etc.. unless the habits that exist in the north american society about driving 1st and public transport 2nd change, the drivers ultimately should bare the costs of such choice... i can't help but draw comparisons to any european city where the choice is reversed
not sure what barriers you are referring to, i thought we were discussing who should be paying for costs of road maintenance, but the whole point is to have a lively, tightly integrated community, which would eliminate traffic congestion, which ultimately stems from idiotic city planning behind the ideoligy that people are to work in the city and live in the suburbs... |
|
|
| malek |
mute79, its almost impossible to make money out of public transit.
Even less pay for road maintenance from its hypothetical profits.
If the GTA wants more road, it has to tax its gaz more, its the best thing to do. Those who use, pay. And the more you drive, the more you'll have to pay! |
|
|
|
|
