Cell phone blues

I have subscribed to the AMPS system of Komselindo since late September 1996, when I fell for an advertisement boasting clear voice quality, greater system coverage, low battery consumption and lower bills compared with the GSM system.

However, a strange thing occurred in December 1996 when my bill suddenly soared. It was difficult to contact me on my mobile phone as it produced an engaged signal all the time while in fact it was lying on my desk, unused. I tried dialing my own number from another phone. This could only mean that no sooner had I bought my mobile phone and had it activated when another person illegally made use of my number.

I became increasingly suspicious about this, especially when friends told me that when they called my mobile phone number a complete stranger answered the call. Finally, Komselindo admitted that my AMPS-Komselindo set had been duplicated.

As advised, I had the number blocked and paid the blocking charges. Then I visited the Motorola dealer on the first floor of Komselindo Building to have the frequency changed and the set replaced by Generation-2 K-Prosel.

For some time I enjoyed the comfort of using this Prosel-2 and I felt safe as every time I wanted to make a local or long- distance call I had to use my access code first.

However, even this access code did not guarantee security. Two months after I started using the Generation 2, another strange thing happened and my bill again soared. It was queer because Komselindo had never inquired about which four digits I used as my access code. I tried changing the combination of my access code but the party duplicating my number seemed to have bypassed even this new access code combination. As expected, my bill swelled 20 times over.

I lodged a complaint and was told that from the area code frequently used it was found that duplication had been made in Medan.

If you are ready to spend your valuable time making claims, Komselindo will indeed attend to you patiently and professionally. However, the time and money I have spent has proven to be a lot.

In lodging my claim I had to visit Komselindo twice as the process ran for two months. So I had to spend Rp 30,000 for taxi fares to and from my house (Grogol) to Komselindo on two occasions. Then I had to buy a Rp 2,000 stamp duty to be affixed to my letter of complaint. Another Rp 2,000 was charged for a printout of my telephone account. I also had to pay the subscription fee even though the phone was inactive. Then I had to sustain some losses as I could not communicate with my business partners.

Aside from financial losses, I also lost my valuable time. I had to wait four hours for the processing of my claim. Then I lost more hours as I had to check my private telephone book and inquire whether my children or my wife used the phone without my knowledge. I also spent more time looking for the original bills of the last three months. Finally, I had to have my identity card photo copied and my phone blocked.

Unless Komselindo overcomes this problem, I will obviously be lodging a claim every month because of the bill incurred by the party duplicating my number. This means I will have to spend more time and money which would otherwise be put to more productive use.

How is this, then, Komselindo?

MIMBAR SEPUTRO

Jakarta