Misleading Tab Balance Information and Unexpected Final Charge

I agree that it appears to be a system error for showing remaining amount left, but also I’m guessing you were informed, or maybe not, that you also know when you got on a tab and that it’s for 24 months. Until that time runs out, you certainly owe a pro-rated amount. 

I’ll flag a rep to assist but you might be referred back to speaking to billing. It might well be possible to port back, depending on how long it’s been, and reverse the tab pay-off. 

Thank you for acknowledging that the remaining tab amount was displayed incorrectly due to a system error. That is the core issue of my concern.

To clarify, I am not disputing that tab agreements are commonly structured over a 24-month period. I am disputing that at the time I made the decision to transfer my service, Koodo’s system failed to clearly disclose the remaining payoff amount. The account displayed “Remaining Tab Balance: $NaN,” which is not a meaningful or actionable dollar value. Given that tabs can reach a $0 balance prior to the end of the 24-month term due to monthly reductions and bonuses, it was reasonable to rely on the information shown in my account rather than assume a balance remained.

I would also like to note that I previously worked for Koodo as a sales representative and am familiar with how Tab agreements generally function. Despite that experience, the system display did not indicate that any payable balance remained. If a clear dollar amount had been shown, I would not have transferred my service.

Because the system failed to provide clear disclosure, I was unable to make an informed decision. I am requesting that this be resolved through an adjustment or credit rather than being redirected without addressing the acknowledged system error.

Hi there ​@Silentarrow 

We understand that getting charged an unexpected bill is not something you would like to see, especially since you mentioned that the self serve was showing for the tab balance $NaN.

Upon reviewing your account and based on the service agreement, there was indeed no tab balance for the phone, however, there was a remaining tab bonus, that you also mentioned about in your post.

When canceling before the end of the agreement, any remaining tab bonus or tab charge are charged on the final bill.

The charges on the last bill are related to the remaining tab bonus, which was calculated based on an equal monthly reduction over a 24-month period. We recommend checking the Cancelation section on the service agreement  for more details about the cancelation policy.

The info about the cancelation policy is also available on our website here https://www.koodomobile.com/en/help/things-know-about-cancelling-koodo

If you would like to dispute the charges further, please schedule a call back with the virtual assist

Hi ​@Flo Koodo 

Thank you for the explanation. I understand how tab bonuses are structured and that the service agreement outlines how they are calculated if service is cancelled early. My concern, however, is not the existence of the cancellation policy, but the lack of clear disclosure at the time I made my decision.

At the time I reviewed my account in Self Serve, there was no clear dollar amount shown as payable upon cancellation. The system displayed “Remaining Tab Balance: $NaN” and did not display any cancellation payoff amount, warning, or indication that a remaining tab bonus would result in a charge of a specific dollar value. A tab bonus is not typically presented to customers as an amount they owe, and without a clear payoff figure shown, there was no way for me to determine what the financial impact of canceling would be.

Referencing the service agreement or website after the fact does not change the fact that the Self Serve system failed to present clear, actionable billing information at the time the decision was made. I relied on the information displayed in my account, and had a clear dollar amount been shown, I would not have transferred my service.

I am requesting that this be reviewed as a disclosure and billing clarity issue rather than a policy explanation, and that the charge be adjusted accordingly. If this cannot be resolved here, please confirm the next escalation path beyond scheduling a standard billing callback.

​@Flo Koodo 

I would also add that the way the information was presented reasonably suggested that the remaining tab bonus was not a payable amount, but rather a credit or subsidy applied to the device. Seeing a negative balance with no clear cancellation payoff amount led me to believe it functioned as a promotional credit toward the phone, not a charge that would later be applied. Without a clear dollar figure shown as owing, there was no indication that this amount would be billed upon cancellation.

​@Silentarrow 

We understand where you are coming from.

The tab balance and tab bonus are presented as a negative balance meaning they are remaining balances which are being reduced each month until the reach $0. This information can be found here https://www.koodomobile.com/en/help/the-koodo-tab-page-in-self-serve

When canceling, both remaining amounts showing in the tab page (tab bonus and tab charge are due), as per the service agreement.

We have also sent you a PM with more details, please check your community inbox when you get the chance.

So there are multiple things here.

Could things be clearer on Koodo’s end?  100% yes.

Could the Best Buy rep have done a more thorough job checking?  Again 100% yes.

Could you have sought more explicit clarity or directly with Koodo regarding the negative tab bonus (tab bonuses is always an amount owing)?  That is 100% yes again.

At the end of the day you are on the hook for the charges. 
Did you want to Port back due to this unexpected tab bonus like ​@Goran asked above?

​@Flo Koodo 

You are continuing to explain policy mechanics rather than addressing the actual failure at the point of decision. The issue is not whether tab bonuses exist or how they are calculated in theory, but whether the information presented was sufficiently clear to allow an informed financial choice.

A value displayed as “$NaN” is not a number, not a dollar amount, and not intelligible to a consumer. Further, a negative amount labeled as a “Tab Bonus” reasonably signifies a credit, not a liability. In standard financial language, negative balances indicate value owed to the customer, not by the customer. If the system’s intent is to disclose the amount payable upon cancellation, then this presentation fails that purpose.

Referring to documentation or policy explanations after the fact does not remedy a disclosure failure at the moment the decision was made. A system that requires customers to reinterpret a non-numeric value and a promotional label as a hidden financial obligation is not providing clear, comprehensible disclosure. That is the concern being raised.

​@Dennis 

Whether multiple parties “could have done more” is not the standard. The standard is whether Koodo’s system provided clear, intelligible disclosure at the point a binding financial decision was made.

A customer is not obligated to seek external clarification when the provider’s own Self Serve system purports to display the amount payable upon cancellation. If the system displays “$NaN” and a negative value labeled as a “Tab Bonus,” then the failure is not one of customer diligence but of disclosure. A non-numeric value cannot communicate a financial obligation, and a negative promotional amount does not reasonably signify a charge.

Responsibility cannot be shifted retroactively by asserting that the customer should have overridden the information presented by the provider’s own system. If the system is unclear, the burden lies with the provider—not the customer—to correct that ambiguity.

That is the issue being raised.

The suggestion to “port back” implicitly acknowledges that the charge resulted from a system or disclosure failure rather than an informed customer decision. Requiring a customer to reverse providers, undo transactions, and re-enter a contract in order to mitigate unclear information is not a reasonable remedy for defective disclosure.

A port-back does not correct the underlying issue, nor does it address the fact that the Self Serve system failed to present a clear, intelligible payoff amount at the time the decision was made. A remedy that requires the customer to incur additional inconvenience to compensate for unclear information is not a remedy at all—it is a workaround for a system failure.

The issue remains disclosure, not reversibility.

Just because there is an error or glitch doesnt mean it absolves the customer of their commitments.

At the end of the day, the $NaN was really $0 owing, so that glitch did not negatively impact you anyways.

A Tab Bonus only goes 1 way, the amount you owe.  You made the assumption that a negative tab balance is a credit to you.  Koodo has explanation on the Tab Bonus page that explains how it works.  As a former sales rep I would really expect you to know better here.

The Tab bonus seems at the heart of the issue here.  You could have inquired about what a negative tab bonus meant, but you made the assumption.

In this case it does not mean there is a system or disclosure failure.  The Tab bonus was displayed clearly.  It just means the customer misunderstood (this happens all the time across various industries).  You made an incorrect assumption.

At the end of the day, the Customer Service Agreement is the default document and if you reviewed this you would have realized that it is an amount owing.

I guess we have to agree to disagree.

Regarding your issue, you can respond to the PM Flo sent you.  Or you can request a callback via Koodo assist and speak with a rep.  Note that it will be at the sole discretion of the rep to provide a resolution that you may or may not agree with.

If that fails to satisfy you, you can file a CCTS complaint.  The link is at the bottom of this page.