Abbot and Costello seek Employment at ATT Wireless ! 

...or Adventures in Tedious Absurdity with AT&T Wireless Services...


Sorry about the _Avengers_-ish tag lines, but my recent bizzare 
experiences with AT&T Wireless Services and their caricatures of 
customer service reps could easily substitute for an episode of the series...

Anyhow, I've been a generally happy customer of AT&T Wireless's New York 
City 00025 system for about 9 years now -- my service was them was one of 
the first accounts I had which I obtained while still in college, and 
despite a number of moves and many other cellular accounts since then, I 
have kept that account and added two others for our company in ATT's 
00025 NYC market. 

I've been willing to put up with some of their glaring problems, such as:

[] A rather small coverage area as compared to the NY B-side Bell Atlantic
00022 system. Although they offer "home" rates in some systems surrounding
their 00025 system, they charge tolls and call delivery charges to/from
these surrounding non-AT&T systems while BAMS has one truly large system
(and has recently expanded it to include all of NJ, although tolls between
systems do apply). 

[] The utter lack of handoffs or interconnectivity with the Sussex NJ 
system. This system occupies a significant chunk of Northern NJ, and a 
good number of miles on I-80 west of I-287. Anyone who travels this area 
who uses AT&T is going to get cut off since handoffs don't occur, while 
since BAMS owns (brands?) the comparable B-side system (which USED to 
have it's own SID of 01488 or something; it is now the same as the rest 
of BAMS' NY system at 00022), there is no such problem, and it even hands 
off nicely to the BAMS Philly/NE PA 00008 system.

[] The lack of the No-Answer-Transfer feature: Why? They use that
wonderful catch-all "Due to Fraud" to justify the lack of the feature. 
But it does work at times in *some* switches in their 00025 system, and
when roaming as well (try *72, which is most normal markets is supposed to
be *71; McCaw/ATT tried to force their brand of NACN feature codes on the
rest of the country a while back it seems; no one bought it, but many
ex-McCaw markets are now stuck with non-standard feature codes like *71
for immediate call forwarding and *710 to turn off all call forwarding. 
The "correct" codes are *71 - No Answer Transfer, *72 - Immediate Call
Forwarding, *74 - busy transfer, *73 - deactivate all forwarding, *710
(*713)- deactivate NAT leaving any other forwarding intact, *720 (*723) -
deactivate immediate call forwarding leaving any other forwarding intact,
*740 (*743) - deactivate Busy forward leaving other forwarding intact (a
rarely used and ever more rare feature to be properly implemented.)

[] The quirky Ericsson switch: It may have been a state of the art switch 
in 1991 or so, but its flaky now. Sometimes generates ring tones when 
callers call you, sometimes does not. If you recently powered your phone 
off, and someone calls you, they will hear dead air for maybe 20 seconds 
rather than ringing -- most of the time they hang up before the call goes 
to voicemail or the No-Answer-Transfer number. 

[] The prohibition against forwarding calls to toll-free numbers: Have an 
800 voicemail or pager? Want unanswered calls to go there? Want to 
forward your calls there when you are away? Well, AT&TWS will *not* let 
you! Again, they claim it is a "fraud" issue and say nothing more. 

[] Outrageous toll delivery rates: Why do I have to pay 28 cents per 
minute to have calls delivered to me when AT&T is selling long distance 
for 9 cents per minute? I dunno, but apparently enough idiots allow AT&T 
to deliver their calls for them so they end up paying a de-facto airtime 
charge for call delivery. (Just as an aside, if we can get T-1 US toll 
rates at about 2.5 cents per minute with Bell/GTE termination, I would 
*think* that AT&T, the largest LD telco in the US could do a bit better, 
yet they bill their semi-captive LD customers outrageous rates to deliver 
their calls to outside markets. To be fair, though, other carriers do 
this as well, although BAMS offers it for 10 cents during off peak periods)

[] The do NOT cover the Midtown Tunnel (I-495, sort of) and the Battery 
Tunnel (I-478, again, sort of), while BAMS covers all the NYC tunnels. 
(BAMS also provides CDPD coverage in all of it's tunnels, while AT&TWS, 
the "premier" CDPD data provider with its Pocketnet service, does not, 
and you can not use your CDPD or Pocketnet device while sitting in the 
endless tunnel traffic -- not even in the Holland and Lincoln tunnels, which 
AT&T does offer cellular service in.)


Despite these problems, the service level has generally been good enough 
to make me want to keep our accounts with AT&T over the past years.

However, two months ago, I received a bill from AT&T for over $400! My 
bills per account are generally $50 - $75 per month, so I looked over the 
bill, and saw something unusual.

It seems that for some calls which were forwarded (either via Immediate 
Call Forwarding or No Answer Transfer) I was billed *roaming* rates and 
long distance charges, even though the calls occurred during *Off Peak* 
(read: free airtime) and were forwarded locally (read: no local toll 
charges).

In essence, when someone called my cellphone during off-peak hours _when 
airtime is FREE_, and when the calls were forwarded to local NY Metro 
numbers which are also _FREE_, I was billed $.99 per minute airtime AND 
$.28 per minute long distance charges.

Previously with AT&T Wireless, as well as currently with BAMS, GTE, Cell
One of VT, and all the other carriers we use, when a call is forward with
No Answer Transfer, and it follows you while you roam, if you do not
answer it, you pay whatever the local airtime and toll (if any) charges
*in your HOME system* are for the transfer -- you are NEVER supposed to
pay roaming airtime just because your phone rang a few times in the
visited market and then was redirected or "taken back" by your home switch
to your voicemail or NAT number. This is a standard practice, one
exercised by AT&T (and the others) during the entirety of my service with
them. 

Even odder, this was not consistent throughout the whole bill -- there 
were many calls which were rated correctly, that is, if a call was 
forwarded to a local number during the off peak periods, the entire call 
was free. 

So I called to see what was going on. I first spoke to a Carolyn Miller 
at their customer service center (As an aside: They have centers all over 
the US and in Canada; most of the reps have no idea about any of the 
particularities of the NY system, which makes it hard to deal with them; 
I used to be able to talk to a rep in the NY market, while now it seems 
impossible to talk to anyone who even knows were NY *is*!). Carolyn was 
clue-less, and said "Well, the calls were forwarded, and forwarded calls 
incur airtime and toll charges". 

(Try to correlate this with the "Who's on First Sketch"; she's a Pro...)

Me: Hmmm...Ok I said, what time did call #128 occur?

Carolyn: At 10:35PM.

Me: And when is my airtime free?

Carolyn: Ummm..when it is off-peak

Me: And when does the off peak period commence?

Carolyn: At 9 PM

Me: So what is the airtime rate at 10:35PM?

Carolyn: I guess it is free...

Me: (Now we are getting somewhere I thought!) Ok, good (I could be a 
Kindegarden teacher having such apparent communicative skills, no?) Now, 
what is the rate for a call in the NY market in terms of toll charges?

Carolyn: There is no charge

Me: So you mean it is free?

Carolyn: Yes

Me: And what is the rate applied to a call-forwarding call, is it my 
rateplan's specified airtime rate and toll charges?

Carolyn: Yes

Me: So how come a forwarded call, labeled as such, is being billed at 99 
cents per minute airtime and 25 cents per minute toll when you just told 
me that the call should be free?

Carolyn: Because you were using call forwarding...

(Third base...)

Me: (exasperated) Ummm...Am I missing something? 

Carolyn: I think you should just switch to another rateplan

Me: Why, you'll just get that one wrong too!

Giving up on Carolyn, I asked to have a manager call me back. This was in 
early December, and I figured give them a week or so to research the 
problem, made sure Carolyn noted the account, and figured I'd get a call 
back from someone who knew what they were doing and get it resolved then.

So January comes around, and no response. I call back, and this time 
speak to someone in Nova Scotia. She looks into the matter says "Oh, 
these are roaming calls placed in the state of New Haven". Now maybe some 
Yalies think that New Haven should be a separated from the rest of 
Connecticut, but the lady in Nova Scotia didn't impress me too much as 
being a Yale graduate (she was WAY too articulate :) Sorry, had to...!)

After clearing up with her that New Haven was not New Hampshire and that 
it was a somewhat well known city in the state of CT and along the 
eastern seaboard, she went on to explain that since I placed the calls in 
CT, I was billed airtime and toll charges since it was not in my home 
coverage area. 

I replied that I wasn't even IN Connecticut some of those times, and that
in all cases my phone was off all during that weekend and was using my
other BAMS NAM there -- I, or rather my phone had just autonomously
registered in CT with the NY ATTWS NAM when I drove up I-95, and after 
passing Stamford I remembered to switch to my BAMS/CT NAM/account. 

The lady in Nova Scotia says "Well, my records do show your phone was 
registered in CT, and it doesn't seem like you placed any calls other 
than the call-forwarding calls..." (How on earth do I *place* a call 
forwarding call? Someone calls me, my phone is off, and it goes where the 
call is forwarded, I don't "place" anything). So I asked to speak to her 
manager, who I was told was Peter Ross. The rep put me on hold, and then 
came back and asked "So your phone was never on in CT?" and I replied 
"No, not when those calls came in no, but that's not even the point. Even 
if it WERE on, and I just let it sit there, a call which is not answered 
and not placed in CT should never incur airtime charges or toll charges". 
So she put me on hold and then came back and said "Peter Ross says that 
even if you didn't place or receive a call, you used the cell tower, 
which is why you were billed". "Ok", I said, "if that is the case, then how 
can I use the cell tower when my phone is off?". She paused a bit, as if 
stretching for an answer, and said "Well, even when your phone is off it 
is communicating with the tower at all times" (Really, you mean if I take 
all the batteries out and don't plug it in it somehow gets energy to 
communicate? Wow -- AT&T Wireless shouldn't be in this messy cellular 
business, but should be selling perpetual motion machines and other 
devices which wonderfully violate the laws of thermodynamics!)

Not being satisfied with that inane answer, I asked to have Peter Ross 
calls me back, and even left him a voicemail. Not a word back from him yet.

Then a week later, I call and specifically ask for a Rep in the NY 
Market. I get a hold of a lady called "Christine", who looks at the 
account and says "Oh, if they are forwarded they are billed airtime, even 
if your airtime is free" HUH? I ask for a supervisor...

I get a hold of Regina Tisdale, a manager at AT&T in New Jersey, who says
she will look into the problem. I tell her enough people have "looked into
the problem" and we have gotten nowhere. I want them to put _in writing_
precisely what the policy is regarding call forwarding charges and if
roamers will pay extra to have no answer transfer calls received while
they are registered (even if their phone is off!) in some other market.
She says she will get some material to me, and in a week I get some
brochure which explains how to use call forwarding and that "airtime and
toll charges (in any) according to your service plan will apply".  Sort of
supports my position, no? 

About the same time (a week ago), I get a bill for another $400, and AT&T 
threatens to cut off my service.

I call up their billing office, and say "There is no way you will see one 
penny of that money, other than the monthly charges and any valid usage 
charges, and I suggest you have your attorneys contact me if you wish to 
litigate the matter." (The account in question is still in my name and 
not in the company name, so I can represent myself pro se if needed.) I 
added "Also be warned that if the phone is suspended, I will file an 
informal complaint with the FCC regarding your billing practices and your 
refusal to explain - in writing - why these charges occurred." The rep 
sounded a bit intimidated, and transferred me to James Wayland.

Initially James tried to be helpful, but after he talked to his 
supervisor, I was told the same thing, that the charges were valid, but 
he had no more information than that. I asked him to have the reasons put 
in writing, and the following conversation ensued:

Me: Well, if that is your position I'd like you have that in writing -- a 
simple statement with your name or whoever is making this representation 
and their office and contact information, so I can pursue this matter 
further.

James: Well, we can't put it in writing. (In a scolding tone) The notes to 
your account say you were told previously that the reason you were 
billed for call forwarding charges in CT is that you were using the New 
Haven tower (gee, there's only one?), and since you did that, you must 
pay airtime and toll charges.

Me: But my phone was off then

James: But you just said it was on

Me: It was on my BAMS NAM, not yours

James: So you were still using the New Haven tower

Me: (Wishing the "New Haven tower" would fall on him and knock some sense 
into this apparent moron) Yes, I was using it with an account which has 
nothing to do with you, which you do not bill, and which for the purposes 
of this conversation is irrelevant. My point is that for some reason, 
when someone calls my AT&T cell number, and my phone was last registered 
in CT, I am billed as if I placed the calls from CT, even though I never 
placed or received a single call while I was there.

James: Ok, let me check...It's going to be a bit while I research this...

(15 minutes later)

James: I asked about this, and since your phone was last in CT, when 
someone calls you, even if you don't answer or the phone is off, you will 
pay roaming and toll charges.

Me: So why when I was in Washington, DC, and calls came in and were
redirected back to NY, why were there no charges in that case? Or Boston?
Or Philadelphia? 

James: Each market can set its own rates. In some markets, they bill you 
for it, and we only pass the charges on to you. If you roam in some 
markets, and you don't answer a call and it is forwarded to voicemail or 
another number, you may pay roaming charges.

Me: Really? It doesn't say that anywhere in my contract with you. I 
consider this to be a modification to my contract and your past 
performance 8 years. I'd like what you just said in writing. 

James: We already sent you the materials...

Me: (Interrupting) What you sent was a brochure on how to use call 
forwarding. I want you to put what you JUST told me in writing, with the 
exact wording you used. 

James: Let me check on that...

Me: You need to CHECK to see if what you just told me is correct? (Why 
should I have any confidence in ANYTHING he tells me?)

...So he puts me on hold, then comes back, and says:

James: I'll have the materials sent out within two weeks.

Me: And will that include an explanation of the charges and your 
statements from this conversation?

James: (Evasively) It will contain what you need to know

Me: I'll ask you again, will it contain and explanation of the charges 
and your statement to me that based upon where you roam charges may be 
incurred for NAT and CF?

James: (reluctantly) Yes, it will.

Me: Ok, and what is your last name and what center are you out of? (So I 
will have a detailed record of my conversation with him)

James: It is Wayland, and I am out of the NY center.

Me: But the recordings on hold are from the Pittsburgh system.

James: I can be reached via New York

Me: But where are or what is a contact number in case I need to clarify 
some materials or if the literature is not sent?

James: I can be reached via New York, we are not allowed to say where we 
work (Probably some insane asylum AT&T is farming out work to!)


So...having done all this, I have not heard back from James or any of 
that wonderfully informed gang. 

I finally resorted to a call to AT&T Wireless's Exec Appeals office at 
(888) 413-8106, but the guy who I spoke to went on about "how I am using 
the tower in CT", so I don't expect too much from them. (He did seem 
concerned that it was inconsistently billed, though, maybe that will 
convince them that there really is a problem.)

Overall, I wasted about 5 hours on the phone with these people, got 
absolutely nowhere, and am now so fed up with AT&T WS that unless they do 
something for me other than remove the $780+ of incorrect charges I am 
just going to move all three accounts (even the two with no problems) 
over to Bell Atlantic and not deal with AT&T's nonsense any longer. 

What's worse, if this happened to someone who actually bought the total 
nonsense which these reps spewed, they may have very well convinced him 
or her to pay the outrageous charges since they can *sound* deceptively 
convincing. It is only when you pierce the surface of their self-service 
doubletalk that you find their entire argument as to why the charges are 
valid is utterly specious and fabricated for their convenience. 

One thing is for sure: They will _never_, _ever_ see a dime of that $780 
which they misbilled. 

It's a shame that a company which once was responsive to issues like this 
and had reasonable people working for it has become such a stodgy and 
brain dead firm, so entrenched in their own dogma and customer-service 
platitudes that their responses are non-sequitor and mere mindless 
babbling rather than any manner of informed and concerned analysis of what 
appears to be a substantive billing problem.

And not that the size of our (relatively small) account should matter, we 
currently pay them about $170 per month in total for all three accounts, 
which in about 4 months would total the current amount they claim is 
owed. Had they just credited the $780, and earnestly looked into the 
problem and resolved it (and it IS a problem, this is NOT the way it 
should be billed), they would have had a happy customer who in four 
months or so would have paid back -- via normal usage -- the total amount 
credited. 

Instead, they have alienated a generally loyal customer (there aren't 
many people who stay with the same carrier for 9 years), and will likely 
lose all of our company's business due to their stupidity. 

Or perhaps AT&T's service reps are smarter than I give them credit for, 
and they realize this is a problem, but figure the cost of fixing it is 
higher than its worth to let me go as a customer, so they insist the 
charges are valid knowing that I'll leave them and hopefully no one else 
will notice it.

In any event, unless I get some radical help from them by tomorrow, it's 
time I think to leave them and move the NY accounts to BAMS. 

I've had problems with BAMS before, but each time something comes up they
manage to address the issue in a fair manner, and I'll take that sort of
service to the deceptive, obtuse, and just plain dumb people which I 
talked to at AT&T over the past few months any day. 


(This post and updated SID list are also available at www.wirelessnotes.org)

Regards,

Doug