HC Deb 07 April 1925 vol 182 cc2030-2
86. Colonel DAY

asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been drawn to a complaint by the London Theatre of Varieties, Limited, forwarded to the Controller, London Telephone Service, on 20th March, 1925; and whether, seeing that this company pays over £1,000 a year for telephone calls in respect of the 15 halls that are owned by the company, and that for the year ending 31st December last there was an apparent overcharge in their account of approximately £10 per quarter, and that in the account for the quarter ending 31st December in only one instance was the charge correct, in one case it was below the correct amount, and in the other 13 halls the company was overcharged, also that in every case the error was brought to the notice of the Controller but no redress given, neither was the request for a joint test granted, the only reply received being an intimation that unless the account was paid within seven days the agreement would be terminated, he will arrange for a joint test to be held, so that the accuracy or otherwise of the telephone charges may be scrutinised?

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON

I have seen the complaint referred to and previous correspondence. I am satisfied that the fullest inquiries have been made in each case of complaint and that there is no reason for reducing the amount of the accounts rendered. In connection with a special check made in July last on one of this company's circuits, a number of omissions were brought to their notice. A further special record was taken recently on another of the company's installations in connection with an alleged overcharge in the December accounts, but the company declined to produce their record for the purpose of comparison. In the circumstances the Controller of the London Telephone Service was justified in giving notice to terminate the agreement failing payment of the amount outstanding.

Colonel DAY

Will the right hon. Gentleman grant to this company and other dissatisfied telephone subscribers facilities for a joint test in order that they may be aware that the test is to be taken and compare their figures together.

Sir W. MITCHELL-THOMSON

A joint test seems a purely futile proceeding. The only advantage of the test is that it should be taken when the user is not aware of it.

Colonel DAY

Cannot some notice be given to them that the test will take place during the next month or two months? I know that in one instance the Post Office undercharged instead of overcharged.