wcf@hcx.psu.edu (Bill Fenner) (11/29/89)
I had my first experience with call supervision problems today. But first, a little history. When I ordered my telephone line, I was too young (or something) to have the service billed in my name (no proof of ability to pay). So I took care of ordering service, and my father called them to just say "Yes, it's OK." They asked me which long-distance carrier I wanted: ITT or AT&T. Well, I chose ITT, just for the heck of it; I never expected to make many long distance calls. The line was for my computer, which was running a BBS, and why in the world would a BBS make outgoing calls? That, of course, was before I discovered FidoNet. Now my BBS makes several long-D calls a month. I always got my ITT bill as part of my Bell of PA bill, but it was about 3 months delayed. I wondered why in the world it was always 3 months late, but didn't bother to do anything about it; I figured ITT was just lazy. So I open the mail this morning and find a quarter-inch thick phone bill. When I came to, I took a look at it. 580 one-minute calls to Texas. Hmm. So I called the number that was on the bill, and got a Bell of PA rep. He said "Oh, ITT bills if you let it ring more than 45 seconds." I said "*WHAT???* That's hardly fair. How am I supposed to know that?" He mumbled something about he wasn't told it himself; he found it out during an investigation of another problem. Like we weren't supposed to know. So he conferred with his supervisor, and said "Ok, we'll take the charges off this month's bill, but that's it, you have to fix your computer not to let it ring for 45 seconds." I said "Wait, they're billing me 3 months behind, what if there are more of these calls?" He said, "Well, you should have set up an account with ITT to get your bills quicker." Again, "Nobody told me that!". So he said he'd take any one-minute calls to that number off my bill up to today (11-28-89). I said I was satisfied with that, and then he transferred me to ITT to set up an account. First, no one answered the main number after about 20 rings, so he went and looked up another number and got a representative. She took the phone number I was calling about, and a phone number to reach me at, and said that the person who is in charge of adding accounts was busy and I would get a call back in 15 minutes. I was around for several hours afterwards and did not get a call. I could also not get anyone to answer on their main number. So I finally managed to get the Bell of PA rep to get me what I wanted, although it took a bit of prodding and 3 or 4 consultations with his supervisor. ITT's customer service seems to be nonexistent, so far. The practice of charging after 45 seconds of ringing is pretty ridiculous, as far as I'm concerned. Do other carriers do this? As far as I can tell, ITT's rates are about 2/3 of AT&T's, at least for the calls that I have been making. Anyone have another carrier to suggest? Relatively inexpensive, doesn't do stupid things, etc. Bill Fenner wcf@hcx.psu.edu ..!psuvax1!psuhcx!wcf sysop@hogbbs.fidonet.org (1:129/87 - 814/238-9633) ..!lll-winken!/
john@zygot.ati.com (John Higdon) (11/30/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0535m03@chinacat.lonestar.org>, wcf@hcx.psu.edu (Bill Fenner) writes: > They asked me which long-distance carrier I wanted: ITT or AT&T. Well, > I chose ITT, just for the heck of it; I never expected to make many long > distance calls. The line was for my computer, which was running a BBS, > and why in the world would a BBS make outgoing calls? That, of course, was > before I discovered FidoNet. Now my BBS makes several long-D calls a month. > [story of major billing errors and screwups, deleted] Let your story be a lesson for those who agonize over selecting a long distance carrier when, in fact, they make few long distance calls. The first question that comes to mind is, "Was the savings provided by ITT over AT&T worth what you ended up going through with all your billing hassles?" Yes, AT&T is probably not the cheapest LD carrier available, but it is certainly one of the best and most trouble-free. If you make few long distance calls, I can't imagine what would prompt you to use someone else. > I said I was satisfied with that, and then he transferred me to ITT to > set up an account. After being put through that kind of ringer, why on earth would you want an account? So you could get all that erroneous billing more quickly? > The practice of charging after 45 seconds of ringing is > pretty ridiculous, as far as I'm concerned. Do other carriers do > this? Not any more. If this is your calling pattern, it would seem that ITT is not going to work for you. All of the major carriers now have answer supervision. > As far as I can tell, ITT's rates are about 2/3 of AT&T's, at > least for the calls that I have been making. Anyone have another > carrier to suggest? Relatively inexpensive, doesn't do stupid things, > etc. 2/3 of AT&T's Reach-out America plan, for instance? If your traffic wouldn't warrant any such plan, then savings from a cheap-tone long distance company aren't going to be really significant anyway. This is not a personal attack, but I am constantly amazed when people automatically go for an "alternate" LD carrier 'cause it's cheaper and then are dumbfounded when they find that the product is inferior. "Cheap" long distance will frequently net you erroneous billing, poor customer service, poor connection time, and sometimes bad tranmission. One of my UUCP neighbors and I did a little experiment. We tested a number of LD carriers for throughput. The Telebit Trailblazer will automatically send at a rate commensorate with the quality of the phone line. To make a long story a little shorter, it came out something like this: AT&T and Sprint were about neck and neck (Sprint just a bit faster) and Telesphere consistently had less than 50% of the data rate. Rates on Telesphere are about 2/3 AT&T. In this instance, which is the better deal? Price isn't everything. John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@zygot.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !