RochesterTel Calling Cards Dump 10XXX Dialing

RochesterTel Calling Cards Dump 10XXX Dialing

Post by Rob Levandows » Sat, 29 Oct 1994 09:40:55

I got an interesting letter from Rochester Telephone the other day.
They recently sent me a new (hideous purple) calling card, which had
my old PIN imprinted (but not my phone number), along with
instructions for dialing an 800 access number for RCI, RochesterTel's
long-distance arm. The letter, which trailed the card by several
months, explains that the Rochester Telephone calling card can no
longer be used for 0+ dialing after November 15th. In order to use
your standard RochesterTel calling card, and have the call billed to
your local telephone bill, you must dial the access number and use RCI
Long Distance.

I called their customer service and asked: will I still be able to use
10XXX codes to select an alternative long-distance carrier for my
calling- card calls? The answer is NO. Apparently they're taking their
cards out of the database.

The letter explains that this change is to help prevent calling-card
fraud.  I'm concerned ... how much fraud can an 800 access code
prevent? Is the savings in fraudulent calls worth relinquishing the
ability to choose which carrier your local-telco calling card calls
are carried by? Is it even legal for RochesterTel to prohibit 10XXX
dialing on their cards?

I suppose I could just get an AT&T card for those times I want to use
AT&T, or whoever ... I already have an RCI calling card, which is
completely seperate from my RochesterTel calling card, because if I
use RCI via my RochesterTel card, I don't get any of my plan
discounts. The RCI Pronto card does. Two cards for one phone number is
bad enough ... will I have to have accounts with any LD company I want to
use in the future?

I'm writing a letter of complaint to RochesterTel and the PSC and FCC,
in hopes that someone else will see that forcing calling card users to
use an affiliated division's LD service is kind of fishy. (Isn't this
what Bell used to do before it was broken up?) If anyone else reading
this is a RochesterTel customer, I urge them to do the same. The
addresses are in every RochesterTel phone book.

Most of all, I'm amazed at RochesterTel's hypocrisy. They've been
patting themselves on the back for months now, in every billing and
throughout the newspapers and TV, on their "Open Market Plan" that
will, as of January 1, enable local telephone service to competition
with recipocrity, etc. Now, they turn around and monopolize their
customer's calling card service. This sounds more like lip service
than phone service to me! :)

Rob Levandowski
Computer Interest Floor associate / University of Rochester

[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: My understanding is that independent
telcos are under *no legal obligation* to offer 10xxx dialing or for
that matter access to any long distance carrier other than whatever
they choose.  Certainly there are a large number of tiny little telco
cooperatives and the like around the USA who still shunt all their
long distance traffic to AT&T. Divestiture only applied to AT&T and
the Bell Companies. GTE also implemented much of the same when it
became common knowledge that the Justice Department was going to get
after them next when it finished with AT&T if they did not voluntarily
change their ways ... so they did.  But as for Rochester and the
other independents, I think they are still pretty much free to do as
they please. Certainly where their own calling card -- thus, an extension
of credit they are granting to you -- is concerned, they are perfectly
free to say what the card (account) can and cannot be used for.   PAT]


1. Dialling 10XXX on intra-LATA calls

Patrick, remember that this country is formed of 50 sovereign states, each with
its own PUC/PSC/DPU/CC or whatever the state chooses to call the regulatory
body for intra-state calling.  What applies in Chicago does not necessarily
apply in other parts of the country.

The situation is as follows:  For each 10XXX code, intra-LATA calling can be
enabled or disabled, based on whether the carrier is authorized by the proper
regulatory bodies to provide intra-LATA calling.

Here in Massachusetts, the carriers AT&T and ITT have not applied for the right
to carry intra-LATA traffic, and calls within the LATA (all of area codes 508
and 617) do not complete if prefixed with 10288 or 10488.

MCI, Sprint, and ALLnet (and others) have applied to the DPU for the right to
carry intra-LATA traffic, and intra-LATA calls prefixed by 10222, 10333, and
10444 complete via the carrier, even if the call is 10XXX+7D in the local C.O.
There is a "do not complete within this office bit", but it should not be set.
There is not a "do not complete within the local calling area" bit.

It is worth noting that it should theoretically be possible for subscribers to
pick a default carrier for intra-LATA calling, either the same default as for
inter-LATA or a different one, but the original order from Judge Green did not
require this capability, and it was not implemented.  Thus to use a carrier
other than your local telco for intra-LATA calling, you will always have to
use the 10XXX code.


2. can triggers function as mandatory access control

3. 10xxx vs. 950-xxxx Variances With Calling Card

4. MAC to VMS to UNIX to PC email systems

5. Reverese Engineering Workshop - Feb 19th

6. 800/950 vs 10xxx And 800 vs Call Me Card

7. Futaba Servo glitch with PIC PWM ...

8. ?Are there calling cards w/ dial-by-name (not just speed dial)?

9. Can Direct Dial Calls be Charged to AT&T Calling Card?

10. How to dial calling card calls on ISDN?

11. AT&T Calling Card/NY Tel Calling Card