Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: John Higdon Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: 10XXX Bugs Message-ID: <8438@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 30 May 90 09:48:05 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: John Higdon Organization: Green Hills and Cows Lines: 31 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 398, Message 3 of 13 Dan Lance writes: > I'm interested in how common this type of sleazy diversion is, and how > Wisconsin Bell can get away with claiming that calls are routed by > default through AT&T when in fact they go through MCI. Can my calls > get routed through another long distance carrier when I use 10288? It was probably just an error on someone's part that the wrong default carrier appeared on the card. The owner or operator of the property where the phone was located could have requested some change and not updated the card, or Wisconsin Bell could have made a mistake in placing the card or programming the default. Probably nothing sinister here. If the phone in question is an LEC pay phone, then 10288 should get you AT&T. If the phone is a COCOT, then anything goes. More than likely in that event, your call would just be blocked. > If MCI had completed my call, would I have been liable for the charges? Of course. If you mistakenly buy a ticket on United instead of USAir and fly to LA, you will still have to pay your Amex when the bill comes. When it comes to long distance, it is Caveat Emptor. It is up to you to learn how to tell if your call is being handled by the carrier of your choice. Now if you could prove fraud... John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !