Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ncar!ames!lll-winken!netsys!vector!telecom-gateway From: AI.CLIVE@mcc.com (Clive Dawson) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Residential Hunting Message-ID: Date: 20 Mar 89 17:59:08 GMT Sender: news@vector.UUCP Lines: 76 Approved: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.uucp X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 100, message 1 of 7 A few months ago I posted an item dealing with hunting service on residential lines. Southwestern Bell had been offering this service for years, then discovered that they weren't charging for it, and finally got a tariff approved with the Texas Public Utility Commission. Those of us which used this service received a letter in which we were told we could either drop hunting or start paying $.50 per month per line for the service. I have two lines at home, A and B. When somebody calls A and A is in use, the call will come in on line B. However, if somebody calls B and B is in use, they will get a busy signal. Here's the problem: I elected to keep hunting, and I just received my first phone bill with the new hunting charges on it. I was expecting a $.50 charge, but instead was charged $2.00! An inquiry yielded resulted in this dialog: SWB: "Yes, we made a mistake by charging you $1. per line, we should have charged you only $.50 per line. We will credit your account with $1." ME: "The credit should be $1.50. Only one of my lines has hunting. The other one doesn't." SWB: "No, the charge is $.50 per line. You can't have hunting with only one line; that wouldn't make sense." ME: "Why should I pay for hunting on my second line when it doesn't have it? Why are you charging for a service on the second line when it doesn't do anything different for me that a regular line doesn't?" SWB: "I'm sorry, but that's the way hunting works. Some places have 20 or 30 or 50 lines, and they pay $.50 per line." ME: "All right, I'd like to cancel hunting on my second line, please." SWB: [Long pause.] "I'm sorry, sir, we can't do that without canceling it for you altogether." ME: "Fine. Then I would like to ADD hunting on my second line, please." I want calls to be sent to my first line if the second line is busy. SWB: "Oh. That's called circular hunting. There are different rates for that, but I'm not familiar with them, so I'll have to research this and call you back." That's where things stand now. I'll be calling the Texas PUC to get a copy of the actual tariff. I was upset enough about the fact that the bean counters decided they had to make money from a service it was costing them nothing to provide, and which actually enhanced their revenue since fewer busy signals meant that more long distance calls get charged. Now I discover that the $.50 charge is a myth, since they are claiming that there is no way to get hunting on only one line, and this is even more infuriating. Does anybody have an experience with hunting tariffs in other parts of the country which would help in this battle? Thanks, Clive ------- [Moderator's Note: I've had hunting on my residential lines for years. Illinois Bell does not charge for hunting, or its close relative, 'jump hunting', which occurs when the hunted number is in proximity to, but not next in sequence to the hunting number. They do charge for circular hunting, and backward hunting, both of which are theoretically only possible on an ESS exchange. They will hunt off your exchange for an added cost. If you have hunting, then call-waiting is only available on the last line in the hunt group since call-waiting relies on a line testing busy, which it will never truly do as long as it can hunt elsewhere. PT]