STEVEF%WALKER_RICHER_QUINN@mcimail.com (Steve Forrette) (01/06/90)
A couple of people have indicated that disconnection by PUC upon report of a tariff violation is a bit much. Here's what I meant by my previous posting: If a COCOT is found to be in violation of tariff and the PUC is notified, they should contact the owner, who should fix it IMMEDIATELY (a day or two), or face termination (of the phone, that is). If the phone is being maintained by a company that does such things, and they are notified by PUC that one of their phones is in violation, any reports of the same violation on other phones under their care should result in immediate termination (in this case, shoot first, ask questions later). I agree with the other posters that small operators should not be yanked upon a first violation, which they *may* not have known about. But they should be told in no uncertain terms by PUC that they are expected to be 100% compliant with tariff, and that if they can't handle that, they are in the wrong business. I have a copy of the Pacific Bell documentation and agreement that the operators sign, and the rates they can charge are spelled out quite clearly (examples along with the jargon so non-techies can understand it). The application that they sign also makes quite clear that they are expected to follow *all* of the rules, and that it is *their* responsibility to see to it that it is done. Of course, nobody reads the "fine print", right? The companies who are in the business of putting many phones in various places and maintaining them have no excuse for violations. However, I am willing to grant them a warning on the first instance of a particular violation on any of their phones (aren't I nice?). But, if they fix just that one phone and leave others in violation of the same tariff, it seems quite clear cut that they are *knowingly* in violation of tariff, and IMHO deserve to have all remaining phones that are in violation disconnected without notice. If this happened a couple of times to some of the larger operators, how long do you think it would take before almost all COCOT's were in *complete* compliance? I think that the above guidelines would not be unreasonable to the small operators, yet would go a long way in bringing order to the anarchy that exists today in the COCOT world.