Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: henry@garp.mit.edu (Henry Mensch)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Two Residential Phones; Same Address and 'Owner'; One Bill?
Message-ID: <13164@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 8 Oct 90 15:36:05 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: MIT Project Athena Network Services Evangelist
Lines: 20
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 722, Message 6 of 9


I get two bills for my home phones.  It seems pointless (I mail the
payments in the same envelope, etc).  It seems reasonable to ask NET
to bill them together.  Any reasons why I shouldn't do this?  Any
reason why they wouldn't do this?

Clues will be welcome.


# Henry Mensch    /   <henry@garp.mit.edu>   /   E40-379 MIT,  Cambridge, MA
# <hmensch@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay> / <henry@tts.lth.se> / <mensch@munnari.oz.au>
#     via X.400: S=mensch; OU=informatik; P=tu-muenchen; A=dbp; C=de


[Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell is willing to issue one bill each
month showing all numbers 'associated' with a main number provided the
service is at the same location and the phones are on the same prefix
and in the same billing cycle. This is good since it allows the useage
from all lines in the account group to mutually contribute to volume
discounts in pricing, etc.  PAT]