c186aj@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) (02/04/90)
I had the occasion to call the Pacific Bell COCOT office to complain about a phone that was blocking 10xxx dialing, and they said that the Calif PUC had ruled that it was *okay* for them to block carriers other than their own! Can you believe this? Considering the recent postings of others regarding the restructuring of regular service rates, I have serious doubts as to just whose interest the PUC is looking after. Since the CPUC can only regulate in-state calls, and since the FCC commissioner's order on blocking is still in effect, I assume that COCOT's still must allow 10xxx dialing for out-of-state calls, but I'd be willing to bet that the ones that block don't make that distinction.
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (02/05/90)
Steve Forrette <c186aj@cory.berkeley.edu> writes: > I had the occasion to call the Pacific Bell COCOT office to complain > about a phone that was blocking 10xxx dialing, and they said that the > Calif PUC had ruled that it was *okay* for them to block carriers > other than their own! Was that the 811-4646 number? Those people are incredibily uninformed and ineffective. It took me three months working with them to get some Pac*Bell pay phones programmed correctly, and then it only happened because I invoked a little upstairs muscle. Can anyone confirm that PUC attitude from an independent source? > Since the CPUC can only regulate in-state calls, and since the FCC > commissioner's order on blocking is still in effect, I assume that > COCOT's still must allow 10xxx dialing for out-of-state calls, but I'd > be willing to bet that the ones that block don't make that > distinction. The only reason COCOTs have to be allowed in the first place (and why states can't prohibit them) is because of the terms of the MFJ. Since the whole point of divestiture is to foster and encourage competition in the communications industry, how can a lack of choice (of LDCs) further that end? That's just replacing one Hobson's choice (AT&T) with another (a slimy, overpriced AOS). To my shame, I haven't been monitoring the CPUC lately. If they have slipped something like this through in addition to the "incentive regulation" abortion, then we can kiss decent regulation goodbye in the Golden State. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !