Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!killer!vector!telecom-request From: marks@Sun.COM (Mark Stein) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: more on COCOTS, AOS and such Message-ID: Date: 2 Aug 88 01:31:53 GMT Sender: chip@vector.UUCP Lines: 58 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp (USENET Telecom Moderator) X-Submissions-To: telecom@xx.lcs.mit.edu (Mailing List Coordinator) X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp (USENET Telecom Moderator) X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 8, issue 119, message 3 First of all, an apology if this message duplicates others recently on TELECOM. The USENET gateway was out of commission for awhile and hence I missed a bit of discussion. The message about COCOTS and AOS caught my eye. I had an experience I would like to relate, followed by a few questions for anyone who might know the answers. While on business in Dallas last year, I made a phone call from my hotel room to my home number, using the card-call procedure listed on the phone (something like dial 8, followed by areacode and number). I dialed, got the familiar "fading tone" that I am used to hearing, so I entered my 4 digit PIN (omitting the first ten digits since I was calling the home number). I was surprised to hear a live operator come on the line after a short delay and ask me what my calling card number was. I repeated the 4 digit PIN, and she keyed something in and my call went through. I thought this was very strange, but didn't really think about it again until my Pacific Bell phone bill arrived the next month. The call in question would have cost about $3.50 via AT&T, but I was billed something like $14.00 for it from some outfit I had never heard of before "as a service of PacBell." OK, now I knew why the operator had asked me for the calling card number. The alternative service probably couldn't automatically handle the shorthand number, and the operator had simply reentered it preceeded by the displayed called number. I called the BacBell business office to contest the charge, and after a brief discussion of the facts with a very pleasant woman (who sounded like she had heard this complaint before), she credited me with the difference between the billed amount and the "AT&T amount." She said something about returning the charge to the alternative service as uncollectable. So it worked out ok for me (that time), but I am left with some nagging questions. Is there any implied contract between myself and any alternative provider, based on my agreement with PacBell? Do the tariffs covering calling cards really allow the number to be so widely available/ accepted? Is this part of the "subscriber database" made available to certified LD services which was mentioned in a previous message? If so, are there any alternatives available to me, as a consumer, to tell PacBell that I only want my card honored by a specified list of providers? Or is the only solution to be aware of where you are making a call from and make sure that you are talking to an operator of the "right" company? Unfortunately, from what I have seen, it is this "consumer beware" attitude which seems to be required when dealing with both COCOTS and AOS. I applaud the proposal in the state of Washington to help bring this problem under control. Are there similar efforts underway in other states? Who can I write to in California to register my opinion? Thanks for any and all information in advance... Mark Stein Sun Microsystems, Inc.