TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Service Providers Recycling Phone Numbers

Re: Service Providers Recycling Phone Numbers

DLR (news22@raleighthings.com)
Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:03:10 -0500

hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
> David Lazarus wrote:

>> Would you pay full price for a used cell phone number?

>> Chances are, you already have.

>> In a little-known industry practice, wireless service providers routinely
>> recycle former customers' phone numbers and give them to new customers
>> without informing them of the number's history.

> Huh? The phone company has _always_ recycled phone numbers. The only
> time you got a new one if you're entering a new exchange.

>> Cell phone companies say they need to do this because there just aren't
>> enough new numbers to go around. A number can be reused within as little as
>> 30 days.

> It's certainly true that there aren't enough numbers to go around.
> Unlike a home phone which tends to be more permanent, cell phone
> accounts can be opened and closed repeatedly.

> However, I do feel 30 days is not enough delay time. Because one has
> to pay for incoming calls, wrong numbers can be costly. Accordingly, I
> think a number should lay dormant at least for a year. I also think
> they should give 90 days free referral just like a land line phone.

Hey, when I moved to Raleigh, NC in 88 I was given the old number of a
lawyer. Resulted in about 1 call a month that we had to tell them
sorry, not us. The one I always wondered about was the call on the
answering machine from the guy wanting use to come bail him out. :)

> [some techie suprised phone numbers don't last forever.]

>> Therre said he called Sprint and was told by a service rep that he
>> must have signed up for a premium service. He said Sprint's records
>> showed that the text messages were being billed by a company called
>> SMS....

> Obviously when any business closes out an account, it must close out
> everything. This isn't an issue of recycling the number, but rather
> failing to close out the account and reset all defaults. Presumably
> the man didn't want text messaging so that should've been turned off.
> All those text calls would've been rejected. End of trouble.

> It appears companies that use new technologies are so quick to start
> up and get running that they don't bother to build proper
> administrative systems. So garbage like this happens. What is
> insulting is that the companies deny responsibility even though it was
> their inter-billing arrangements that made it all possible in the
> first place. You can be sure Sprint was nicely compensated for its
> relationship with the other outfit.

> Imagine you sit down at a restaurant and your check includes food
> ordered by the previous customer. No one in their right mind would
> tolerate that. But apparently when it comes to technology that kind
> of business practice is perfectly ok.

I've had someone in the restaurant business tell me that's exactly
what happens some places. At many places uneaten food is scraped off
and put back in the "pot". This was NYC.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: George Berger: "Re: Service Providers Recycling Phone Numbers"
Go to Previous message: Koos van den Hout: "Re: Disney Bringing Back MovieBeam Set-Top Box"
May be in reply to: David Lazarus: "Service Providers Recycling Phone Numbers"
Next in thread: George Berger: "Re: Service Providers Recycling Phone Numbers"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page