The World of Computer Software/The World of Computer Software.iso/tc13-013.zip/TC13-013.TXT

Text File | 1993-01-07 | 17KB | 329 lines

TELECOM Digest     Thu, 7 Jan 93 15:33:05 CST     Volume 13 : Issue 13

Index To This Issue:                     Moderator: Patrick A. Townson

    GTE Billing - Another Profit Center? (Jack Decker)
    ACD Equipment Suggestions (Justin Leavens)
    Telecom Archives Dial Up Update (Mark Earle)
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply-To: [e-mail]
Subject: GTE Billing - Another Profit Center?
Date: 7 Jan 93 02:41:57
From: [e-mail]


Now I know what you all mean about GTE.  I am now convinced that they
are totally incompetent.

I've already detailed my problems with the obsolete subscriber carrier
units.  Basically, as it stands now, I am still on the carrier.  My
connections are clear, but low in volume on my end.  After their first
couple of bungled attempts at repair, I have not had any problems
getting dial tone.  My 2400 bps modem works, and I have used a FAX
machine on this line with apparent success.  Were it not for the low
receive volume, and the fact that every time a CB radio user drives by
while transmitting I can hear the signal on the phone, and the low
on-hook voltage (15 volts) that won't drive some line-powered
equipment, I would have no complaint about the service.  The GTE
supervisor says they can install a filter to cut the RF interference,
but it happens infrequently and I'm afraid it might degrade my modem
connections.

Actually, I was prepared to let it go because they told me that next
summer they were going to put a remote unit out here with a
fiber-optic link to the central office.  When they do that, I will be
getting dial tone from less than half a mile away, rather than the
seven or eight miles of old cable that are doubtless serving us now.
However, a GTE repairman let it slip that due to budget cutbacks, that
project has probably been put on hold for now.  I wonder if there is
any way to get it back on track?  I suppose I could escalate my
complaints to the PUC, but as I say, I'm afraid that GTE might try a
"quick fix" that will really screw up my line (and, as the GTE man
said, I'm only paying for voice grade service so I have to expect "a
little" interference).  In the meantime, I dug out an old rotary dial
phone with a volume control handset, so I have at least ONE phone that
I can hear fairly well on.

But all of this pales in comparison to my recent experience with their
billing department.  Our first GTE bill was a shocker.  Now, to put
things in perspective, I have to admit that our income level was on
the low side last year (this was one reason we moved) ... so low, in
fact, that we now qualify for "lifeline" service, which gives you a
discount on the initial installation charges as well as a $4.10/month
credit on the monthly service charge (which is a good thing, since the
normal monthly rate for flat rate service is $16.09, not including
taxes ... considerably higher than what we paid on Michigan Bell.  At
least the flat rate service here really IS flat rate [no 400 call cap
as in Ma Bell territory], so I'm not complaining too much about the
higher rate, although it gave me considerable pause when I first
learned how high it was).

Now, we had paid the $19.50 installation charge in advance (that's the
only way they'd install our service) so it was quite a shock when our
first month's bill came to $55.50!  Here's how they came up with that
amount:

Private telephone line              $12.59   (these are in advance for
Interstate access charge              3.50   the period Jan 1 to Feb 1)
Michigan Lifeline service credit   CR 4.10   (note this is a credit)

Service order processing              9.13
"Line connect charges/NRC"           10.38

[Note the above comes to $19.51.  I won't quibble over the penny, but I
*did* have a problem with the fact that I had already paid this and it
wasn't credited!]

Local service-38 days from Nov 23   $20.38   (NOTE no lifeline credit!)

Federal excise tax (3% of $32.37)      .97
State tax (4% of $51.88)              2.08
911 operational charge                 .50   (MI Bell didn't charge this!)
Emergency telephone service            .07

[I wonder why is there a separate charge for 911 and emergency
telephone service?]

Now, I had problems with two things on this bill: First, the lack of
credit for the $19.50 prepayment of the "service order processing" and
"line connect charges/NRC", and second, the lack of any lifeline
credit for the 38 days of initial service.  Not that the latter would
break me, but if they are supposed to be taking it off, they should do
so.

Anyway, yesterday (Monday, January 4) I went to the local GTE Phone
Mart in Muskegon, Michigan (where I had paid the initial $19.50) in
the hope of getting the matter settled.  Fat chance!  A GTE employee
led me to a bank of four memory-dial telephones that had buttons on
them preprogrammed to connect callers to various departments (e.g.
billing, new service orders, repair, etc.) and told me that I would
have to call the billing department from there.  I could have done the
same thing from home.  But the worst of it was that there were already
others there trying to do the same thing, and ALL of us were getting
busy signals.  That's right, not even the normal eternal wait on hold
with occasional recorded announcements that you usually get when
calling from home, just a constant busy signal.  The GTE employee said
we should just keep redialing.

In addition, the phones themselves apparently went through some sort
of private PBX and were equipped with three-way calling, so if you
didn't hang up long enough to release the line, you'd dial out on the
second leg of a three-way call.  Then when you tried to hang up the
second time, you'd get your original busy back, or if you hung up for
too long, the phone would ring.  This caused no end of confusion for
the hapless folks trying to reach various GTE departments.  The woman
next to me was at her wit's end trying to deal with the phone and the
busy signals, and all she was trying to find out was where she could
pay her phone bill besides at the phone mart.  Why would she want to
know that?  Because there must have been at least fifty people already
in line trying to get to the ONE payment window (or at least it seemed
like it; I honestly didn't count but it was a LONG line).  Naturally,
the GTE employees who worked inside the phone mart couldn't take
payments, and couldn't tell her where else she could make payments
either.

After about 15 minutes of redialing, I finally got through and spoke
to someone in the business office.  After being transferred once (to
"collections"), I spoke to another representative who agreed that the
$19.50 should be credited to my account, but who said that it might
take three or four months(!) for the credit to appear on my bill, and
in the meantime I could just deduct the $19.50 each month from the
billed amount, until the credit appeared.  But the lifeline was
another matter.  She at first agreed that I had a credit coming, but
couldn't tell me how much.  She said she'd have to call me back later
at home with the amount!  I had wanted to pay my bill while at the
phone mart (in spite of the long line) but at this point I decided to
forget it and wait until I was in town again.

Well, just after 3 P.M. I got home and the GTE rep phoned me shortly
thereafter.  Now get this: She said that I had received a lifeline
discount on my installation ($19.50 instead of the normal charge,
which was "normally more like $40"), and that this was in lieu of a
lifeline credit on my initial service period.  I said that just didn't
sound right to me, because folks would wind up paying different
amounts depending on where their initial billing fell in the billing
cycle.  In my case it would have been 38 days without the credit, for
someone else it could be 15 or 45 or whatever.  I asked if this was
allowed in the tariffs and she confidently proclaimed that indeed,
this was in their tariffs that were on file with the M.P.S.C. (I had
already mentioned the possibility of a complaint if we couldn't
resolve this matter, since I am really losing patience with GTE, but I
tried not to be too hard on the rep ... after all, she can't help it
that she works for that kind of employer)!

I said that while I was not calling her a liar, I would like to see a
copy of the tariff section that authorized them to bill in that
manner, and asked if she would send me a copy.  She said she would
talk to a supervisor and that they would either send a copy to me, or
else she would have the supervisor call me.

Well ... today she called back and said that they would NOT be sending
me a copy of the tariff because, and I quote, "the information I
received yesterday was in error".  She went on to say that I was
indeed entitled to a credit of $5.53, and explained how she arrived at
that figure (it included a credit for taxes collected on the amount,
which is something I would have asked about had she not mentioned it).
And then she said something that struck me as strange ... she said
something to the effect of "Since you're getting the credit, you don't
need a copy of the tariff, right?"  I said no, I didn't, but the tone
in her voice almost led me to believe that for some reason they
REALLY, REALLY DIDN'T WANT me to have a copy of that tariff!  It makes
me wonder what they're hiding in there (or if they just plain couldn't
find a copy in any convenient place!).

She assured me that the $5.53 credit would be on my next bill, and
that I could deduct it from my current bill.  "What about the
$19.50?", I asked ... would that be credited on my next bill?
Probably not, she explained, but maybe in another month or two.  But,
she had said that I could also deduct that amount from my payment,
right?  Well, yes, if I really wanted to ... (Nah, I think I'll let
GTE have another $19.50 to play with until they get around to giving
me the credit ... NOT!)

Now surely GTE has computers, so why should it take them three or four
months to issue a credit for a prepayment?  Even if mine had gotten
"lost", as was claimed, I had the receipt in hand and could have shown
it to any phone mart employee, had anyone there been deemed competent
enough to handle billing adjustments.  I wonder how much slack they
would cut ME if I were four months late paying a $19.50 phone bill?


GTE is now the largest telephone company in the United States, and
they are the perfect example of a monopoly gone bad.  You folks who
want to go into competition with a local telco for dial tone should
really consider doing it in GTE territory first.  You'd probably be
able to get 90% of their customer base overnight (the other 10% would
be GTE employees and their families, folks who are on vacation, and
the EXTREME few who've never had any beef with GTE).  And if the
regulators tried to stifle the competition, the local folks would
probably mutiny!

Keep in mind that:

1) A lot of folks in this situation probably don't realize they're
being overcharged.  They probably expect a high initial bill, so
they'd pay the extra $25 or so without question.  Nevertheless, it's
money that GTE is not LEGALLY entitled to collect.  I wonder how much
additional revenue they take in this way?  Even assuming that the
$19.50 would have eventually been credited had I not complained (and I
certainly have no reason to believe that would have happened), there's
still the other $5.53 that I would almost certainly not have received
had I not demanded to see the tariff authorizing the charge.  How many
"lifeline" customers even know what a tariff is?

2) A lot of folks who did question the bill would have accepted the
first explanation given.  I almost did, until I thought about the fact
that it would be inequitable depending on when the billing cycle
kicked in for various customers.  In one way, you could say they lied
to me at first ... maybe not deliberately, but the first explanation
certainly wasn't truthful.  How many customers would realize that?

3) What other company do you know that, when a customer appears to
inquire about a bill, herds the customer into a room and hands them a
phone without so much as a hint of apology, even though the lines are
consistently busy?  How many other companies do you know that can make
customers stand in line for half an hour or more to pay a bill?  This
sort of thing may be common in other countries, but only the
government and monopolies can get away with it here (well, some
entertainment-related industries can too, but those are usually cases
where demand exceeds supply).

Sorry this is so long, but I am now prepared to believe just about
every rotten report that's ever been posted about GTE.  They sure
haven't impressed ME any!  I know I'm not one of their prime customers
(no optional features on my line, and not even any intraLATA toll
revenue for them this month) but when you are a monopoly, you have to
serve the small customers and the big ones alike.  I say let's give
'em some competition so they don't have to put up with insignificant
customers like me!  ;-) Of course, I gather their big customers don't
get much better treatment, from what I read here in comp.dcom.telecom!


Jack Decker --- 1:154/8.0 FidoNet, [e-mail]

------------------------------

From: [e-mail] (Justin Leavens)
Subject: ACD Equipment Suggestions
Date: 7 Jan 1993 12:29:45 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA


I'm about to start looking for equipment for one of our offices to do
automatic call distribution and some other items. Not being sure what
kinds of things are available, let me list some things we want to
accomplish:

1. Must be ISDN compatible (does this throw me out right there?). Our
   campus runs on a 5ESS.
2. We'd like to automate our switchboard operatations as much as
   possible, so touchtone menus are needed.
3. Some of our offices want a recorded message to play to each caller
   before the call is transferred to the office.
4. Some of the offices would like recorded messages to play while callers
   are on hold in queue. How many callers can typical systems queue up?

Any comments or information on what kind of equipment could be
purchased/leased to do these things would be very helpful. Please
e-mail responses, as I have a hard time keeping up with the volume of
messages here these days.  Thank you in advance.


Justin Leavens / Microcomputer Specialist / University of Southern California

------------------------------

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 14:47:43 -0600
From: [e-mail] (Mark Earle)
Subject: Telecom Archives Dial Up Update


Patrick et all,

     My FidoNet dial up system has been repaired, and some upgrades
will be occuring in the next few weeks. I'm re-organizing files into
smaller logical groupings, etc.

     The system will NOT answer the line if it is unavailable (i.e.,
if I am working on it) so anyone should be able to try accessing
without a toll call, if it is temporarily down. Some BBS's use the
auto answer feature of the modem, and the modem will answer when the
computer is down. My software decodes the word "ring" from the modem,
and then issues the answer command. So when the softwaer is turned
off, no answer.

     I have some more storage available. While I don't think there is
enough to mirror all of the archives, certainly the more recent stuff
would fit; I'll report on that, assuming Pat has no problem with it
being available.

     Also to save connect time, the files will all be compressed with
pkzip. Those who might need non-compressed (other non msdos systems,
etc) may make arrangements with me to get the files non-compressed.
I've found the majority prefer compressed as this saves connect / toll
charges.

     Anyhow, the system is available at [phone], and uses a US
Robotics HST modem, which has MNP5 available. NON-HST callers with
modern modems (v32/42) should get reasonable transfer rates, although
the base connection will be 2400 baud.


      [e-mail]    Mark Earle fidonet 1:160/50

     Note: Fidonet system operators or point operators may do
automated file requests. Ask for 'files' to get the current list.


[Moderator's Note: Thanks for your help in making the Telecom Archives
(or at least a subset of the archives) available via dialup phone for
our many readers without Internet FTP arrangements. Readers, if you
use this service to retrieve back issues of the Digest or other
telecom files, be certain to leave a note of thanks to Mark.   PAT]

------------------------------

End of TELECOM Digest V13 #13
*****************************