Path: utzoo!telecom-request Date: Wed, 1 May 91 01:34 PDT From: John Higdon Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Third Party Billing Fraud, and New England Tel's Answer Reply-To: John Higdon Message-ID: Organization: Green Hills and Cows Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 325, Message 7 of 8 Lines: 30 Steve Forrette writes: > I asked Pacific Bell about this a few months ago, and they said that > they would only do it after I received at least $100 in phraudulent > calls. This is the standard response that the front line is told to give people who casually call in about this. In fact, Pac*Bell will give you billed number screening (as they did me) without one cent of fraud being involved if you simply press the matter with a supervisor. I have both collect call and third number blocking on both my residence and business accounts. Initially, I got the "there has to be a problem before we do this" baloney, but when I started talking tarrifs, we cut through the BS and I got it done. A number of associates have had this same experience: first, denial -- then compliance upon insistence. I suggest you call back and beat them up. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: Illinois Bell gave it to me with no questions, and in fact the rep said unofficial company policy is they would love to get rid of third number and collect billing anyway if it were possible; but there are a lot of people who seem to prefer it. PAT]