Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
SAYNOTO0870.COM

<---- Back to main website

 
Home Help Search Login Register

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 7
Send Topic Print
SayNoTo118800.co.uk (Read 89,040 times)
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #30 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 9:18pm
 
Mobile118 wrote on Aug 12th, 2009 at 8:59pm:
The general public will never use this brand 118 800 need to rethink. I am not aware of any company that has managed to make a success after such bad publicity. When people wont even opt out because they are paranoid the company will use their details you know you have issues. When they re launch (and they will) expect more emails, web sites and campaigns...


David,

Your post makes for interesting reading but I was just curious as to why you only offer your opinions on 118800 and not on the motivations of those who have set up to saynoto118800.  I would have thought you of all people would be likely to have a pretty shrewd idea of who Mr Issell and his colleagues may be and of their real motivations.

I find it hard indeed to believe that anyone who offers 070 numbers as a solution to privacy abuses by 118800 can be a good guy given the utterly shocking reputation for scams and fraud (including fraudulent overcharging of those calling their relatives in hospital by Patientline/Hospedia) with which the whole 070 number range is associated but which Ofcom was clearly leaned on from on high at the 11th hour not to be allowed to be brought to an end (I expect the leaning on Ofcom occurred due to the Hospedia issue and its likely failure as a company if 070 was renumbered to 06).

So far as I can see saynoto118800 is a scam because it is reliant on deliberately encouraging the passing off of 070 PNS numbers as being mobile rate phone numbers.

I quote from http://www.out-law.com/page-9680

Quote:
Premium rate regulator warns business partners of 070 scammers

OUT-LAW News, 24/12/2008

The premium rate phone regulator has warned that it will take action against companies that facilitate fake-mobile scams as well as the companies directly behind them.

PhonepayPlus has said that the numbers of complaints about scams involving 070 numbers has risen throughout the year to a peak of 99 complaints in September. It levied a £250,000 fine against one 070 scam operator earlier this month.

Premium rate phone regulator PhonepayPlus said that it will automatically investigate any firm whose network operator services are used to facilitate the scam.

PhonepayPlus has warned of the scam in the past, but the numbers of complaints indicate that it is still being perpetrated. In May it received 50 complaints about 070 scams, a number which rose to 99 by September. Complaints dropped to 64 in October and 53 in November.

PhonepayPlus has said that it will take firm action against companies that help scammers to cheat users. Service providers are the companies which directly operate premium rate number services, while network operators connect them to phone networks.

"Where any service provider is found to have breached the Code through misuse of 070 prefixed numbers in a clear attempt to scam consumers, PhonepayPlus will automatically initiate an investigation into the network operator associated with that service for lack of due diligence," said PhonepayPlus.

The regulator has recently taken action against operators of 070 scams, fining service provider Starwire Limited £250,000 over 27 complaints of abuse of a 070 number.

PhonepayPlus has also initiated emergency proceedings against four operators of alleged 070 scams. It has blocked access to the numbers associated with the four operators to protect phone users while it conducts its investigations.

The regulator also said that network operators could be liable for fines levied on service providers.

"Where a service provider fails to pay a fine and/or administrative charge and a network operator is found to be in breach of the Code through poor due diligence, the Tribunal may include within any fine sanction imposed on the network operator, the entire fine and/or administrative charge amount owed by the service provider," said PhonepayPlus. "The Tribunal may also impose other sanctions on the network operator  for its failure of due diligence."

The 070 scams exist because numbers beginning 070 are very expensive to call. In one of the cases investigated by PhonepayPlus callers were charged a 50 pence connection fee and £3.95 per minute to call the numbers from a landline, and potentially more from a mobile phone.

They work by automatically ringing phones but hanging up after a single ring. Users see a missed call notice on their phones and assume that numbers beginning '07…' are mobile phone numbers.

Many return the call to see who has phoned them and incur the call charge. Some of the services investigated by PhonepayPlus play a recording of a ringing phone to keep users on the phone for longer periods so that they incur higher charges.

The 070 numbers are not intended to be numbers on which operators can share call revenue, and are intended as numbers which allow someone to be reached on whatever phone they are using.

The problem became so serious that telecoms regulator Ofcom had planned to move all 070 numbers to the 06 number range to avoid confusion. In October, though, Ofcom shelved those plans.

"Since our review of telephone numbering in 2006, the number of complaints has significantly reduced and we have found that the use of 070 appears to be declining," said an Ofcom report. "Closing the 070 number range as previously intended is not a proportionate response."

Ofcom said that the complaint numbers peaked in 2005
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #31 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 9:25pm
 
See also



Quote:
Ofcom u-turn on scam number crackdown

OUT-LAW News, 15/10/2008

Telecoms regulator Ofcom has backtracked on its commitment to order that all personal numbers using the prefix 070 be moved to the 06 number range.

"Since our review of telephone numbering in 2006, the number of complaints has significantly reduced and we have found that the use of 070 appears to be declining," said Ofcom's report on the issue. "Closing the 070 number range as previously intended is not a proportionate response."

"Given our legal duty to provide end users with a migration path to another number allocation where a number range is closed, our analysis shows that the costs associated with migration significantly outweigh any benefits gained from closing the range," it said.

The most common 070 scam has been one in which a mobile phone user receives an aborted call which rings only long enough to leave the number stored as a missed call on the receiving phone.

Recipients then call that number back and only find out later that they have been charged £2 for the call. Some users reported to Ofcom that they called back a number of times, raising the cost. One claimed to have lost £35 in such scams.

Ofcom said, though, that scam numbers were now low, and that some people who complained about scams were not victims of scams, just of high call costs on legitimate services. 070 numbers are designed as 'personal' numbers which can be diverted to any number at which the subscriber is based.

Ofcom and premium rate phone regulator PhonepayPlus are still receiving complaints about 070 numbers and scams, but the number of complaints has fallen since a peak in late 2005, Ofcom said.

Ofcom has published its revised plans for consultation. It said that rather than forcing 070 users to the 06 number range it would support PhonepayPlus's actions against those abusing 070 numbers, demand that operators make their pricing clearer and demand that operators examine 070 subscribers more closely.

Ofcom this year conducted research which found that seven per cent of consumers claimed to have been a victim of 070 scams, though it said that some of these complaints were likely to be to do with high call costs on legitimate services and not scams at all.

Ofcom said that with low complaint numbers and high costs associated with moving all users to another number range, it was best not to take action.

"This is a small market especially in comparison to other number ranges (the volume of traffic to 070 numbers is around 1% of that for the 0870/71 range) and one that is declining both in terms of call traffic and revenue. Thus any significant change is likely to create costs for communications providers that are large relative to the size of the 070 market," it said.

The activities associated with moving number ranges that will cost providers money, said Ofcom, include changes to contracts, notifying end users, changes to technical and billing systems, renegotiation costs and loss of business. Ofcom estimated those costs at £10m.

Ofcom said that the stationery changes that users would have to make could cost them £22m.

Previously, Ofcom had ordered providers to play free call cost warnings on any 070 numbers which it cost more than 20p to call. It is now also consulting on withdrawing that requirement.

Some alarm systems depend on 070 numbers and automatically dial those numbers when the alarm is triggered. The messages prevented those automatic calls being received, Ofcom said.

Because this poses a threat to human life and property, Ofcom has said that the requirement to play these messages on 070 numbers should be dropped. 

See: The Ofcom consultation (109-page / 356KB PDF)

See also:

    * Ofcom will deny premium-rate numbers to past phone offenders, OUT-LAW News, 30/09/2008
    * Personal numbers must carry cost warning, says regulator, OUT-LAW News, 31/05/2007


One wonders what Ofcom's position will be if the number of 070 numbers being issued Skyrockets and it and PhonePayPlus are flooded with complaints about 070 PNS numbers being deliberately passed off by end users as ordinary mobile phone numbers.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #32 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 9:52pm
 
After Herculean struggling with a 92 page long BT pdf price list I find the most expensive 070 PNS rate currently available is the 50p per minute at all times pn2 rate.  So perhaps SayNoTo118800 can tell us what 070 PNS rate it is that they think they will be using
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
saynoto118800
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 24
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #33 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 10:30pm
 
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM MYSELF
- BARRY ISSELL


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxA6Rgg14Wc




www.SayNoTo118800.co.uk
66-68 St.Loyes Street
Bedford MK40 1EZ


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #34 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 10:48pm
 
saynoto118800 wrote on Aug 12th, 2009 at 10:30pm:
IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM MYSELF
- BARRY ISSELL


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxA6Rgg14Wc


Why don't we get to see the lovely Sarah in the video as well as you Barry?

Also I have bad news for you regarding one of the main premises in your video in that people do not pay for Incoming text messages, even when they are roaming overseas.

I also still can't believe you describing any 070 number as being a "Safe Number"!

Sadly your video does not inspire confidence despite the world domination map in your new offices since you seem to be precisely the kind of bloke I thought you would be.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 12th, 2009 at 10:55pm by NGMsGhost »  

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
Dave
Global Moderator
*****
Offline



Posts: 9,902
Yorkshire
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #35 - Aug 12th, 2009 at 11:47pm
 
I would urge you to be careful in promotion of your "safe" numbers. Many people think that 070 numbers are normal mobile numbers. They get a shock when they find out that they have been charged outside inclusive minutes or at a higher rate than to a mobile.

It will look bad on your campaign if someone obtained one of these numbers from your site and started to call it, blissfully unaware of the costs until the bill arrived.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #36 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 12:04am
 
Dave wrote on Aug 12th, 2009 at 11:47pm:
I would urge you to be careful in promotion of your "safe" numbers. Many people think that 070 numbers are normal mobile numbers. They get a shock when they find out that they have been charged outside inclusive minutes or at a higher rate than to a mobile.

It will look bad on your campaign if someone obtained one of these numbers from your site and started to call it, blissfully unaware of the costs until the bill arrived.


It is also a violation of the terms of use for anyone who uses or sells an 070 number to try and mislead a caller or an 070 number end user that it is a mobile number charged at mobile rates and included in mobile phone inclusive minutes rather than being a PNS number charged at the appropriate PNS rate charge band and excluded from mobile phone bundled minutes.

After 09 numbers 070 numbers are probably some of the most hated and distrusted numbers in the entire telecoms industry and are certainly far more heavily deplored and not trusted than any number starting 084 or 087.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #37 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 12:33am
 
I have now sent an email to the appropriate people at Ofcom and PhonePayPlus alerting them to the obvious dangers of this bizarre and ill conceived idea.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
saynoto118800
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 24
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #38 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 1:56am
 
Hi, Barry here.

NGMsGhost, I have tried so hard to answer all your points in a constructive manner - to the point that I have actually posted a video of myself here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxA6Rgg14Wc so you can see that the www.SayNoto118800.co.uk 'FlybyNight Scammers' are not going anywhere fast.
As you can see we've even painted the office walls the same colour as the website !

You have made some really valid points in your post's which I have answered truthfully and I shall continue to do so.
What I will not tolerate is our organisation being blantantly slated by you with no foundation.

If it is such a bizarre and ill conceived idea - why are people protecting themselves with the service..?

I cannot for the life of me understand your resentment towards the service, however you are making statements about www.saynoto118800.co.uk that are inaccurate. At no time have I said that the numbers we supply are 'Mobile Numbers' - they are Personal numbers. Please watch my video again - I haven't edited it, honestly.

Once again, the numbers are for the sole purpose of giving to Organisations who you believe may pass your personal contact details on to 118800 or indeed, as has recently been highlighted by Dave and his local garage experience - may be used by said Organisation to send unwanted promotional 'SMS Spam' - where are we going so wrong NGMsGhost ?

It seems to me that you have probably had a bad experience yourself in the past and you are now using this topic to blast scorn and ridicule all over www.SayNoTo118800.co.uk
WE DO NOT PROFIT FROM THE NUMBERS - WE WANT PEOPLE TO USE THEM IN THE MANNER FOR WHICH THEY ARE BEING PROMOTED.

Please be sure to post your reply from OFCOM and PhonePayPlus on here.

I won't post your PM to me on here as it was exactly that - a Private Message. All I can say is that your last post was a very hypocritical statement.  Angry

Kind regards,

Barry Issell

www.SayNoTo118800.co.uk
66-68 St.Loyes Street
Bedford MK40 1EZ
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #39 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 10:43am
 
NGMsGhost wrote on Aug 12th, 2009 at 9:52pm:
After Herculean struggling with a 92 page long BT pdf price list I find the most expensive 070 PNS rate currently available is the 50p per minute at all times pn2 rate.  So perhaps SayNoTo118800 can tell us what 070 PNS rate it is that they think they will be using


Barry,

I note that you have not yet told us under which Personal Number charging rate your Personal Numbers will be issued.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
NGMsGhost
Supreme Member
*****
Offline


The Forum Ghost of NonGeographicalMan<b
r />

Posts: 2,720
Surrey, United Kingdom
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #40 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 10:56am
 
saynoto118800 wrote on Aug 13th, 2009 at 1:56am:
If it is such a bizarre and ill conceived idea - why are people protecting themselves with the service..?


How many people are doing so?  There will always be a few people who will fall for any scheme no matter how prejudicial it may actually be to their interests.  Look at all the people who have responded to fake emails from alleged Nigerian Generals offering to share 10 million US Dollars with them if they just send them their bank account details and forward them a few grand in US Dollars to cover their expenses in releasing the money to them. Wink

Quote:
I cannot for the life of me understand your resentment towards the service, however you are making statements about www.saynoto118800.co.uk that are inaccurate. At no time have I said that the numbers we supply are 'Mobile Numbers' - they are Personal numbers. Please watch my video again - I haven't edited it, honestly.


We dislike covert revenue sharing numbers on this website.  But your company is utilising the most dislikeable form of covert revenue sharing number of the lot.  Numbers that deliberately trade on misleading the caller they are mobile numbers due to their number code, even though they are not.

Also tell me how your "safe number" is actually used?  I believe it is meant to be used to fill out a box from any company you are asked to give your details to that says "mobile number"   Therefore your scheme involves "passing of" PNS numbers as mobile numbers on a massive scale.

Quote:
Once again, the numbers are for the sole purpose of giving to Organisations who you believe may pass your personal contact details on to 118800 or indeed, as has recently been highlighted by Dave and his local garage experience - may be used by said Organisation to send unwanted promotional 'SMS Spam' - where are we going so wrong NGMsGhost ?


The number is also likely to be used by the organisation you gave it to on the basis it is a mobile number.  Hence Passing Off.  You clearly only picked the 070 range because the numbers looked like mobile numbers.  Also you are deliberately trying to sabotage the commercial activities of 118800 by having numbers passed to them as being mobile numbers when they are PNS.  I confidently forecast your little scheme will fail as websites will soon be rewritten to refuse to accept 070 numbers as valid data input.

Barry it is obvious from your video that you are probably a lifelong salesman of some kind and that you believe if you keep on extolling the virtues of your product to a client for long enough and ignore all their brick bats it will sell.  But however much you may have succeeded with double glazing or timeshares or life insurance in the past you won't succeed here because your product is inherently preposterous and absurd and that will soon be realised by the world at large.
Back to top
 

<div style=
 
IP Logged
 
saynoto118800
Newbie
*
Offline



Posts: 24
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #41 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 4:46pm
 
Hi, Barry here.


NGMsGhost, the Safe numbers are 07 Personal Numbers.
As you are obviously well aware, the 07 rates vary depending on Network and operator. Much the same as if you call a 0800 number - calls are charged at your standard mobile rate but are free of charge to call from a landline.

You call them 'Covert revenue sharing' numbers - what has that got to do with our service ? We are not in the revenue generating business - we are providing 'Safe Numbers' FREE OF CHARGE to protect people from the likes of 118800 text SMS Spam - and the recently highlighted 'Promotional Spam'.
Why are you so concerned about an Organisation who sells personal details to 118800 being charged to call these numbers ?
I am assuming that you are closely affiliated with one  of these Organisations, hence your determination to bring down our legitimate service www.saynoto118800.co.uk  Angry


We don't have much double glazing here in downtown Lagos (only in my personal 'world domination' office) - nor do we sell many timeshares. Life Insurance ? much too boring..
I'm sorry if I come across with a passion - but you see thats what happens when someone believes in something.

Maybe you would care to clarify exactly why you think that our service is 'inherently preposterous and absurd'...? Because from where i'm sitting, the more you go on about how we are scammers and 'reporting' us to whoever - the more I think you have unstated, underlying reasons that you desperately need to get rid of us.. Undecided

Kind regards,

Barry Issel

www.SayNoTo118800.co.uk
66-68 St.Loyes Street
Bedford MK40 1EZ





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
andy9
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 505
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #42 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 4:54pm
 
saynoto118800 wrote on Aug 13th, 2009 at 1:56am:
If it is such a bizarre and ill conceived idea - why are people protecting themselves with the service..?



How are they protecting themselves - when people can call them anyway? How is that better than refusing to give a number?

And why have you failed to answer my question about your defamation of the motives of councils and certain other bodies, pretending they might have breached data protection law and released protected information to your rival?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #43 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 4:59pm
 
saynoto118800 wrote on Aug 13th, 2009 at 4:46pm:
NGMsGhost, the Safe numbers are 07 Personal Numbers.
As you are obviously well aware, the 07 rates vary depending on Network and operator. Much the same as if you call a 0800 number - calls are charged at your standard mobile rate but are free of charge to call from a landline.








Are you trying to tell us that 07 numbers are free from a landline? I don't thinks so. See here

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/01/personal_number_warning/

I agree with NGMsGhost your outfit is doomed to fail and agree you will probably be sued
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
sherbert
Supreme Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,011
Gender: male
Re: SayNoTo118800.co.uk
Reply #44 - Aug 13th, 2009 at 5:16pm
 
saynoto118800 wrote on Aug 13th, 2009 at 4:46pm:
Hi, Barry here.


Life Insurance ? much too boring..







I assume you have made that comment from experience?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 7
Send Topic Print
(Moderators: DaveM, Dave, bbb_uk, Forum Admin, CJT-80)

Website and Content © 1999-2024 SAYNOTO0870.COM. All Rights Reserved.
Written permission is required to duplicate any of the content within this site.

WARNING: This is an open forum, posts are NOT endorsed by SAYNOTO0870.COM,
please exercise due caution when acting on any info from here.


SAYNOTO0870.COM » Powered by YaBB 2.5.2!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.


Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge