HC Deb 18 May 1960 vol 623 cc1258-9
8. Mr. W. Edwards

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware of the large number of cases where charges for trunk calls which have not been made are demanded from telephone subscribers; if he is satisfied that the telephone subscriber is adequately protected from over-payment under the present system; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Bevins

My experience does not support the first part of the hon. Member's Question. Though errors sometimes occur, sample checks of callers' numbers show that the proportion of calls wrongly booked is very small, and when they come to notice they are carefully investigated. If the hon. Member has any particular case in mind, I will be very glad to make enquiry.

Mr. Edwards

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the case I have in mind is my own case in connection with two telephones for which I am financially responsible? In both accounts charges were made for trunk calls which I had never made. Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that the telephone subscriber who is liable to be charged for calls made by other people should be protected by his Department? Judging from his reply, it would appear that he is doing nothing about the matter. If it can happen to me twice, surely it can happen to all telephone subscribers. Will the right hon. Gentleman do something about it?

Mr. Bevins

I hope that the incorrect charges to the hon. Gentleman have been waived by the Post Office. I ought to tell him, however, that we make regular checks on these calls in about 10 per cent. of the cases, and our investigations show that incorrect charges are made in about one case in 8,000. Having said that, I admit that the present system is by no means foolproof, and the more rapidly we can move over to subscriber trunk dialling, which will minimise the liability to error, the better.

Mr. Ness Edwards

Has the right hon. Gentleman considered the very interesting experiment being conducted by his predecessor, and about which he told the House, of installing in subscribers' homes a machine automatically to register the calls so that there is an adequate check against the charges? What has happened to that?

Mr. Bevins

I am deeply grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that suggestion. I will certainly have a look at it.

Forward to