Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: gtephx!ellisond@asuvax.asu.edu (Dell Ellison) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: More TSPS ANI confusion Message-ID: Date: 25 May 89 20:20:06 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: AG Communication Systems, Phoenix, Arizona Lines: 23 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 176, message 7 of 8 In article , mit-amt!rdsnyder%mit- amt.media.mit.edu@eecs.nwu.edu (Ross D. Snyder) writes: -> The other day a friend of mine was making an AT&T operator-assisted call, -> and the person she wanted to reach was not there, so she told the person -> who answered the called line to have the desired person call her back at -> a different number than the one she was calling from. The problem occurred -> when, after she had said "...call me back at NPA-NXX-", the operator broke -> the transmitted audio path from my friend and completed the number with -> "XXXX" read from her TSPS console. Of course, the last four digits the -> operator read were not the last four digits that my friend intended to say. -> After I thought about this situation, I started to get upset, realizing that -> there is really no recourse for my friend other than making a DDD call -> and giving the person the correct number. The operator had already hit -> "position release" and was off to continue to unknowingly confuse other -> customers. What do you expect for a free phone call? Maybe the operator should not have cut the individual off. However, the person should have been charged for that call because the line was used to communicate information. (At least, IMHO.)