Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: res@cblpe.att.com (Robert E Stampfli)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Don't Pay For Slamming
Message-ID: <15479@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 19 Dec 90 04:19:31 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 23
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 887, Message 11 of 12


> Somewhat closer to our case, if you had arranged
> to have your gall-bladder removed by Surgeon X, and (owing to hospital
> oversight) it was removed by Surgeon Y, you would still have to pay Y
> for her services.  

If Surgeon Y charged twice the fee that you had previously arranged
with X, I would not think you liable for the difference (though
perhaps the hospital might be).  Furthermore, if there was substantial
evidence that Surgeon Y had instigated the "oversight" for her own
pecuniary interests, I would think this would not only represent an
ample reason to refuse said payment, but would constitute an excellent
reason to pursue other legal remedies against her. 


Rob Stampfli	att.com!stampfli (uucp@work)
kd8wk@w8cqk (packet radio) 614-864-9377	
osu-cis.cis.ohio-state.edu!kd8wk!res  (uucp@home)


[Moderator's Note: If this last group of messages on slamming did not
leave you as thoroughly confused on the subject of slamming as I am,
then nothing printed here will do so.  PAT]