DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) (01/20/91)
I was speaking to a friend of mine today (before going over to visit her), and during our phone conversation, she mentioned that her "best friend" was in Isreal teaching English, and due to the hostilities in the area, was unable to get through. My friend was pretty anxious to call her teacher friend, so I tried it out from my own phone before leaving. I've only called that country once myself, so I looked up the country code, city code, etc., (to make sure that she had not made a mistake), and then dialed the number, and it worked fine, on the first try. So I figured that she was calling at a busy time, or SHE misdialed. When I went to her school to pick her up, I asked her to do EXACTLY what she did on her previous attempts. So she went to the dorm payphone, dialed 01-972-4-333-xxx-#, and got the AT&T "boing". I entered MY calling card to make sure that her card wasn't invalid or over the limit (she has one of those AT&T cards with no physical phone number). An AT&T operator came on, and said that one can NOT make Calling Card calls to that country. I asked why, and she said (incredible as this may sound) "The state on New Jersey doesn't have a credit card billing agreement with Israel". I told her that I really don't buy it, and she just asked if I wanted to talk to her supervisor. I told her "No, not really, I know they'll give me some story about fraud ... I'll just use MCI instead." I remember a few months ago we were discussing this very same thing, and if I recall correctly, a letter was sent to the chairman of AT&T via AT&T mail (or AT&T's in-house system, if not the same). What ever came of this? I'd be interested in knowing because I am considering writing to them letting them know how inconvenient it was not to be able to get through. Chances are that I'll never have to call there again, but that misses the point. If I WANT to call there, I, as a customer in good standing, should be allowed to. I am thoroughly upset by the attitude which a company I (generally) have a great deal of respect for seems to be willing to take, especially at a time like this when it is very important for some people to get through. I'm also interested in how legal this is ... I'm not up on common carrier law or administrative law, but if someone who knows could point me in the right direction maybe I could investigate this a bit. And YES, I am up at 4AM typing this, probably becuase I am quite upset with AT&T. (I feel like that guy in the AT&T ad at the payphone where he always gets connected to Fiji ... but in this case I *AM* dealing with AT&T!! :) ) Thanks for any info/help, Doug dreuben@eagle.wesleyan.edu // dreuben@wesleyan.bitnet [Moderator's Note: Don't you love the bogus and totally stupid stories the AT&T operators make up about these things? Don't waste time with them or their supervisors. I mean, 'a billing agreement between New Jersey and Israel' ... now really. When you get into a hassle trying to place an international call with your AT&T card tell the operator to connect you to the Pittsburgh IOC and that you don't want any backtalk from her about it. A lady in our office had the same problem from our *office* phone Thursday. About noon Thursday, recall that the air raid sirens went off accidentally, and the television said Israel had apparently been hit a second time. This lady is Jewish; some of her family live in Israel. Her trouble is she is super honest about the use of the office phones. We use several thousand dollars of AT&T international calling each month; she could have easily just dialed her family direct and the call would have passed unnoticed on the office phone bill. But oh no! She doesn't believe in that, and instead tried to dial it using her personal AT&T card so she would get the bill. Despite the fact that AT&T had a positively identified 'bill-back' number (our office number showed on the operator's tube) and despite the fact that our office does a large volume of business with AT&T, the operator and her supervisor refused to honor this lady's request! It made me sick to think this lady is upset about her family and AT&T wants to play games. I manage the phones in our office and I am tempted to pull all sixteen of our dial one plus lines, our T-1 and our tie lines away from AT&T and give them to Telecom*USA. Then when our AT&T rep comes around to ask what I did that for, I'll smile sweetly and say, "because your operator said there is no billing agreement between New Jersey and Israel ..." as I forcibly walk him out the door. I'm growing increasingly disenchanted with AT&T and their high-handed, and probably illegal discriminatory practices. PAT]
am299bv@sdcc6.ucsd.edu (Ravinder Bhumbla) (01/21/91)
In article <16204@accuvax.nwu.edu> DREUBEN@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Douglas Scott Reuben) writes: >[the usual call-blocking experience, followed by misinformation from >the operator about international call blocking >I remember a few months ago we were discussing this very same thing, >and if I recall correctly, a letter was sent to the chairman of AT&T >via AT&T mail (or AT&T's in-house system, if not the same). What ever >came of this? >[Moderator's Note: Don't you love the bogus and totally stupid stories >the AT&T operators make up about these things? Don't waste time with >them or their supervisors. Some time back I had had the same trouble trying to call India and had been told the same answer - "the call-blocking is at the request of the country being called". At the advice of the Moderator and on receiving the e-mail address from another reader (I think it was reallen@attmail.com - correct me if I am wrong), I had sent e-mail to this address. I had protested the blocking and the fact that the operators were lying to me. I received a call from the local AT&T office a couple of days later. The lady apologized, said it was due to high rate of fraud, and said that if I had trouble in the future, I could mention her name and ask the operator/supervisor to override the call blocking. I was also told that I would be receiving written communication separately from Mr. Allen (which, by the way, I never did). I had posted all this in this newsgroup. Coincidentally, last week I had to dial India from a friend's home phone. I tried to use my AT&T Universal Card but after I entered the card number, the call was intercepted by an operator. She told me that her computer showed that this call was not permitted. I protested that this was not even a payphone, but she was unyielding. Then I remembered my previous experience and repeated the whole thing to her including the the name of the representative who had called me. I mentioned that the representative had advised me to ask the operator to override the blocking. To my surprise, the operator immediately agreed. However, it is impossible to get through to India on the first attempt and I had to call again. Again it was intercepted by an operator (I don't know if it was the same one), and she put the call through without any further questions. So, I would suggest that you send e-mail to the above address or contact the local AT&T office. That way you might be able to talk to the operator/supervisor and make an international call when you need to. I am sure that they'll not lift the call-blocking in general. Ravinder Bhumbla rbhumbla@ucsd.edu Office Phone: (619) 534-7894 [Moderator's Note: Let me repeat that email address which flashed across your screen a second ago in case you missed it, or didn't have your pencil handy: reallen@attmail.com. I certainly do not condone long distance billing fraud, however this business of refusing service to all credit card users because of the acts of a few phreaks is wrong. Even if they refuse service to pay phones, why are they also refusing service to private phones where the responsible party can easily be identified? Bank cards and other credit cards rely on either the physical presence of the card when the transaction is going on *or* the PIN, as in the case of bank ATM cards, or both. Why can't AT&T rely on the PIN as a reasonable assurance the card is being used by its rightful owner unless they are otherwise notified it is stolen? When used with a card reader type phone, why can't the presence of the card and the PIN serve as adequate proof for AT&T? Instead of solving the fraud problem, AT&T is taking an easy way out: just blackball anyone calling several foreign countries. PAT]
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (01/21/91)
Ravinder Bhumbla <rbhumbla@ucsd.edu> writes: > So, I would suggest that you send e-mail to the above address or > contact the local AT&T office. That way you might be able to talk to > the operator/supervisor and make an international call when you need > to. I am sure that they'll not lift the call-blocking in general. You will recall a short time back that GTE Mobilnet had blocked (and still does) IDDD from its mobile customers. A number of us who make such calls bitterly complained and each one of us had IDDD reinstated on our mobile units. Mobilnet did this quite readily without much of a stink. Obviously, this is a tactic used by some common carriers to deal with certain types of fraud: turn a service off to the general subscribership and then reinstate it on a need-to-have basis individually. Somehow this seems to be a cheap and dirty way to solve a problem. Rather than use creative means to improve security, the solution is to just inconvenience the customers. It is a trend that goes on in this country because we, the public, permit it. In telecommunications, as with everything else, service to the customer has become a meaningless concept. The customer is now expected to be grateful to receive any value at all for his dollar, the terms being dictated by the convenience and whim of the seller. The customer is always right? Wrong! The customer is some scum that whose sole purpose is to provide revenue to the company. You and I are guilty of allowing this to fester by our passive acceptance of this treatment. This is still the land of capitalism, and until everything is "run by the government" (another trend, suitable for discussion elsewhere), we the people are still able to vote and speak with our pocketbooks. Instead of worrying about the tastefulness or sensitivity of commercials, the politics of the company's philanthopic gestures, or other, irrelavent issues, let us be sure that we, the customers, are receiving product suitable to our needs, provided in a professional manner with noticable concern our satisfaction. I could not care one twit whether AT&T's spots are relavent, competent, or material. But being a user of international long distance, I care whether that service is available in a timely and convenient manner. If AT&T cannot provide it, then I (an otherwise heavy AT&T customer) will take that business elsewhere and will let AT&T know why. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o ! [Moderator's Note: I am coming <<thisclose>> to yanking my business from AT&T and giving it to some other carrier for this very reason and others. I go into the phone center store on Devon Avenue to buy a simple $50 phone over the weekend. Charge my AT&T equipment account, I ask them. The clerk spends ** fifteen minutes ** on the phone with 'credit' somewhere ... and they can't find my account, even when I read them the number from the bill for $20-plus they send me every three months for a two-line turn-button set I still lease. Finally I left and went down the street to Radio Shack and bought the phone. But you know the really sad thing, John? You could quit them, I could quit them, *everyone on this list could quit them* !! and they wouldn't know the difference. I get *five* monthly bills from AT&T: Two for my cellular phones' long distance because AT&T says they can't be combined; one from AT&T Mail; one for phone leasing; one long distance bill. That is only my personal accounts -- my office gets a few more. Had they figured out a way to sell me the phone in the store Saturday I'd start getting a sixth monthly bill for that. AT&T won't accept their own card for their store and forward service; for international calls to several countries or for *anywhere* if god forbid I should be standing at a payphone in the wrong place. I should give them the whole works back with 'thanks, but no thanks, let me know when you are in a position to serve customers without lying to them and wasting their time.' PAT]