Ed_Greenberg@3mail.3com.com (10/06/90)
... or Marketing Out of Control. I found the following comment on Hamnet on CompuServe... "Mark, I have been trying to leave you a reply for two days now but this stupid call waiting that the local phone company gave to everybody free for a month keeps kicking me off if someone calls my number. I plan to try to have it removed from my line tommorow for the third time!..."
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/08/90)
Veteran endurers of Pac*Bell nonsense will recall that several years
ago the utility itself got its hand slapped for slamming. It would
routinely provide subscribers with Call Waiting, Call Forwarding, or
Three Way Calling, without even being asked. But it wasn't for free --
normal rates applied. People would have these features for years
without even knowing anything about them. It came to light when people
began calling repair service claiming that their conversations would
be interrupted with clunks and beeps.
Pac*Bell was ordered to remove the services and retroactively refund
to any and all who came forward after a media blitz. Another
outcropping of that incident was the requirement that all monthly
residence bills contain a detailed listing of the monthly charges.
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !John_David_Galt@uunet.uu.net (10/13/90)
John Higdon (john@bovine.att.com) writes: >People would have these features for years >without even knowing anything about them. It came to light when people >began calling repair service claiming that their conversations would >be interrupted with clunks and beeps. >Pac*Bell was ordered to remove the services and retroactively refund >to any and all who came forward after a media blitz. Another >outcropping of that incident was the requirement that all monthly >residence bills contain a detailed listing of the monthly charges. I saw the same news stories I think you did, but I read them more carefully. No one got service they hadn't asked for, but lots of telemarketing calls were made to offer Custom Calling -- and a few elderly people thought they said "customer calling" or some such thing and agreed to it without understanding it. I don't like this kind of aggressive marketing, but it is possible (and one would assume) that the marketing people did not intend to deceive anyone. I wonder if the costs of these customers' stupidity wound up in my rates?
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/14/90)
portal!cup.portal.com!John_David_Galt writes: > I saw the same news stories I think you did, but I read them more > carefully. No one got service they hadn't asked for, but lots of > telemarketing calls were made to offer Custom Calling -- and a few > elderly people thought they said "customer calling" or some such > thing and agreed to it without understanding it. My acquaintance with the matter came not from the media but from the PUC releases concerning the affair. In truth, there were many cases (regardless of the media account) in which services that were unordered were connected and charged for. In addition, there were occasions where service was ordered disconnected and Pac*Bell failed to comply and continued charging for it. This worked well on business accounts where harried bookkeepers would be faced with many bills for many lines and not know that some other department had ordered service disconnected. My clients had a few of these. Pac*Bell is still somewhat slow about disconnecting some types of service (notably WATS lines), but they are now very good about stopping the charges on the day of the disconnect order! John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
grayt@uunet.uu.net (Tom Gray) (10/15/90)
In article <13502@accuvax.nwu.edu> portal!cup.portal.com! John_David_Galt writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 733, Message 4 of 11 >John Higdon (john@bovine.att.com) writes: >I saw the same news stories I think you did, but I read them more >carefully. No one got service they hadn't asked for, but lots of Bell Canada was doing just that putting unordered custom calling features on people's lines. They were doing it across whole office code blocks. They said tat they were offering a free sample of their service whic of course wouldn't be in anyway deleterious to the customer. One woman was operating a small consulting business from her home. Call waiting was applied to her line without her permission. Customers were calling her line and recieving continuois ringing Previously if she had been on the line with a customer, other customers received busy. She received many queries as to whether she was still in business.