2. Positions of the Parties

Complainant disputes placing calls shown in her November 2001 and December 2001 telephone bills to 415-233-4492, a local toll number to access her ISP, Earthlink. She claims that she re-programmed her computer dialer software to dial Earthlink's local number, 415-240-4492, on October 12, 2001. She asks SBC Pacific Bell to credit her account for $435.42 in billed charges for these disputed calls.

Complainant acknowledges that her dialer software was "by mistake" programmed to dial the toll number and she paid $171.30 for these calls, as shown in her October 2001 statement. She says that, thereafter, she made sure the toll number was removed from her dialer software. She even called Earthlink's Technical Department and had them "walk her through" the procedures to ensure that the toll number was "not stuck somewhere in her computer." She also called SBC Pacific Bell's telephone operator to ensure that the replacement number 415-240-4492, was not a toll number. Being an experienced Internet and computer user, and having paid $171.30 for her mistake, Complainant claims she did everything to ensure that her mistake would not be repeated.

SBC Pacific Bell responds that the toll number, 415-233- 4492, was directly dialed by Complainant's computer dialer software during the period in question. According to SBC Pacific Bell, Complainant dialed it either as a primary access number to Earthlink or as an alternate access number to Earthlink if the primary access number failed to connect.

In addition, an expert witness for SBC Pacific Bell testified that the utility did not "re-route" the disputed calls from Earthlink's local access number to its toll access number. SBC Pacific Bell points out that it has no relationship with Earthlink in this matter and is unaware of alternate numbers to deploy to connect with Earthlink. According to SBC Pacific Bell, the only plausible explanation for this dispute is that Complainant failed to properly program her dialer software to prevent it from dialing the disputed toll number to access her Earthlink. Further, SBC Pacific Bell asserts that the Complainant is the party that selected the access number for connecting with her ISP. Therefore, SBC Pacific Bell submits that pursuant to its tariffs, Complainant is required to pay SBC Pacific Bell for the services it rendered Complainant.