Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: David Tamkin Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Strange Charges on Bill Message-ID: <5236@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 16 Mar 90 07:29:37 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 30 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 177, Message 8 of 10 Robert Stampfli wrote in TELECOM Digest, Volume 10, Issue 167: | OK, then it would seem to me that if I request my second line be for | local calls only, with no long distance access, that I should not be | charged this fee. So far I have been unable to convice my telco that | this is the case, even though it would seem I would be paying for | something I cannot use. 1. Can your local telco really block all outgoing long distance calls? They can assign no 1+ carrier, but can they block 10XXX? [Perhaps the link is not used for calls dialed via 950-YXXX or a carrier's 800 dial-up, but use of those carries a surcharge that can outstrip the subscriber line charge fairly quickly.] 2. Would the telco really cancel this charge on the strength of a customer's personal solemn promise not to place any long-distance calls? 3. Can your local telco, as Steve Forrette pointed out, block incoming long-distance calls? I truly doubt it. If you receive a long-distance call, you are using the link from the l/d company's local POP to your own CO. You don't even get to choose which long-distance carrier it is, because the caller makes that decision. David Tamkin P.O Box 813 Rosemont, Illinois 60018-0813 | BIX: dattier dattier@chinet.chi.il.us (708) 518-6769 (312) 693-0591 | GEnie: D.W.TAMKIN No two Chinet users agree about this (or anything else). | CIS: 73720,1570