...and here was me thinking it was actually because MI5 were bugging his phone line!

Only he's not joking....

Deadly serious ... As others here know I spent a lot of tme at a senior level in BT and still have some very good high level contacts.

It may be an idea but it is highly unlikely that they would be able to do that. In order to make a charge they would either need to make the service available to all, in which case it would be fair to charge for it, or they would need to prove a loss caused by someone using it without authorisation. Since it is an automated service it would be very difficult to prove an actual loss. If they went around just billing people

Just ask the BT technicians who try to use teh service and find it unavailable because it is being abused. That costs BT money.

There is a record on one user dialling it 2500 times during a 12 month period ... what did he expect to see? A line getting shorter and less noisier the more often he used it?

BT don't need to prove anything of the sort. The system is provided for authorised use. Automated or not, they will still be able to identify you from your phone number (i.e. the number of the line used to access the system) and they will know the time you dialled the service, and unless there was a report of a fault (real or otherwise) being investigated at the time then they can reasonably assume that the use was not authorised.

Billing unauthorised users

"It would technically be no different to a bank charging you for going overdrawn."

Yes it would be. Bank charges can be levied because they are specified in a contract that you have previously signed. That is why they are penalties and not fines: you have agreed to them. You have not agreed to a

Edited by Kayak (Thu 28-Sep-06 13:56:59)

I don't think it is that the system can't handle the calls, it's the line testers in the exchange that get busy which is a bore when you are clinging to the top of a pole.

I can't see anyone getting a bill but I do wonder what punters get out of it when they can't interpret the results!

Edited by deleted (Thu 28-Sep-06 14:18:23)

I only ever use 17070 to (a) check the number when I am in a strange house and there's more than the one line I've been told about and (b) to do a ringback to ensure the phone is OK. I would hope BT would view such usage as reasonable. OTOH, if you want to go further, there could be a message warning that unauthorised use of the system will incur a charge.

In reply to:

---

Bank charges can be levied because they are specified in a contract that you have previously signed.

---

That is precisely the same, the bank specify in a contract what services are available to you and the limits on those services. Where in your contract with BT does it say that you can use the facility in question? If it doesn't say that you can use it, you may not do so. Using facilities to which you not entitled are likely to require not just payment but penalty payments, such as those for an unauthorised overdraft.

In reply to:

---

Anyway, clearly the way to proceed is for BT is to introduce a password-type system as they have already done. I'm not clear on why the menu options still allow non-password access too though

---

Probably for much the same reason as sweet shops do not have locked doors over all their counters to make it clear that unauthorised taking of their goods is not permitted. The cost would be ridiculous considering that the majority of the population have an idea of what they can and must not do. The system you suggest would be paid, in the main, for those who do not need it. Only those who break any good practices they can get away with make it necessary. This way is far fairer at least for the well behaved - but the habitually anitsocial may not see that.