Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!news.cs.indiana.edu!cs.widener.edu!dsinc!casbah.acns.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: cbmvax!.UUCP!robert@uunet.uu.net (Robert L. Oliver) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: COCOT *LOCAL* Toll Charges Message-ID: Date: 28 Feb 91 16:57:07 GMT Sender: news@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Mr. News) Organization: Rabbit Software Corp. Lines: 44 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 169, Message 2 of 5 Originator: telecom@delta.eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: hub.eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu Here in Bell of PA land, something VERY bad has started happening. I'm trying to find out if this happens elsewhere, and more details on the tariffs which apparently allow it to happen: Using a COCOT (the only thing available at the time) in Phila. I placed calls to a phone in Phila. These calls were LOCAL calls. Would have cost a quarter if I had the change and only stayed on a minute. However, I used my Bell of PA/AT&T Calling Card number associated with my home phone number. Later, in my home phone bill, I found a page from some "carrier" which has the standard disclaimer that "This portion of your bill is provided as a service to Integretel, Inc. Toll charges are computed based on the rate schedule of Integretel, Inc." As would be expected, these rates were approximately 500% of the Bell rates. Instead of roughly .45, I was charged $2.95. When speaking with Bell, Integretel was consistantly referred to as a "carrier" meaning a long distance carrier. When I protested that my calls were WITHIN Phila., I was informed that any calling card calls were classified as "long distance." So, while COCOTS are required to tell you who the long distance calls are handled by, I wasn't aware that a local credit card call was considered long distance. Furthermore, I don't know how I'd have avoided the rip-off long distance company. Could I have used 10ATT to force AT&T long distance service on my Intra-LATA call? How could I have forced Bell of PA to handle the call? Would 10BPA have worked? There *IS* such a 10xxx code; it's normally only used to force BPA on Phila./Southern Jersey calls in the specially tarriffed corridor. Is this a common problem, or unique to PA? How do we get it changed? I *WAS* going to write to the PA PUC, but was told by Bell that the PUC doesn't have jurisdiction on long distance calls (again, even though this was really intra-LATA), and that I'd have to write to the FCC. Bleh. Robert Oliver Rabbit Software Corp. 215 993-1152 7 Great Valley Parkway East robert@hutch.Rabbit.COM Malvern, PA 19355 ...!uunet!cbmvax!hutch!robert