Slashdot Mirror


Telcom Fraud: The Previous Generation

theodp writes "Remember back in the day when telcom firms were charged with simple, good old-fashioned consumer fraud? AT&T and Lucent got a history lesson Friday, agreeing to a $300 million settlement related to claims that they used confusing billing statements to mislead consumers into paying lease charges for their home telephones, including the timeless rotary Traditional, that totaled many times more than the actual value of the phones."

70 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. Check your house for leased items by Raiford · · Score: 3, Insightful
    How many other items in your home are leased from a utilities service? How much are they worth ? This could be the tip of the iceberg for much more litigation.

    --
    "player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
    1. Re:Check your house for leased items by MsGeek · · Score: 2

      Adelphia used to charge us something like $5/mo for the cable box and $10/mo for the cable modem when I had cable modem. Those charges are conveniently off the bill now, although they are still charging us the same price. And the price of my current package is due to go up $4 very soon.

      Maybe they'd be a good target for yet another law suit. Not that they'd be an especially deep pocket to go after in their current condition...

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    2. Re:Check your house for leased items by JimBobJoe · · Score: 2

      Here's an item that you may have in your home, but which is often rented for no good reason by offices: water coolers.

      Where I live, I can get a water cooler rental at $8/mo with a cold tap, and $14/mo with a hot tap. Most people just go ahead and rent the water cooler, and get the water delivered.

      On the other hand, you can get a water cooler with both cold and hot taps for $150. I just found a friend of mine who owns a small business has been paying $8/mo for five years now. He cut that out pretty quickly.

  2. This sounds a bit like... by Verizon+Guy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Cable companies charging a $15 rental fee/month for cable modem rentals...

    --

    Aw, fuck it. Let's go bowling. - The Big Lebowski

  3. Let me guess by I+Love+this+Company! · · Score: 5, Funny

    The "confusing" billing statements were mailed to residents of Palm Beach County?

    --

    "All art is quite useless." -- Oscar Wilde
  4. Settlement, opt out or opt in by jyang · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just got a class action notice the other day from Verizon wireless. It said essentially "if you do nothing, you'll receive some coupons worth $10 - $20, and give up your right to receive settlement. Or you have to send a opt-out letter to provided address to participate in class action settlement".

    I don't know what piece of legislation allow companies to do this. It is better for consumer that settlement is opt-out (do nothing and you'll participate in settlement).

    Of course I actually send my name address to opt-in to this particular settlement. Darn thing that postal service raised postage again I end up using 2 32cent stamps.

    Somehow I'll be had...

    --
    --- You make things foolproof, and they'll find you a damn fool.
    1. Re:Settlement, opt out or opt in by flonker · · Score: 2

      I believe that they can't remove you from the class just by sending you some bits of paper. In order for it to work, you would actually have to use the coupons, signifying your acceptance of the terms of their "settlement".

  5. This is going to sound pitiful by Raul654 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm 20, and I have and use a rotary phone that my grandfather used to own. This makes me (just about?) the youngest person on the planet with one of those. I swear, it must weigh 10 pounds and is built like a sherman tank - it must be 90% metal.

    --


    To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law into contempt.
    --E.C. Stanton
    1. Re:This is going to sound pitiful by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      Those metal phones sure cleaned easily, and the cloth wrapped cords sure looked nice. I hate these plastic phones, they look cheap and feel cheap.

      Hehe, I remember the old slogan "German Engineering" and I think of those old phones that work forever. Even thou they are american made. :)

    2. Re:This is going to sound pitiful by Kredal · · Score: 2, Funny

      You darn kids!!

      My phone number back in the day (when I had to walk 17 miles in the snow to school.. uphill.. both ways) was Five. There were only 10 phones in the world, and I had one of them. And you!! Always dialing my number and hanging up.. I'll get you yet, you darn kid!

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    3. Re:This is going to sound pitiful by 4444444 · · Score: 2

      I'm 20, and I have and use a rotary phone that my grandfather used to own. This makes me (just about?) the youngest person on the planet with one of those.

      sorry my 13 year old daughter has one. when she saw it in a old box of junk she had to have it. she thought it was sooo cool

      --

      http://Lenny.com
      4 great justice!
  6. Great for the lawyers. by ejaytee · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well great, so a practice that appears questionable at best is coming to a close.

    Here's my problem with the universe of class action lawsuits: out of this $300 million, the lawyers are going to take 30% or so. This is a tidy little sum. The people who were gouged are going to end up with not-so-much relative to the amounts they were "overbilled". Probably less than the inflation-adjusted price of a Princess telephone.

    The article even mentions that some of the settlement money comes in the form of calling cards donated to charity. This doesn't remediate the damage to the class in any way whatsoever, but it does help to pump the total value of the settlement (and hence the total value of 30% of the settlement.)

    The class-action phenomena is great for lawyers who can come up with new and innovative reasons to sue companies for large sums of money.

    Where it's abused, they cost all of us (the end users) a little bit of money, earn the litigators a lot of money, and often accomplish nothing more than what could be accomplished with a press conference or two to bring pressure on the company to stop.

    Perhaps I am just growing cynical.

    1. Re:Great for the lawyers. by zenyu · · Score: 2

      Here's my problem with the universe of class action lawsuits: out of this $300 million, the lawyers are going to take 30% or so. This is a tidy little sum. The people who were gouged are going to end up with not-so-much relative to the amounts they were "overbilled". Probably less than the inflation-adjusted price of a Princess telephone.

      I once had a Providian credit card with like a 5.9% intro rate that was supposed to last for a year, and a 9.9% rate after that. Another bank bought them and raised the rate immediately to almost 27%. I got quite upset and tried to talk to them and they said there was no record of the 5.9% rate was supposed to go on for some time. Well I paid down the balance which took a few months since I had transfered all my other balances to the card. So I was out a few hundred bucks.

      About a year and a half later I get a statement saying I can get a real low rate for a year if I sign up again because of a settlement in a class action. I could also refuse that and get a check for like $25, but the lawyer already took a $100 on my part for the $300 value of my settlement.

      Still I'm happy that the new bank paid someone for their evil. And the $25 is better than those $1000 rebate checks people get to buy another car from the same company that sold them the auto-kill-passengers model.

      I think I also received a bunch of coupons from some phone monopoly a while back too, never used any. They had billed $2/mo for some imaginary service for a couple years. It seems to me that these settlements are always too low, it shouldn't pay to commit fraud. Criminal charges are the only real solution. But if that were evenly applied our president would probably still be in prison. :/ Until then, the bigger settlements probably discourage some fraud, since the fraud itself hurts the non-monopolies, like that credit card company I left, in the long run. Combined with the settlement of the lawyers fees it may actually make some of it not pay.

  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 2

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. leased phone by Unknown+Poltroon · · Score: 2, Funny

    My mom leased one of our phones in the house for like 20 years. IT was a fun deal. It was like 25 cents a month, and they couldnt raise it because the contrat was so old. We used to drag on of their poor linemen out ther every couple of months cause the dog chewed through the phone, and they had to replace it free. Serves em right.

    --
    All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
  9. And taking another page out of MS's playbook.... by billbaggins · · Score: 2, Interesting
    The settlement also includes pre-paid calling cards, which are being donated to charities...
    Wasn't/Isn't MS "donating" (or trying to donate) zillions of copies of its bloatware to schools as part of some settlement, in place of some of the monetary cost? Same idea, these probably cost a lot less than face value, but they count toward the nice fat grand total... though at least Lucent & ATT don't get quite the lock-in benefits that MS was going for, since it's rather easier to change your pre-paid calling card vendor than your OS...
    --
    "The best argument against democracy is a five minute chat with the average voter."
    --Winston Churchill
  10. Re:had one of those by deranged+unix+nut · · Score: 3, Informative

    Strange, this sounds familier.

    The phone company wanted to "Lease" my DSL modem to me too.

    Fortunately I can do math and determine that purchasing the modem is better than leasing if I intend to use it for more than a year.

  11. Re:The leases are a scam. by srw · · Score: 4, Funny

    True story:

    A few years back (1992-4) I worked as a counselor at a summer camp. We had a fairly strict policy about not letting kids phone home unless there was a really good reason. One of the kids in my cabin was given permission to phone home, but he then started crying. It took me a while to find out his problem: The phone at the camp was one of the classic rotary wall phones and he didn't know how to use it.

    I would guess this kid was 8 or 9 at the time.

    I dialed for him, and all was well. He'd be 16 to 19 now. I hope he's learned to use a rotary phone since then.

    -srw

  12. It's about time this issue was resolved but... by hillct · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's good to see this issue finally resolved, but this isn't the limit of the sleeziness of AT&T et al. Equally as disturbing as the phone lease charges addressed in this suit, is the ongoing bilking of cutomers who don't keep up on service plans and pricing opportunities. Many elderly customers (including, my grandparents, as I duscovered a few years back) are still recieving service at AT&T's base rates, from the late '70s, without the advantage of any of the pricing plans currently available upon request from all long distance carriers. Certainly the argument that it is the customer's responsibility to investigate pricing opportunities, is not without weight, but there are AT&T customers still recieving Pro Watts service, which in my case I discovered, then I tried to dial an 888 number from my grand parents redidence. Upon review of their bill, and with one 5 minute phone call, their bill was reduced by almost 70%, but the carriers are under no oblication to move customers to any particular rate plan at any time, and because the customer demographic which includes senior-citizens does not demonstrate elasticity in their telephone calling patterns, such that regardless of pricing, they will likely make the same amount of calls; there is no incentive on the part of carriers to offer them any more modern pricing plans. This is particularly interesting because over the past 20 years, it has been common opinion within the telecom industry that as market pressures drive pricing for basic calling services down, that refenue differential will be recouped through the pricision of more advanced services such as caller-ID, 3-way calling, distinctive ring, and so on.

    At some point it will no longer be cost effective to treat their customer base in these two wildly divergent ways, and telecom carriers will be forced to bring their pricing into allignment elderly customers, althoufh this will have the down side of pringing down on these customers, that deluge of telemarketing calls from competing providers - a joy to whih they have been to some degree spared thus far.

    --CTH

    --

    --Got Lists? | Top 95 Star Wars Line
    1. Re:It's about time this issue was resolved but... by indiigo · · Score: 2

      The carriers aren't under any obligation, whatsoever. In the business world, at the end of your contract, you can renew, go with a competitor, or negotiate new rates. This is no different. No company is obligated to save you money because you aren't smart enough to turn on the TV and see a different rate advertised, and age certainly isn't an excuse. I'd warrant saying if an elderly person can't manage to verify their phone bill is high, then they probably aren't competant enough to live alone or make financial decisions in the first place.

      --
      fslg503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-985-86 8650 3-985-fdsg8686503-985-8686503-985-8686503-9
  13. Re:The leases are a scam. by hubie · · Score: 2
    I wish they made a cell phone with a rotary and a real ringer, that'd be cool.
    Maxwell Smart used one.
  14. Consumer fraud is old news? by dsconrad · · Score: 2, Informative

    I like how the phone companies used to charge extra money for touch tone dialing. Nevermind that it saved the phone companies millions, if not billions, of dollars per year. Shouldn't they be charging people to use pulse dialing? It's good that things like this don't still happen. Do they?

    1. Re:Consumer fraud is old news? by Eminor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I like how the phone companies used to charge extra money for touch tone dialing. Nevermind that it saved the phone companies millions, if not billions, of dollars per year.

      Notice how banks do the same thing. I'm sure sure ATMs and Internet banking save them money (no tellers to pay), but they add service charges for "the convenience". When was the last time you could ask an ATM a question?

  15. 'Princess'? by Wouter+Van+Hemel · · Score: 2, Funny


    Ah, there it is, in all its pink glory... The Princess-phone! How I have longed to possess one of these beauties, how I have sought for its rare splendor, no price's too high for this baby...

  16. how about the worst of the worst. by loraksus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yet Qwest is still doing what they have been doing for the past several years.
    I rather like how they handle the situation, have shitty customer / telecom service, get fined, go to court, negotiate w/ govt, say that they will add more phone / data lines to rural areas (which they were already planning to do anyways), get their fines reduced and pay almost nothing.
    That and piss away shareholder money like a college student at a kegger, forcibly switch their dsl customers to MSN, and sell your personal information.
    Same shit, bigger pile methinks.

    (perhaps I'm still a little bitter about the whole msn thing)

    --
    1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcfv gbhnjmk,l.;/
  17. Not the Last Time Either by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just watch the ad spot for AT&T digital cable, where they try to dispute the second "Digital cable is much more expensive" "rumor"... Digital cable, by their own admittance, is $69.99 per month, or over twice the price of basic...

    What part of "more than twice the price" doesn't translate as "much more expensive" in any sense of the term? Sounds like fraud and false advertising to me...

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    1. Re:Not the Last Time Either by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      They most likely have an unadvertised internal deal for $69.99 basic cable, so they can say that it's the same price. Kinda like stores that have "sales" on items that happen to have recently been marked up *gasp* the exact percentage of the sale!

  18. speaking of fraud... by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

    I recently had a huge problem with Wired Magazine. I've paid through Jan04 - their subscription site says so - yet the site says "Your account is paid and active, but we are awaiting your renewal payment" - showing a payment due of $12!

    Not only that, but I got a letter from a fucking collection agency - on a bill for a VOLUNTARY magazine subscription DUE IN JANUARY OF 2004! If they try docking my credit, I'm so suing...

    Angrily worded letter is on the way as we speak...

    1. Re:speaking of fraud... by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      Nice attempt at a flame. Actually, I don't know Perl, and prefer Windows to Linux (I've been called a wintroll a couple times). As for e-mailing them - nope. I've sent them a letter via certified mail, as well as a copy to the debt collection agency (though I imagine it's a Wired-owned one). I'll sue if they try knocking my credit rating.

      So, in conclusion... fuck off.

    2. Re:speaking of fraud... by t · · Score: 2
      You should scan all that shit in and put it on the web. Nothing like generating a fsckass amount of bad press to get a company to fix their broken shit. What you did, certified letter etc... will probably work but does nothing to fix the general problem.

      I wish there was a website like gettingFuckedBy.com or something witty that devoted itself to showing how companies are screwing us everyday.

      t.

  19. The rise and fall of phone company competition by Featureless · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Four years ago I signed up with a local and long distance phone company called Econophone. One of the new breed of de-regulated, privatized competing phone service providers, they were offering rates for local and long-distance calls well below half what AT&T was, and still significantly cheaper than Verizon.

    I used them successfully for two years, and paid very little for phone service. 5 cents a minute national long distance and comprable local rates.

    How, you ask? De-regulation, which happened under Clinton in the mid '90's. However, once de-regulated, the baby bells immediately began testing the resolve of the federal regulators to force them to deal fairly with their "client competitors" for local & long distance service. You see, they wanted the good parts about de-regulation (being able to diversify, charge whatever they wanted, etc.) but not the bad parts (actually having to give up their monopoly status). They fought tooth and nail battles over various regulations and did their level best to kill their competitors... by bribing regulators to get call-completion charges, by systematically failing to service their new clients properly, and, now and again, by slamming their customers.

    Clinton's people were going to stick it out and fight the bells into submission. The Bush people had a more, shall we say laissez faire attitude about it, and the last two years have all but brought about the end of competition among the bells, first as the feds looked the other way while they turned their embrace with their competition deadly, and now as the FCC is actually going to rubber stamp their new "pseudo-monopoly" status, enshrining the notion that bells need not lease their lines to anyone, just like they already did with cable.

    Econophone is bankrupt. Many of you remeber the Northpoint fiasco; Econophone was very similar. Not content with stealing their customers and bludgeoning them to death with sabotaged service, the bells had to make a show of violently disconnecting them from the network, without warning. The message: don't deal with the independents. You just never know what might happen to your calls.

    This industry makes billions of dollars a week. They are _printing money_. Their margins are _incredible_, and that's with some of the worlds most notorious bureaucracies. I've dealt with AT they just _hemorrhage_ money. Why not? They get paid most every time someone makes a call.

    De-regulation was a failure. Not exactly because it was inevitable, but because it was never really intended as anything but ideological cover for more and better price fixing. $5/mo for call waiting service anyone? Or how about $3.50 for _not_ publishing your number in the phone book?

    You might say the little carriers like econophone went out of busines because they didn't charge enough. But I don't think those people made a math error when they founded their company and calculated what they could charge. I think we got a brief glimps of what we _should_ have been paying all along, before the Bells furiously covered it up.

    1. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by gilroy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Blockquoth the poster:

      they were barely holding california's power supply together, then deregulation came in and lobotomized them

      Nah, you just don't have the proper faith. Deregulation only fails because we don't go far enough. If deregulating industry A screws the consumers and deregulating industry B screws the consumers, it must be that if we deregulate all industries, it will help the consumer...


      Deregulations has been a long-term failure in each of the industries in which we've tried it since the late 1970s (with, admittedly, the partial exception of the telecom industry, where at least prices have generally come down -- although lack of vigorous oversight has allowed the re-emergence of local monopolies). Business clamors for it and certain elements in the government eagerly give it to them. But those same elements don't believe in spending dime one on enforcement of the associated conditions, and so the model collapses. Then we're left with the same old monopolies, but now they don't have any silly Public Utilities Commission breathing down their necks and "hampering their efficiency" with quaint oddities like fair practice regulations.


      The deregulation zealots bring to mind Santaya, but I don't know which quote is more a propos: "Those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it" ... or "Fanaticism consists of redoubling your efforts when you have forgotten your aim."

    2. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by miracle69 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Or how about $3.50 for _not_ publishing your number in the phone book?

      I hate that as well. It's $3.50 a month to be unlisted in the phone and the operator. Luckily, it's still free to tell them what name to list the phone number under. I know many a minor-league athelete that use their first name and their mother's maiden name as their last name. This allows relative anonymity from overzealous fans, as well as allowing their families to locate them in their new city should they get traded...

      Personally, I use a completely fictioal name that everyone in my family knows. It's also amusing because it shows up on people's caller-ID as well. Several of my friends are now doing the same thing, using Bart Simpson's imagination as a guide.

      --
      Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
    3. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by Featureless · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You make a very good point, but I would argue that the deregulation/capitalist model is fundamentally flawed for some services; electric power, most notably, but also education, police...

      In the particular case of power, it's very simple: the incentives are exactly the opposite of what you want, since distribution over long distances is so inefficient.

      If you build power plants, the power supply goes up, and your product is worth less. Hence, your profits go down.

      If you do not build power plants, and/or take some of your plants off line, the power supply goes down, and then your product is worth more. Supply and demand! Whopee! Time to raise the rates! This is more or less what's happened everywhere this scheme has been tried; the only difference is that in California the distributor couldn't pass on the rate hikes because its end-prices were capped. Enron et al didn't mind, they just ran their rates up astronomically, ridiculously high for a few months, then turned off the lights (a negotiating tactic which actually took lives!), and even now they're probably still going to get the proceeds of the "utility bailout," so it's all the same to them.

      The only possible way the "private" power generation companies can fail to get rich is by doing what they're supposed to... which is, provide ample, cheap, environmentally sound generating capacity. If you want to make money, on the other hand, the opposite is true; it's in the private utility's best interests to use the cheapest, dirtiest power generating techniques available, to encourage as much waste as possible, to cultivate their most profitable volume buyers at the expense of their least profitable low and middle income customers, to run as close to 100% capacity as they possibly can, and, of course, to create artificial shortages. If the consumers don't like it, there's always electric blackmail.

      It's interesting to me that there did seem to be some early success in the telecom deregulation regime. One thing I would really like to spend more time doing is going over the actual laws involved... I have a feeling there must have been some interesting rules in there about how the incumbents have to operate for it to have worked at all.

    4. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by gilroy · · Score: 2
      Blockquoth the poster:

      If you want to make money, on the other hand, the opposite is true; it's in the private utility's best interests to use the cheapest, dirtiest power generating techniques available, to encourage as much waste as possible, to cultivate their most profitable volume buyers at the expense of their least profitable low and middle income customers, to run as close to 100% capacity as they possibly can, and, of course, to create artificial shortages.

      Unless, of course, we change the economics through (sensible) regulation. For example, massive penalties for pollution. (I'm actually a fan of tradable pollution credits coupled to absolutely devestating fines for failure to comply.) Another example: massive penalties for failing to provide universal access.


      The legitimate issue is, how do you ensure that the regulation is sensible? Obviously that's a judgement call. And, in pure Adam Smith terms, you're going to build in some economic inefficiency. If you're a free market ideologue who thinks government == Evil, then of course the only "sensible" regulation is none at all...


      Which is how we got into this mess in the first place: a generation of "government leaders" who hate the very jobs they occupy.

    5. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by gilroy · · Score: 2
      Blockquoth the poster:

      I would say the "strong regulation" you describe is basically suggestive of the oversight regime that we just removed

      I must be slipping. It's "suggestive" of that regime because I happen to feel that regime served the public interest more than this one does. I guess I should be (more?) explicit: I think deregulation has been a failure in essentially every industry to which it has been applied. It has created short-term lower prices, at the cost of any consumer protection and with the long term result of reemergent -- but this time unrestrained -- monopolies.


      Since the "free market" does not seem to produce what might be the best outcome -- many, small suppliers of these services, in a field of true competition -- then I think it reasonable to wonder whether private investors are likely to look after the public good as well or even as consistently as oversight agencies do.


      I believe firmly that (a) free market capitalism is the most efficient way to produce services and goods and (b) left to its own devices, unrestrained free market capitalism is inimical to human freedom and human dignity. The market is a wonderful engine, but for two decades, we've been treating it like the driver. The right way to harness market forces is to set the economic rules of the game so that socially favorable outcomes are the simplest way to make a profit. In that manner, the drive -- even avarice -- of capitalists can also produce real benefits: Doing good while doing well.


      But if you remove all government oversight, you shouldn't be surprised when the wickedest of men doing the wickedest of things do, in fact, produce the wickedest of outcomes.

    6. Re:The rise and fall of phone company competition by TeddyR · · Score: 2

      And another 1.75 (or 3.50 depending on what other services you have) for caller ID block to block the other side from seeing your caller ID.
      [which btw does NOT work for "toll free" 800,888,877,866 numbers] Something about the person paying for the call has the right to block it or see who is making the call....

      --

      --
      Time is on my side
  20. Re:Telco -or- Telecom by linefeed0 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Usually, "telco" refers to TELephone COmpany and "telecom" (or "telcom") to TELECOMmunications, the industry occupied by such a company. Both could technically stand for either, but "co." is a more common abbreviation for company than "com" (at least before the internet frenzy). "Telco" is an enumerable noun (you call up _the_ local telco), while telecom is not (someone working in telecom; the telecom _industry_).

    Most areas do have a ringback number (rings your phone, usual procedure is dial it and N digits of your number, get a dialtone, hit the hook or flash, get another tone, hang up) and an ANI number (automatic number identification; a voice reads out your phone number), which the service technicians use frequently.

    For instance, in central (charlottesville) virginia, the ringback for sprint is/was 511 and 7 digits of your phone #; the ANI is 118. Numbers for many areas can be found in the 2600 FAQ, but it's not complete or up to date. These numbers sometimes change when switching equipment is replaced.

  21. Funny story about telecom fraud... by Featureless · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's 1996, and the bells have been newly de-regulated. They're pleased as hell, because they can diversify, but more importantly, because they can now charge whatever they want - price gouging galore! Time to raise the price of call waiting!

    There was only one pesky problem. The bells were now theoretically obligated to "compete" with other carriers. The nerve! Wasn't everyone informed that they don't share their playground? Wasting no time, they immediately set to work on the FCC and congress to try to roll back the regulations (or at least the enforcement regime) that allowed competitors to re-sell some of the network and compete.

    They came up with a great idea. Oh, it was a real doozy, and very simple. They convinced the feds to allow them to charge a "call completion" fee.

    It works like this. If a customer in one local phone company calls the customer of another, the originating carrier has to pay a fee to the receiving carrier for "completing" the call. This, reasoned the bells, was *it.* Who can start up a competing local carrier, if (since they're new) every call from their customers terminates at a bell-controlled phone, and they're saddled with 3c fees for every call! It's a classic "screwing the little guy with the power of math" scenario.

    It was a perfect plan. And it only had one fatal flaw.

    The metropolitan ISPs of New York City were some of the phone company's most enthusiastic enemies. And why not? Have you ever tried to get the NYC Bell to do anything more complex than a residential hookup? How about manaing hundreds of lines in a hunt chain... let me tell you. You lose a few every few months for no discernable reason, and during one of your dozen hour-long calls to the bell for support, you discover that in trying to "fix" your hunt, they've now disconnected your office phones as well. True story.

    The NYC ISPs were desperate to deal with someone, _ANYONE_ other than the local bell. So what did they do? They got together with a tiny, unknown little local carrier. And they became its first, and practically only, customers.

    And do you know what happened then?

    ISPs need lots of lines, and they're willing, nay desperate, to pay a premium for any kind of service exceeding the Soviet-block standard of the bell. They hardly ever make any calls out. But everyone calls an ISP. In fact, they get thousands and thousands of calls a day.

    Within days of getting their first 8 figure "call completion" bill from the tiny little independent local phone company (that the bells had just been gloating over murdering), the bells were back in Washington, and back in court, desperate to break the deal.

    Now, exercise for the reader: where they successul in weaseling out of it? What do you think?

    1. Re:Funny story about telecom fraud... by Large+Green+Mallard · · Score: 2

      Is this the startup story of Verizon?

    2. Re:Funny story about telecom fraud... by Alan+Shutko · · Score: 2

      No, Verizon was Bell Atlantic (before it merged with some other corps).

    3. Re:Funny story about telecom fraud... by alanjstr · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Yes, reciprical compensation had a fundamental flaw. But in the carrier access systems world, there's a lot of 'bill the other guy' going around. When a person makes a long distance call, everyone along the way gets their share. The local phone company where the call originates, the long distance company in the middle, and the local phone company on whom the call terminates all have capital expenditures to cover. Not to mention the wireless networks.

      Recip Comp was supposed to balance out. Instead startups tried to take advantage of it. In a move of pure greed, they went for the quick buck and ignore the intent of the law. But then the bubble burst and they had no solid business plan. And now many of those little telecoms have gone bankrupt. There are a LOT of bankrupt little telecoms now.

    4. Re:Funny story about telecom fraud... by Zarquon · · Score: 2

      Bell Atlantic + Nynex (sp?), IIRC.

      --
      "'Tis great confidence in a friend to tell him your faults, greater to tell him his." --Poor Richard's Almanac
  22. Slamming... by Colz+Grigor · · Score: 2
    Considering all the "slamming" AT&T, MCI, et al did back in the 90s (and still do, near as I can tell), I find it very difficult to believe that anyone is still on the same plan as they were in the 70s.

    ::Colz Grigor

  23. Re:Telco -or- Telecom by coryboehne · · Score: 2, Funny

    Whooaaa cowboy, slow down, don't phreak out on us. lol ;)

  24. Pathetic by quintessent · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Another class action settlement. No doubt this will be like most others in which consumers get nothing but the recognition they've been cheated (and maybe a 75 cent check), and a few lawyers get to buy cliff houses in Miami.

  25. How much is AT&T making on this settlement? by guttentag · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Lucent's results for the third quarter ended June 30 include $162 million in costs for its part of the settlement, spokesman John Skalko said. AT&T, the largest U.S. long-distance phone company, is paying $130 million before taxes, spokeswoman Sue Fleming said.
    So how much are our friends at AT&T making in profit on this settlement after taxes? You have to realize that being AT&T, the company will get a special tax break for agreeing to the settlement, another tax break to cover the lost business it expects as a result of the bad PR from this settlement, a tax break for having the word American in its name, a tax break for being AOL, a tax break for not being NTT, plus revenue for providing the months of teleconferencing service that allowed the parties involved to come to a mutually beneficial settlement.

    Note that comparatively tiny Lucent actually had to pay money in its part of the settlement.

    1. Re:How much is AT&T making on this settlement? by guttentag · · Score: 2
      a tax break for being AOL
      Wow! That was a big Freudian slip. Ah, it's all the same anyway. :o)

      In any case, make that:

      a tax break for being AT&T
  26. DIY phone service by silentbozo · · Score: 2

    I look forward to the day when we can direct-dial via point-to-point links through user-owned wireless, bypassing the monopolies. Bloodsuckers will get what's coming to them...

  27. Not all are sleazes. by Ckid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In Canada, Telus, Telus Mobility, and Microcell (Fido) automatically (and I do mean automatically) call thier customers every six months and let them know that, based on the customers usage, they are on the best cell plan/long distance plan/whatever. And if they are not, will recommend one that fits more into thier usage patterns.

    I think it's the whole cupon strategy, if clients think thier saving $0.10, they'll spend an extra dollar. I wonder how it's worked out for them, personally, I appreicate it.

    --
    -In the event that you disagree with the previous comment, be advised that you are most likely right anyway.
  28. Re:Whee by Kredal · · Score: 2

    Sure. And if you play it on my channel, We'll just use the bottom 10% of the screen for advertising... Don't worry, it won't affect the transmission too much.

    -TNN Exec

    --
    Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
  29. Stupid math trick by gilroy · · Score: 2
    Blockquoth the poster:

    Kinda like stores that have "sales" on items that happen to have recently been marked up *gasp* the exact percentage of the sale!

    Well, actually, that would result in a discount, albeit a small one. Assume the original price is p and the advertised percent markdown is f. Then the internal price (before the markdown) would be p'=p(1+f) and the sale price would be p''=p'(1-f)=p(1+f)(1-f), which of course is p(1-f^2). For f > 0, p'' < p... but by much less than the advertised amount.


    (So, the really said thing is, I formatted those equations by hand in HTML. Ugh.)

    1. Re:Stupid math trick by ceejayoz · · Score: 2

      lol... you took all the time to do that? sheesh

      you know what I meant :-p

  30. this is not bad as.......... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2
    ........as stealing mp3's.

  31. Is this really fraud? by Trekologer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ok, here's what this is about. Some people just realized that they have been paying the phone company every month to lease telephone equipment. Over the years, they've paid many times what the phone itself was really worth.

    And?

    If you've walked into a store anytime in the last 20 years, you would find that you can, in fact, purchase your very own telephone and don't need to continue to rent one from the phone company. And even if you continued to rent the telephone, you're not just renting the particular phone sitting in your house but also buying protection from that phone breaking. If it does break, the phone company will supply you with another one.

    This should be filed under "Oh, come on!"

    1. Re:Is this really fraud? by Megane · · Score: 2
      If it does break, the phone company will supply you with another one.

      Except some of these old phones simply don't break. I find good old AT&T touch phones at thrift stores every now and then. Follow that "timeless rotary traditional" link, and look at that upper-right phone. I've got one of those red desk phones, and the handset wire looks just as gangly as the one in the picture.

      About the only one I have that doesn't work is a rotary phone. It doesn't work because the phone companies don't support rotary any more, except in special cases. And then they charge you less for going to the trouble of providing rotary-only service.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    2. Re:Is this really fraud? by Reziac · · Score: 2

      I imagine this has gone away by now, but in the Early Days[tm] on some systems, you were not ALLOWED to use your own telephone equipment; you were =forced= to use rented equipment. (Gee, sounds just like some cable modem companies...)

      Sometimes this goes awry the other way. Back in 1975, I was moving on very short notice (to a location with no phone lines at all) and Mountain Bell couldn't get a guy out to disconnect my service in time, so they told me to just cut the line and bring the [rented] phone back at my leisure. So I did, and a week later dragged their phone to the office to return it. The gal peered at the ledger and told me, "But it says here you've already returned it!" Well, if you insist... so I picked up the phone and left. I still have the phone. (It's a rotary that can handle party lines.)

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  32. Not just US telecoms by FTL · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Five years ago I was browsing my grandmother's telephone bill, and discovered that Bell Canada was charging her rent on her telephones. Over the past 25 years she had paid $1000 each on three telphones. They were returned that afternoon.

    Next time you see an older telephone in Canada, flip it over and see if it has a "Property of Bell Canada" sticker on the bottom. If it does, warn its owner.

    --
    Slashdot monitor for your Mozilla sidebar or Active Desktop.
    1. Re:Not just US telecoms by SN74S181 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As a rule, I ONLY have 'Bell System Property, Not For Sale' phones at home.

      Back when the divestiture happened a lot of customers opted to purchase the equipment.

      There is no phone on the market for a reasonable price that is as durable and well made as a Bell System phone.

      Taking one apart, you'll find different date codes on each component, sometimes with varying dates that span decades. These things were built to last, to standards at least as good as Mil-Spec. Any time a phone was returned to Bell, it was broken up and reassembled from interchangable components.

      The Touch-tone phones of the early 70's aren't even digital. They have inductors and LC oscillators to generate the tuned frequencies.

      They're available for $3-5 at thrift stores, and easily servicible.

      Other than one spread-spectrucm cordless, I won't allow any of the post-breakup crap-phones into my house.

    2. Re:Not just US telecoms by Vegeta99 · · Score: 2

      Yeah. Those suckers are BUILT LIKE A TANK. Jesus, they EASILY weigh 5 pounds. While one could bash in the case, there's no way you can break the handset.

  33. In 1996 I was the last person with rotary by gelfling · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In 1996 I was the last person in my exchange with rotary service. After years of letters from NYNEX begging me to switch, for a nominal fee of about $4/month they finally cracked and just gave it to me. I refused to pay a charge for a service they had instituted in 1963 and had probably amortized by 33 years later. Apparently it cost them far more than $4/month to maintain the rotary crossbars for only one customer in the exchange.

    It is my one small victory agains the MAN.

    1. Re:In 1996 I was the last person with rotary by gelfling · · Score: 2

      If I remember correctly it was the 586 exchange in area code 516 Deer Park, NY

    2. Re:In 1996 I was the last person with rotary by Vegeta99 · · Score: 2

      They dont have to keep a (BIG FREAKIN HONKIN) Crossbar switch to keep your rotary service going. It's an option on digital switches. Williamsport (570-32*) was one of the first towns with a Digital switch, and all of our rotary phones still work.

      On the other hand, almost every phone in the house says "PROPERTY OF BELL TELEPHONE" under it. We've got one wall mount traditional rotary, and about 6 desktop traditional touch tone phones.

  34. Now let's get rid of the Touch-Tone fee by Megane · · Score: 2
    In the current generation of telephone switch equipment, it's actually more expensive to support rotary dial, because they have to have special equipment to detect those line flashes. I'll bet most of you in US cities are on a line that doesn't support rotary dial at all.

    But you're still paying extra for the phone company to provide a service that costs them less money! It's about time to switch that around and charge rotary customers (aside from grandfathering current customers) extra instead of Touch-Tone users.

    Of course this will never happen, since they already consider it part of the regular phone fee, and writing it up as an extra service is just a billing formality. Rotary customers are so rare these days that they can afford to eat the extra costs.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
  35. The money's usually well-spent. by PhxBlue · · Score: 2

    This is a tidy little sum. The people who were gouged are going to end up with not-so-much relative to the amounts they were "overbilled".

    Which is a fair amount more than they would have had if the lawyers hadn't done the footwork.

    Don't get me wrong, I'll grouse about lawyers' jackpots just as much as the next guy--but lawyers do work for their money, and most of them don't get windfall cases like this one. A database administrator is just as likely, in most cases, to make a salary competitive with a lawyer; but we don't complain that the DBA makes too much. Add to that the fact that lawyers do have a significant place within our society. I don't have statistics for how many of our current Supreme Court justices practiced law before they became judges, but I'd make a bet that all nine of them did.

    I'd rather see lawyers make the money than professional athletes. Two or three generations, what do we have to show for the hundreds of millions of dollars we wasted on them?

    --
    !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  36. Re:Telco -or- Telecom by Dynedain · · Score: 2

    I remember as a kid that we used to try "getting Mars to call"

    We would dial a number, hang up, and a few minutes later we would get a return call that would be all random noise.

    I realize now that what was happening was a modem was picking up and attempting a dial back.

    After a few months the number didn't work anymore. No "out of service" message, it just didn't respond, just dead air.

    --
    I'm out of my mind right now, but feel free to leave a message.....
  37. "Sale" in the ads, "lease" in the gray print by Jerry · · Score: 4, Funny

    I purchased a Princess phone for the kitchen at a "Sale" advertized by AT&T at their phone center. I had it for ten years. When I called to cancel my phone service because I was moving the clerk reminded me to return the Princess phone. I was stunned. I told her I payed $30 for it at a phone sale. She said "check the light gray print on the back side of your bill of sale." In print so light you could barely read it was the word 'lease', even though the front was 'sales' invoice. This lawsuite is punishment for that kind of deceptive business practice. They got their phone back. Every component was taken apart and reduced to its minimum parts, all were put into the box, except for the screws and nuts, throughly shaken, and the box was taken to the company, sealed up. I left with my refund, they had "their" phone.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  38. $1800 Rotary Phones by stuffman64 · · Score: 2

    Until recently, my grandma has been renting old rotary telephones from the local Bell, dating to 1972. The phones were leased for something like $5 a month per phone (two phones total). She refused to give them up, saying "if they aren't broke, why fix them?" and felt she had no business pleading with the phone company to lower her rate. I called Bell personally, asking why the heck they are ripping my grandma off for all these years. I told them in all, she has payed over $1800 per phone over the last 30 years. They agreed that it was expensive, and decided to let her keep the phones at no additional cost (gee, how nice).

    The sad thing is, they still work...

    --
    --- At my sig, unleash hell.
  39. Re:true story from ex-Lucent employee by Vegeta99 · · Score: 2

    What do you expect? This is AMERICA! They're being sued because it wasn't in huge, giant 72point font on the front of the envelope in English, Spanish, French, German, Haitian, Slavic, Hindi, Chinese, etc etc. McDonald's was successfully sued because their fries have beef flavoring in them, and they didn't tell vegetarians (although the ingredients list STATES THAT). Some fatass is suing a bunch of chains because they "forced" him to feat fattening food.

  40. Re:We pay extra for touch-tone - after 40 years! by Vegeta99 · · Score: 2

    You still do? It disappeared off of my VZ/Hell Fucklantic bill years ago. All they did was raise the basic price.