[comp.dcom.telecom] Toll Calls on 800 Service

"Sander J. Rabinowitz" <0003829147@mcimail.com> (08/23/90)

I just read of a disturbing development involving 800 service.  Can anyone
confirm or deny the following:

(Detroit Free Press, 22 August 1990, Front page)

"Starting September 15, with the football season opener against
Syracuse University, fans can phone an 800 number and listen to the
play-by-play of MSU football, basketball and hockey games, but for a
price.

"UNLIKE OTHER 800 NUMBERS, WHICH ARE TOLL FREE, CALLERS WILL BE BILLED
FOR CALLING 1-800-CALL-300.  (Note: Emphasis added.)

"Football games, which usually last about three hours, would cost
$36.50.

To my knowledge (although I've subscribed to Telecom only since last
week), this is totally without precedent.  It disturbs me for the
following reasons:

1) Up to this point, 800 service has been synonymous with toll-free
calling (from the standpoint of the caller).  It is conceivable that
some businesses could abuse 800 service by advertising their number
but withholding the fact that their number incurs a charge.  (Or
putting it in very small print.)

2) We have a five-year old in our house, and hearing of all the horror
stories regarding 900 and 976 services involving children playing with
the phone, we now have 900 and 976 service blocking.  Now, with the
advent of NON-tollfree 800 service, I am at a loss as to how to deal
with it (aside from physically putting locks on the phones).  Whereas
I can generally do without 900 service, I don't think I can say the
same regarding 800 service.

3) Businesses using 800 service should be outraged (again, assuming
the above is true).  If people become afraid to use 800 service
because of the possibility of a charge, calls to 800 numbers in
general may significantly decrease.  Businesses that use 800 numbers
as the primary means of dealing with their customers should be
especially concerned.

In all of this, I can't help but feel that Michigan State University
deliberately took the 800 route to circumvent call blocking measures.
This is a truly unfortunate occurance, and I would hope that this is
the only time that anyone uses 800 service in this fashion.

I am sending carbon copies of this message to Michigan Bell and my
Congressman.

Best wishes from Sander Rabinowitz
MCI MAIL: 382-9147    Internet: 0003829147@mcimail.com


[Moderator's Note: I think you will find the billing is on a credit
card number which you must punch in when you first connect. You will
NOT be billed by telco for the 800 call, but you WILL be billed by the
University (or some affiliated organization handling university sports
promotions, etc) via the credit card you authorize on the touch pad.
Therefore, a person dialing that 800 number will be greeted only by a
synthesized voice asking them to enter their card number. If it is not
valid; or valid, but credit cannot be authorized, then it will simply
disconnect you.  Every example I've seen in the past like this has
been for phone sex, horoscopes or similar services. I don't think you
need to worry about anyone running up your phone bill, and I doubt
your child has access to your credit card numbers. The price quoted,
$36.50, would only buy five or ten minutes on many 900 lines. I
suspect the University went with 800+credit card to keep the price
down.  PAT]

john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (08/24/90)

"Sander J. Rabinowitz" <0003829147@mcimail.com> writes:

> 2) We have a five-year old in our house, and hearing of all the horror
> stories regarding 900 and 976 services involving children playing with
> the phone, we now have 900 and 976 service blocking.  Now, with the
> advent of NON-tollfree 800 service, I am at a loss as to how to deal
> with it (aside from physically putting locks on the phones).  Whereas
> I can generally do without 900 service, I don't think I can say the
> same regarding 800 service.

Excuse, please. Pray tell, what do you do about all of those hundreds
of "pay" prefixes (like 212, 303, 415, etc., etc.) with that
five-year-old in the house? For years I have heard people moan the big
groan about how tough it is with small children in the house who could
accidently pick up the phone and dial things that would actually COST
MONEY!!! But it is always in reference to 900/976 (the evil,
wallet-sucking devil prefixes) and never about the mundane, simple,
little-talked-about toll calls. Other than possibly the amount, what's
the difference?

Reminds me of an incident at a client's business. The controller was
looking over some phone bills. There was (probably) page after page of
major employee phone abuse -- personal short-haul toll. Many tens of
dollars were involved. Then her eyes zeroed in on one particular call:
Memphis TN. It was for $0.16., made on a Sunday. You would have
thought that she had nailed D. B. Cooper. "I'm going to find out who
made this call and make them pay for it."

Sixteen cents? No the problem was that it was Memphis, TN. Never mind
that office people routinely chat to their wives, girl/boy friends,
etc., and run up bills for individual calls as high as a few dollars.
It's that someone would have the nerve to use a company phone to call
THAT FAR AWAY without copping to it. During the business day a local
call of 11 minutes would cost $0.16. I wonder how many of those are
personal.


        John Higdon         |   P. O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 723 1395
    john@bovine.ati.com     | San Jose, CA 95150 |       M o o !

0003829147@mcimail.com (Sander J. Rabinowitz) (08/25/90)

"John Higdon" <john@bovine.ati.com> writes:
 
>"Excuse, please. Pray tell, what do you do about all of those hundreds
>of "pay" prefixes (like 212, 303, 415, etc., etc.) with that
>five-year-old in the house? . . .Other than possibly the amount,
>what's the difference?"
 
First of all, I would never let the kid play with the phone ANYWAY.
But this kind of this does happen ... and anyway, the amount DOES
make a big difference.  I am aware locally of a 976 service that costs
as much for a single one-minute call as it does to dial ALASKA for at
least twenty minutes!  And where else do you get local numbers that
charge you at least as much on a per-minute basis as a direct-dial
call to EUROPE at prime time rates?
 
The point is this: If I found that the kid was playing with the phone
with strictly long distance numbers, it would take a lot of calls
before the damage to the phone bill becomes serious, and hopefully I
would be able to notice what was happening.  But with a 900 or 976
number, a single call could inflict a lot of damage, and that's
something that I'd rather not deal with.
 
Of course, with 900/976 blocking, I don't have to deal with that
problem.  My original letter was concerned about the possibility of
toll calls on 800 service, and I have since been reassured that
there's no such problem.  Above all else, I didn't see 800 service
what 900 service is now.

 
* * * Sander J. Rabinowitz   0003829147@mcimail.com

peter@ficc.ferranti.com (peter da silva) (08/26/90)

In article <11299@accuvax.nwu.edu> John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com> writes:

> MONEY!!! But it is always in reference to 900/976 (the evil,
> wallet-sucking devil prefixes) and never about the mundane, simple,
> little-talked-about toll calls. Other than possibly the amount, what's
> the difference?

Well, the money is significantly higher. But more to the point, kids
aren't having advertising directed at them encouraging them to call
particular numbers long distance (to talk to Santa or whatever).


Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
peter@ferranti.com

roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy Smith) (08/27/90)

John Higdon writes:

> people [with small children moan about] 900/976 (the evil, wallet-sucking
> devil prefixes) and never about the mundane, simple, little-talked-about
> toll calls. Other than possibly the amount, what's the difference?

	The difference is that there are very few TV commercials
telling kids in California to call some number in 212-land so they can
hear Jose Canseco talk about his whatever he was talking about, or
True Confessions, or phone sex, or whatever.  Also, if your five
year-old were to rack up a $20 phone bill chatting with Grandma for an
hour cross-country in prime time, would that be so bad?  Even if it
were $100 because Grandma was still in the Old Country, how mad could
you get?  It's still cheaper than a plane ticket :-)

	On a different subject, are long-distance DA calls from pay
phones supposed to be free?  I called 212-555-1212 from a 516-area pay
phone yesterday and had to put in $0.40 (not bad, considering the rate
card said it would coast $0.75).  Once I got my number, I never did
get my call placed because I couldn't figure out how to place a
calling card call through AT&T (and this from a phone which claimed to
be owned by NYTel!)  Does using an AT&T calling card guarantee that
your call goes through on AT&T, or do the various long distance
companies accept each other's calling cards and cross-bill?  


Roy Smith, Public Health Research Institute 
455 First Avenue, New York, NY  10016 
roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu -OR- att,cmcl2,rutgers,hombre}!phri!roy 


[Moderator's Note: The only thing which 'guarentees' your call will be
placed on AT&T -- and then, only provided the owner of the phone
and/or phone switch does not act in a fraudulent manner -- is by
dialing 10288 on the front of every call. Other companies often times
accept the AT&T card, but bill via your local phone company at
outrageous prices. The card itself is no guarentee, but must be used
in connection with 10288+1+10D to be almost certain.   PAT]

cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer) (08/28/90)

In article <11299@accuvax.nwu.edu>, john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon)
writes: 

>"Sander J. Rabinowitz" <0003829147@mcimail.com> writes: 

## 2) We have a five-year old in our house, and hearing of all the
## horror stories regarding 900 and 976 services involving children
## playing with the phone, we now have 900 and 976 service blocking.
## Now, with the advent of NON-tollfree 800 service, I am at a loss
## as to how to deal with it (aside from physically putting locks on
## the phones).  Whereas I can generally do without 900 service, I
## don't think I can say the same regarding 800 service.  

# Excuse, please. Pray tell, what do you do about all of those hundreds
# of "pay" prefixes (like 212, 303, 415, etc., etc.) with that 
# five-year-old in the house? For years I have heard people moan the big
# groan about how tough it is with small children in the house who
# could accidently pick up the phone and dial things that would
# actually COST MONEY!!! But it is always in reference to 900/976 (the
# evil, wallet-sucking devil prefixes) and never about the mundane,
# simple, little-talked-about toll calls. Other than possibly the
# amount, what's the difference?

The difference is that no one runs TV ads aimed at children
encouraging them to dial prefixes like 212, 303, 415, etc.  Further,
even if kids did dial such numbers, the odds are remote that they
would do so 20 or 30 times in a week.

Also, SOME of the 900/976 numbers (NOT the ones aimed at kids), carry
material that is utterly inappropriate for a five-year-old.  It's
unfortunate that the adolescent phone sex services are on the same
prefix/area code as some of the other pay-per-call services.  If they
were kept separate, I would probably arrange for those to be kept
unavailable from our phone, and the other pay-per-call services
available.  As it is, everything is off limits.

# Reminds me of an incident at a client's business. The controller was
# looking over some phone bills. There was (probably) page after page of
# major employee phone abuse -- personal short-haul toll. Many tens of
# dollars were involved. Then her eyes zeroed in on one particular call:
# Memphis TN. It was for $0.16., made on a Sunday. You would have
# thought that she had nailed D. B. Cooper. "I'm going to find out who
# made this call and make them pay for it."

# Sixteen cents? No the problem was that it was Memphis, TN. Never mind
# that office people routinely chat to their wives, girl/boy friends,
# etc., and run up bills for individual calls as high as a few dollars.
# It's that someone would have the nerve to use a company phone to call
# THAT FAR AWAY without copping to it. During the business day a local
# call of 11 minutes would cost $0.16. I wonder how many of those are
# personal.

Doubtless, the call to Memphis wasn't the major cost to the company --
but it was the most obvious.  Sorting personal calls from business
calls Mon-Fri would be nearly impossible -- but a call on a Sunday
isn't just clearly a personal call, it's someone who probably came in
to the office just to avoid the charge.  (Which says something about
what a cheapskate and fool such a person must be, for $0.16.)


Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
You must be kidding!  No company would hold opinions like mine!

heiby@eecs.nwu.edu> (08/28/90)

I believe that another reason why people are concerned about the 900
and 976 numbers and children is because children see Santa Claus on TV
telling them to dial a 976 or 900 number to find out what's happening
at the North Pole.  They see comic book heros telling them to dial the
phone to find out their latest adventures.  I've yet to see a
commercial on TV asking kids to phone a non-976/900 number.  


Ron Heiby, heiby@chg.mcd.mot.com	Moderator: comp.newprod 

"Craig R. Watkins" <CRW@icf.hrb.com> (08/28/90)

In article <11410@accuvax.nwu.edu>, roy@alanine.phri.nyu.edu (Roy
Smith) writes:

> On a different subject, are long-distance DA calls from pay
> phones supposed to be free?  

I don't know of anywhere which requires free LD DA calls from pay
phones.

However, when I use AT&T and use my calling card to "pay" for the LD
DA call, it never appears on my bill.  I don't know if there is any
limit per month or a requirement that a matching number of toll LD
calls be placed, etc.


Craig R. Watkins		Internet:	CRW@ICF.HRB.COM
HRB Systems, Inc.    		Bitnet:		CRW%HRB@PSUECL.Bitnet
+1 814 238-4311			UUCP:		...!psuvax1!hrbicf!crw

peter da silva <peter@ficc.ferranti.com> (08/31/90)

In article <11409@accuvax.nwu.edu> optilink!cramer@uunet.uu.net
(Clayton Cramer writes:

> a call on a Sunday [is] someone who probably came in
> to the office just to avoid the charge.  (Which says something about
> what a cheapskate and fool such a person must be, for $0.16.)

This is an unfounded assumption. It could just be someone who came to
work on a Sunday. And someone who does that probably deserves a few
personal calls.


Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
peter@ferranti.com


[Moderator's Note: It may also be they called in on the company's WATS
extender, like I do when I work at home for my firm.  PAT]