A good number of SLT subscribers are harassed by unwarranted red notices epidemic, on regular basis. 75% of subscribers receive unwarranted red notices from SLT, although their payments are regular. I presume this is due to a lapse in the SLT invoicing and payment computing system.

In the notice itself is mentioned,".... your telephone has been listed for disconnection." "Please ignore this notice if you have made your payments."

What a hilarious red notice. This means that the head does not know what the tail is doing. If a payment is made at the tail (SLT Teleshop) the head (Invoicing computers at Billing Centres) does not get this information for 3 weeks or more?

SLT’s red notice comedy has become a meaningless exercise and an eye-sore for subscribers. Regular payees are greatly exasperated by these unwarranted red notices, especially the elderly who does not want to be in the "Red".

I am not quoting the a/c no of the subscriber B for obvious reasons as he has not received a Red Notice with such a huge amount as arrears. This proves that Red Notices are not based on actual outstanding amounts or SLT guidelines.

Instead of sending such useless red notices on regular basis for small amounts in arrears (as in Case A), SLT must develop a system to send out real red notices, if the arrears are over a fixed credit limit. Each subscriber (not business subs) should be fixed with a credit limit to pay within 3 months, considering the usage. If this amount is exceeded the line should be cut off, with one week’s notice.

Another drawback is that Teleshops do not accept advance payments. This is a major problem for subscribers who wish to pay several months estimated bills in advance to overcome the agony of visiting teleshops and waiting in queues, on monthly basis.
Ariyasumithra Wijeyaratne,
Polgasovita.