Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 00:35:18 -0800
From: John Higdon <john@bovine.ati.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: More Allegations About MCI

robert@caliper.com (Robert Freimer) writes:

> The other interesting part of this experience is with Sprint, which I
> am now happily using for International calls.  They had no problem
> with my request for an account with 10333 access.

I have had a secondary (10333 access) account with Sprint for about
ten years. At no time has Sprint ever attempted to become PIC on any
of the lines involved, nor have they ever pressured me into any
particular plan or usage. In months where there is no usage (most of
my calls are made through another carrier), there is no bill. There
are no minimum monthly charges as with AT&T; no "mystery" charges as
with MCI.

I also have a Sprint calling card that was issued back in the US
Telecom days before the merger with Sprint. After all this time, and
even after months of inactivity, it always works. Even though Sprint's
rates are not as low as I have been able to negotiate elsewhere, it is
nice to have the backup account. Neither AT&T nor MCI would be
suitable for such standby service. AT&T has its minimums (and soon, an
eighty-cent surcharge on carrier-code usage), and MCI constantly
attempts to become PIC and applies constant pressure to this effect.


John Higdon  |    P.O. Box 7648   |   +1 408 264 4115     |       FAX:
john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 |   +1 500 FOR-A-MOO    | +1 408 264 4407
             |         http://www.ati.com/ati             |

From: john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon)
Newsgroups: alt.dcom.telecom,comp.dcom.telecom.tech
Subject: Re: MCI One Number Kinda Sucks
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 1996 12:31:39 -0700

In article <4t5q9q$dq2@news.internetmci.com>, Yourname@somwhere.COM (Your
Name) wrote:

> ahh....John..did a mci guy run over your dog or what.....

Not a very well-asked question, but I will give it a reasonable answer.
Over the past ten years, I have had "opportunities" to deal with MCI in a
vast array of settings and circumstances. I have attempted to use them for
my personal long distance, my company's long distance, and for various
clients at one time or another.

I am not talking about trivial situations. Work for one client involved
multiple on-site consultations at MCI's Rialto switching center. I have
used MCI Vision for my business delivered on multiple T1s. One client used
MCI for a service bureau (again, multiple T1s).

All of these encounters resulted in disaster of one sort or another.
Promised services were never delivered. What they could REALLY deliver
came along unusably late. The rates on the bill never matched the quote.
To explain this, reps went through incredible dog and pony shows about
rebates, "free days", multiple volume discounts, etc., etc. In essence, I
was told that if I would spend the two days trying to calculate all the
hooey, I would find that the bottom line would match the quote.

In my own company's case, we were promised 800 ANI and status delivery.
The lines went in with neither. It took MCI forty days to get ANI working
(they were never able to provide status) and then they tacked on a $500
charge to do so. After I cancelled service, the company continued to bill
for inexplicable charges for a solid year thereafter. Ignoring the bills
resulted in various and sundry threats of legal action, etc. They did not
stop until my attorneys did a little threatening of their own.

A client was promised high-volume 800 service. I repeatedly asked MCI if
unanswered calls would be a problem considering access charges. "We're
MCI; we can do anything." First thing out of the box, MCI complained that
there were large numbers of unanswered calls. They unceremoniously pulled
the plug on my client, forgetting all the apparently empty assurances made
when the contract was signed. Sidebar: this seems to be MCI's trademark
MO--promise the customer anything to get him hooked, then weasel around
making excuses. One of MCI's great excuses is, "our rep must have
misunderstood the product offering...".

MCI's procedures and policies have been consistent to the point where I am
sure there are many reading this saying, "Yep, that's what happened to
me...". My condemnation of that company is not based upon a single
experience, nor is it based upon a single level of product or service.
Yes, I have had people tell me that they have had MCI on their home phone
for years and are very happy. I am not one of them, however, since on the
very first bill, they charged me for over two hundred dollars-worth of
calls I never made. And they were not too cooperative about taking them
off.

Do I look with suspicion on MCI's product offerings? Well, if you had ten
years of experience with the company--virtually all bad--wouldn't you?
Don't forget, MCI was the one offering its alternative information
service--you know, the one where they would go ahead and put the call
through on the MCI network. Problem is, they were charging for the
information calls on an 800 number. They were doing this following a major
order by the FCC limiting the ability of IPs to do the very same thing. It
was an obvious attempt to use the 800 service to lull people into thinking
the service was free. They stopped when AT&T filed suit.

> Glenn Dobson ++++ Olympia , WA.......
> MCI Private-Line Junction Tech

I see where you are coming from. At the moment, I am involved with another
project with MCI (client's request). It is in my best interest to have
this project run smoothly--regardless of the carrier. The MCI people that
I am working with are very helpful and knowledgable. But there is a lot of
history here, and I am keeping a very keen eye on the situation. To my
knowledge, the corporate situation has not changed, and since I believe
MCI's problems are of a top-down nature, hopes are not high.

-- 
John Higdon  |    P.O. Box 7648   | +1 408 264 4115  |      FAX:
john@ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | +1 500 FOR-A-MOO |+1 408 264 4407
             |       http://www.ati.com/ati/         |