ac220@cleveland.freenet.edu (Richard Szabo) (10/10/90)
Excuse me if this has been answered before; I'm new to the list. In
attempting to use my MCI card by dialing 950-1022 from a certain COCOT
I got a COCOT recording telling me to deposit 25 cents for the first
three minutes. On another COCOT I've used dialing 950-1022 causes the
LCDs to light ablaze with the words "FREE CALL"!
Aren't 950-xxxx numbers supposed to be free?
Rich Szabo Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Internet: ac220@cleveland.freenet.edu
[Moderator's Note: Yes, 950 calls are supposed to be free of charge to
the caller. They are sort of like 800 numbers; the charge for the
call is paid by the OCC you are using to route your call. Readers, if
your labels do not include this additional audit item, maybe it
should, although its one of the more obscure things that most users of
COCOTs would not understand very well. PAT]johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us (John R. Levine) (10/10/90)
In article <13206@accuvax.nwu.edu> you write: >In attempting to use my MCI card by dialing 950-1022 from a certain COCOT >I got a COCOT recording telling me to deposit 25 cents for the first >three minutes. Around here, I've walked up to more than one COCOT, dialed 950-1022, and been advised to "deposit nine dollars, and ninety five cents, for the first one minute." Perish forbid their AOS should lose even one overpriced call. Does anyone know offhand whether the Mass. DPU has any COCOT rules? Regards, John Levine, johnl@esegue.segue.boston.ma.us, {spdcc|ima|world}!esegue!johnl
Tad.Cook@beaver.cs.washington.edu (10/13/90)
> [Moderator's Note: Yes, 950 calls are supposed to be free of charge to > the caller. They are sort of like 800 numbers; the charge for the > call is paid by the OCC you are using to route your call. I was told by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission that COCOTs could legally charge for 800 calls. I asked about this because of the 800 access to US Sprint with a FON-Card. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP [Moderator's Note: Ask them for a written copy. To charge the caller for an 800 number makes two people pay for the call. PAT]
forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) (10/16/90)
In article <13480@accuvax.nwu.edu> hpubvwa!ssc!Tad.Cook@beaver.cs. washington.edu writes: Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 731, Message 5 of 10 >> [Moderator's Note: Yes, 950 calls are supposed to be free of charge to >> the caller. They are sort of like 800 numbers; the charge for the >> call is paid by the OCC you are using to route your call. >I was told by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission >that COCOTs could legally charge for 800 calls. I asked about this >because of the 800 access to US Sprint with a FON-Card. >[Moderator's Note: Ask them for a written copy. To charge the caller >for an 800 number makes two people pay for the call. PAT] In California, this is indeed the case (actually, it may have changed since the new COCOT regulations went into effect in August, but it definately was the case before that time). I have it in writing from Pacific Bell. They may charge up to 10 cents (cash deposit) for 800 calls, calling card calls, collect calls, etc. What's lame about this is that you simply can't make a call without a coin deposit (except for 911, etc.)
jtatum@gnh-porthole.cts.com (Jamie tatum) (10/24/90)
Well we're lucky out here ... our pay phones do not charge for 800 numbers. Not only that, they're cheap at ten cents a call. (Local, of course!) I'm referring to Connecticut. You know, since David's mailbox put up EBBS, I don't think there has been one netting (Internet, etc.) board in all of Connecticut! INET: jtatum@gnh-porthole.cts.com UUCP: crash!pnet01!gnh-porthole!jtatum ARPA: crash!pnet01!gnh-porthole!jtatum@nosc.mil