how-to block ads
|
next review in page
Review by CCSucks 
member for 2.3 years, 9 visits, last login: 2.2 years ago
lodged 2.3 years ago
 Lynnwood,Snohomish,WA
 Contract price not specified.  "Most Excellent Voice Quality!" "Clueless Customer Service and Billing Dept" "Great if it had worked out"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings below consensus)
|
Horrible experience with CallCentric - Long rant
I opened two accounts with CallCentric to keep in touch with my family overseas, one under my
name another under my brother's name.
I funded both accounts and purchased a DID for one of them.
Easy setup and the quality was outstanding!
As soon as my brother tried to add some more funds to one of the accounts both accounts were
marked as "Fraudulent" and locked.
I contacted customer service and the billing department. Both initially asked for double sided scans
of our credit cards, against my best judgement I provided them with those.
This instead of resolving the issue actually escalated it. Their next request was for a signed billing
form asking for more personal information, phone numbers, addresses, etc.
I submitted that too.
But this did not resolve the issue, CallCentric still demanded more, this time a scan of my passport
and/or driver's license. I submitted the scans, again against my best judgement, but blocked my
photo and my DOB.
Customer support DEMANDED that the scans show a clear picture of my face AND my date of birth.
I found this ridiculous and disrespectful of my right to privacy as a customer.
This was in no way useful information for billing purposes.
I contacted my CC company and asked them to work with CallCentric. CallCentric did NOT want
to work with them in solving any billing issues.
They still demanded a photo ID and my date of birth as the only possible way of unblocking the
accounts.
On principle I had my credit card rollback the charges, which they did.
How is that for identity verification?
Overall, I am very upset that I have been effectively "banned" from one of the best voip providers
and that I was put through this whole ordeal.
Great technology and implementation, yes, but HORRIBLE customer support.
Comments:
 IscreamPremium
join:2009-02-17
New York, NY
kudos:5 Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
| Thank you for this detailed and honest review Dear CCSucks, I'm personally and on behalf of Callcentric sorry that things did not work out for you.
The reasons to perform those various safety checks were more than strong... otherwise our system would simply never even have flagged these accounts.... Among reasons are: using public IP/proxy admitted already to conduct fraudulent transactions, being extremely far away from the billing address on the card; that "far away" is on the list of fraudulent countries/regions; visiting our system from one IP place and visiting shortly after that from a second place (far away)- while registering the device from 3rd place... Plus some other reasons - we simply use quite "standard" industry's practice recommended/enforced by CCA for all "card not present" transactions....
On another hand...
While am again sorry that it did not work out for you specifically - we are in business to serve customers - and thereby make a profit. Turning away customers or having them leave is therefore not something we take lightly....but we do have to follow our security protocols when alerts have been triggered. As most public _here_ is aware of - Callcentric serves its retail customers since 2005 and to date - among anything that could be discussed here about Callcentric's business - the thing which was always valued at most - was an absolute quality of Callcentric customer service. We stand behind this concept - the Customers are our ALL.
Unfortunately - all Voip companies are subject to massive ongoing fraud - and efforts to control it can seem intrusive to honest customers.
Also, for obvious reasons I cannot explain here how Callcentric fraud prevention system works and why Callcentric personnel requested certain pieces of information, but those are a result of many years of withstanding fraud and being in business. | |
| | | The whole story.... People are going to question your review here being that it's clear that you registered for the sole purpose of bashing this company. the 1st thing you need to understand is that Voip services from companies such as these have very high rates of fraud. It's common practice in Asia, eastern Europe and Latin America to fradulently access these services and then create elaborate calling servics that are then resold to unsuspecting users. See here: »www.computerworld.com/s/article/···one_bill
So i ask, why did your brother not sign up for his own account with his own card? Why did you not just use his card from the start? Why use your card and then switch it out immediately? This is already suspicious. I'd also like to see the full support thread as I have my doubts if you're telling us the whole story. Post it to pastebin leaving out names and whatnot and we'll be the judge of it. Also, remember that just because you didn't get the answer you wanted, it doesn't mean the support was 'horrible'. They have rules and policies and you not liking them doesn't equate to bad customer service, it just shows that you're whiny.
I see they've already posted a nice and professional response, even though they did not have to explain or justify their policies to anyone. So much for 'horrible' customer sevice. | |
| | | | Re: The whole story.... LiquidMan,
I opened an account for him because I am a bit more comfortable with VoIP than he is (still a newbie and I wish I knew more).
I paid for his DID with my credit card to get him started and then left the account so he could just use it and add minutes as he needed them.
When he tried to do that he was unable to, so I tried using my credit card again. It did not work. Then when I tried it under my own CallCentric account I could not use it either.
I do not have access to my account anymore, but I invite CallCentric to publish the logs with the names and other identifying information removed.
I stand by my rating of CallCentric being a great technical company with *horrible* customer service.
As any other American, I expect to be treated fairly as a customer and not to be assumed to be a criminal just because of "some areas of the world" are purported to be hotbeds of fraud.
For the record, I live in WA State.
CallCentric's policy of refusing to work with the card issuer and instead intransigently requesting private information they have no business having is unusual and also hostile towards a customer who is just trying to resolve a billing issue. | |
|
 Arne BolenHappy Anveo customerPremium
join:2009-06-21
Planet Earth
kudos:4 | Your review is extremely unfair Callcentric would have been horrible if they had not blocked the two accounts.
Now Callcentric did the right thing, as any other provider also would have done.
I fully support Callcentric in this case. | |
| | | I tried to post a fair review Of course everyone is biased one way or another. My review is an honest account as best as I can word it.
I did not register to "bash" CallCentric. I registered because I obviously felt strongly enough to write a review.
In regards to Iscream's comments:
- Using a public IP/proxy admitted already to conduct fraudulent transactions ...
This is untrue. I only accessed CallCentric from my own IP address and my brother did the same from his own computer.
I am in the US and he is in Central America. Neither of us has control over what countries CallCentric flags as "fraudulent"
Also, It is untrue that I "admitted" to fraud of any kind. I was just a customer trying to use pay for a service
using my own credit card until I was falsely flagged as "fraudulent".
- Visiting our system from one IP place and visiting shortly after that from a second place (far away).
I made one account for me and another for my family overseas.
They are far away from where I live. This was the whole point of using CallCentric.
If they lived close by, I would not call them, I would just visit them.
- While registering the device from 3rd place ...
This is untrue. We only registered Xlite and 3cxPhone from our respective locations.
Again, my intention is to point out that I did understand and appreciated CallCentric's effort in stopping and screening for possible fraud.
From my side I made all efforts to accommodate their demands for verification, but I genuinely feel that their requests went too far,
were invasive and had complete disregard for my privacy.
I provided with scans of both of credit cards, an affidavit with more of my very personal information and a scan of my US driver's license,
blocking my picture and DOB.
I also contacted my credit card company to work with CallCentric's billing dept to verify my identity.
CallCentric declined at each point.
Final proof of who I am and how genuine the transactions were is that I had Discover rollback the transaction.
I derive no pleasure of writing this review, but I felt strongly that I had to do it because I view CallCentric's customer service as intrusive and unfair.
Again, I loved their technological side and had a wonder experience with their service while it lasted.
Their calls were crystal clear and it was very easy to set up.
Thank you for your reply Iscream, I wish CallCentric could have worked with my bank and unblocked my account without requesting me
to submit information it had no business having. | |
| | Reviews:
 ·Callcentric
| Re: I tried to post a fair review Based on your situation, I can totally understand why CC is making these reasonable demands. CC is not some large Telcom who is charging $40+ per month and has your SSN, therefore, can just absorb the cost of verifying each customer's details or mark your credit report. A charge-back can end up being extremely costly for them.
Furthermore, if someone is on the IP freedom or pay per call plan, it's simply not cost effective for them to chase banks down to verify each customer's unique situations, as it could possibly take years (if ever) to recoup these costs. | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: I tried to post a fair review Now add in the cost of the time and money required to investigate such issues, it's just not worth it. | |
|
| |
 | next review in page (previous review)
 Review by neillb
member for 13 years, 167 visits, last login: 221 days ago
updated 2.3 years ago
- Charlotte,Mecklenburg,NC
- Contract price not specified.
 about 1 days- "Excellent call quality & good value"
- "None so far"
- "So far excellent PYG VoIP"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
This will be an ongoing review...
I am trying out Callcentric in hopes that I can make it my primary phone service. I have purchased the Grandstream HandyTone 502 ATA and have placed it behind my main router [Asus RT-N12 running Tomato-Toastman mod].
Initial impressions [3 days of use]:
Setup: very quick and easy. I created an account on their site, and once the HT502 arrived [after upgrading the firmware on it to the latest] I made the required changes as detailed on the Callcentric site and within seconds was up and running. The HT502 is behind my Asus with no port forwarding, and it is not in my DMZ. My main phone number is auto forwarded with my other provider to my callcentric number.
Call Quality: excellent so far. The wife and I have logged approx 60 minutes [about 1/2 inbound, 1/2 outbound], and so far everyone has reported excellent call quality.
Reliability: excellent so far. No dropped calls. The only hiccup I had was on the first call I made when the audio went out briefly [I could hear the other person, but they could not hear me]. After a few seconds it corrected itself and I continued the call with no issues. Afterwards I realized I did not yet have the HT502 in the proper QoS classification...after configuring it in my Asus, no re-occurrences.
Value: so for excellent. My primary service with another provider right now is an unlimited plan where I pay a total of $33/mo. We typically use approx 650 mins/mo. which equates to 5cents/min. As noted, so far we have talked 60 mins, and $1.0968 has been billed [taken from the $5.00 credit balance]. If we used 650 mins, our bill would then at most be $13...to me that is a great value comparatively.....especially if call quality and reliability continues to be excellent. I had to pay for E911 and for $1.95 purchased a local number.
HT502: so far has been easy to setup and configure. I purchased this as it was less expensive then the Linksys/ Cisco's and got great ratings. Callcentric support also gave it high marks when I emailed them about support [btw-they responded very quickly to a couple email questions I had] The only complaint, and it really is minor, is that it doesn't support 7 digit dialing. However, in the last few years we have gotten used to full 11 digit dialing, so is not a real issue...but I would have liked to be able to configure it for 7 or 10 digit calling. Maybe the next firmware upgrade will support it.
UPDATE 12/28: using the Dial Plan detailed here [removed 911 and 411 and entered my area code] I have been able to get 7,10,11 digit dialing working. »forums.grandstream.com/forums/in···msg22600
This appears to be working in all scenarios...will continue to test.
>>for some reason I cannot paste the entire dial plan string into my review and have it display correctly...it keeps getting truncated
UPDATE: 1/5: this dial plan seems to be working...I have had only a few experiences where I had to enter the full 11 digits, but almost every number we normally dial has worked with either 7,10, or 11 digits.
Will update once we get some more time in...but so far so good!
UPDATE 1/5: Everything has continued to work well, with only a few minor hiccups...which I am not certain I can blame Callcentric for. I have decided to port my number and use Callcentric FT now and cancel my old provider. I have submitted the required documentation, and today received my port date. Will continue to update as I get more time with Callcentric.
Comments:
| | Grandstream.... Sadly you picked the one brand of ATA that does not support 7 and 10 digit dialing properly with dial plan or manipulation. Anything else could be set up to do it. | |
| | neillb
join:2000-05-01
Charlotte, NC | Re: Grandstream.... That appears to be the case...though I have done some research on this, and according to one individual on the Grandstream forums he has it working in the 502 with the following dial plan:
{^1900x.|*x+|||011[2-9]x.|[49]11|[2-9]xxxxxxxxx+|[2-9]xxxxxx+|1[2-9]xx[2-9]xxxxxx}
»forums.grandstream.com/forums/in···ic=882.0
I don't know what any of that means, and have not tried it... | |
| | | | | Re: Grandstream.... It would be great if you can do it. | |
|
| |
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by jeffbaygents
member for 3.8 years, 14 visits, last login: 201 days ago
updated 2.4 years ago
- Columbia,Richland,SC
- $3 per month
- (month by month)
- about 1 days
- "Same quality & similar features as Vonage at a lower price"
- "Website needs updates to hardware & settings of 2010"
- "Excellent for IT people or a geeky relative to setup"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
I couldn't believe I found a better provider than Vonage at a fraction of the previous cost and with no contractual obligations. As an IT person, I was reading countless instructions of how to get free Internet phone service if you had the right hardware. Unfortunately, however, those free services weren't getting good quality reviews regularly or reliability feedback overall. So, I searched the classic DSL Reports and found tons of feedback over time. Also, I chose to contact the service provider first to ask what hardware products work the best and/or have the least issues. Have had this provider for about 8 months now. I pay about $3 per line per month and have never lost service. They notify well in advance for maintenance and if anything like rebooting the device is req'd. The only investment was to get an appropriate VOIP Adapter.
Comments:
| | Geek setup = Technical setup Yes; I stand by what I said before that a Geek is req'd for setup. Why? Because I've been around the IT block in Fortune Companies as consultant, employee, and management. And, more specifically, because of the following:
1. Selecting an ATA device.
2. Knowing to buy an unlocked ATA device.
3. Knowing that you have to printout and compare every single setting on the CallCentric device recommended settings.
4. Knowing that this is way beyond selecting Tools | Preferences for modifying settings.
5. Knowing how to make decisions because the CallCentric settings shown are a very old version and some of the newer settings have different names and available options.
6. If there are any tech issues, the verbiage of the support request MUST be technically written. I KNOW that all IT Support has a common issue with non-savvy users reporting their initial issues with not enough information and incorrect information.
7. Knowledge of how to update firmware.
8. Experience to know to reset the device to factory settings upon receipt. And knowledge of how to reset the device to factory settings.
9. Many portions of instructions are technical in nature.
10. Firewall blockages and ports are in instructions.
11. Modifying any settings on the home router. Most consumers make zero changes on their router, much less ever access it. C'mon, most people require a CD with a wizard to setup their router for home and that's the end of it. | |
| |  N9MDToo busy to chatPremium
join:2005-10-08
Boca Raton, FL
kudos:5
·Callcentric
·VOIPo
·voip.ms
| Re: Geek setup = Technical setup said by jeffbaygents:Yes; I stand by what I said before that a Geek is req'd for setup. Why? Because I've been around the IT block in Fortune Companies as consultant, employee, and management. And, more specifically, because of the following:
1. Selecting an ATA device.
2. Knowing to buy an unlocked ATA device.
3. Knowing that you have to printout and compare every single setting on the CallCentric device recommended settings.
4. Knowing that this is way beyond selecting Tools | Preferences for modifying settings.
5. Knowing how to make decisions because the CallCentric settings shown are a very old version and some of the newer settings have different names and available options.
6. If there are any tech issues, the verbiage of the support request MUST be technically written. I KNOW that all IT Support has a common issue with non-savvy users reporting their initial issues with not enough information and incorrect information.
7. Knowledge of how to update firmware.
8. Experience to know to reset the device to factory settings upon receipt. And knowledge of how to reset the device to factory settings.
9. Many portions of instructions are technical in nature.
10. Firewall blockages and ports are in instructions.
11. Modifying any settings on the home router. Most consumers make zero changes on their router, much less ever access it. C'mon, most people require a CD with a wizard to setup their router for home and that's the end of it.
Jeff, while I totally respect your background and your depth of knowledge, I find myself disagreeing with just about every one of your points that would seem to make setting up a BYOD an "impossible" task for a newbie. Your comments will only serve to scare off lots of potential VoIP BYOD customers ... for no real reasons.
Responses to your points:
1. A newbie could simply review the CC set-up page and purchase one of the listed adapters.
2. This is a valid point ... given the number of fraudulent units coming out of China ... we have even seen very tech-savvy Forum members (and top level VoIP providers) who have wound up with "bad" ATAs. Caveat emptor!
3. Actually, I have used the default settings ... out of the box ... with every one of my multiple adapters (mostly PAP2s and PAP2Ts with a scattering of Grandstreams and a Linksys SPA8000) ... except for the "Line" setup page. And all I needed to do, as per CC and Voip.ms on-line instructions, was to type in a Proxy Server, an Outbound Proxy (for some providers), a UserID and Password, an AuthID for some providers (the same as the UserID). I then set a few parameters to Yes or No ... as recommended on the providers' sites. And I am in business. I have never had to modify the default dialing plan. 98% of the settings on my adapters have never required attention or modification.
4. What Tools|Preferences does this refer to? I bring up an adapter's URL, click on Line 1 (or whichever I'm registering), make a few entries and yes/no choices, click save ... and I'm in business.
5. Sorry, I must admit that I'm not aware of settings on "newer" devices that would confuse newbies. I would not expect a non-technical person to purchase a highly technical, complex device. The "simple" devices recommended by CC will do for non-techies.
6. Simply stated "issues" (without deep technical knowledge) in TroubleTickets submitted to BYOD providers either got me a quick resolution to my problem ... or an easily understandable request for more information, without using jargon beyond my skills ... and I'm a gastroenterologist with profound Greek & Latin language skills. 
7. In the years I've been using VoIP, starting a while back with SunRocket (RIP), I have never ever updated an adapter's software. "If the system ain't broke, why update it?" is what most newbies would say.
8. I have never ever had to reset a BYOD unit to factory settings upon receipt. They have all worked out of the box. And, if I ever did need to reset a device to factory settings, a simple Google search such as "reset PAP2T" would quickly provide me with the available reset methods ... physically pressing the reset button while powering up or using the dial-in method 73738#.
9. The CallCentric instructions shown for the various devices, in my view, are very easy to follow without the need for a college degree in software programming or telecommunications technology. CC gives step by step, clearly written instructions.
10. I have never ever fiddled with or adjusted firewall and DMZ and port settings ... except for using a different SIP-Port for Line 1 and Line 2 on the same device and 8 different SIP-Ports 5071-5078 on my 8-line SPA8000. I always leave the default DHCP at "active".
11. I am one of the "most consumers" who has made zero changes on the four routers which I currently have in use at two residences and and two business locations. I do, however, access the routers ... after a power failure ... to obtain the DHCP re-assigned IP addresses for my many devices (ATAs, printers, etc.).
My goal in this post was not to demean the opinion of the reviewer; rather, it is to show potential BYOD/VoIP customers that the setup process is not as daunting as suggested by jeffbaygents ... even if they've never been to a site such as the BBR Forums. | |
|
| |
| next review in page (previous review)
 Review by sgarrand
member for 13.1 years, 6677 visits, last login: a few hours ago
updated 2.4 years ago
- West Brookfield,Worcester,MA
- $9 per month
- "Good quality, low prices, excellent support."
- "Not always perfect quality in limited use."
- "Callcentric has been a useful service to have."
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
**Update 11/29/10**
I haven't really used Callcentric a lot lately because we use our cell phones but when I have called my Brother's landline in MD it has been poor quality some of the time. That fact has really been a reason for not using it so it's been more of a number parking or "paid Google Voice" service to me lately. We'll see if my usage patterns change.
**Update 12/1/09**
Bought a printer with fax today and it works great. I've sent and received several faxes without any difficulty. Aside from this, nothing has changed.
**Update 5/24/09**
On 5/5/09 I ported my VOIPo number over to Callcentric. All went well and I am very happy with this company. They answered all my questions quickly and communicated very well throughout the porting process. With Google Voice for outgoing and Callcentric for incoming I'm getting high quality, inexpensive phone service. No complaints at all so far.
Changed price from $6 to $9 because I swapped out a dirt cheap DID for my ported number. Right now I have one dirt cheap DID for $3 and my ported number for $6.
**
A few months ago I decided to look for a backup to my VOIPo service, which has been poor quality for me. I had an old Callcentric account for free and so I looked at their "dirt cheap DID" not expecting to see my little podunk town listed. It was! I used that DID for a while and their low outgoing rate with no issues. I had caller ID blocked by mistake so a 626 area code showed up (this is the default) but their support cleared that up in record time. I've gotten used to VOIPo taking a few days to respond to a ticket but Callcentric replied within minutes. Excellent support!
Today I went looking for a second "dirt cheap DID" and found one in Jacksonville, FL without a problem. Now my Mother in law can call without issues. No more echo or noises.
Next thing to do will be to port from VOIPo to Callcentric. That'll make one of the numbers $6 instead of $3 but that's okay. I'm just not sure what I did with the box the GS502 from VOIPo came in. I'm not even sure if they want it back. I'll ask Tim.
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
 Review by Davesworld
member for 5.5 years, 1003 visits, last login: 11 days ago
lodged 2.5 years ago
- Everett,Snohomish,WA
- Contract price not specified.
- about 1 days
- "Very polished website, True incoming CNAM, load balanced servers."
- "No outgoing LIDB/CNAM insertion but there IS a workaround."
- "You can't go wrong with CallCentric."
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
I have been using CallCentric since early this year 2010. I decided to port my main DID I have had since 2007 into CallCentric from Ooma. We succeeded despite many obstacles from Ooma.
I use an Audiocodes MP-118 FXS as a gateway and the call quality is as good as I have ever heard within the 4khz boundary of conventional telephony. HD is possible with both the gateway and CallCentric should I ever want to use it. Since this device can become very complicated depending on how many providers you use on one gateway, it's not surprising that no ITSP has a setup guide for this equipment including CallCentric.
The order process was very uncomplicated, the install process is only as complicated as the equipment YOU provide and how well you know that equipment, the sip credentials were easily available immediately.
CallCentric DOES require 11 digit dialing and there actually are a few ATA's that won't map a workaround so you can do 7 and 10 digit dialing. Keep this in mind if you can't fathom the idea of dialing 11 digits always because your equipment won't do a dial plan or other digit mapping.
Any issues I have had were handled easily by opening a trouble ticket and in a much more efficient manner than would be if you were calling customer support for other ITSP's and getting a script reader. Some criticize Callcentric for having no phone support but I think what they have is better and they are responsive 24/7/365.
CallCentric supports t.38 for fax and it is reported to be working as of now.
Call Treatments have been extremely helpful in thwarting off pesky robodialers at times.
The dashboard feature when you log in gives you everything important at a glance such as registration status of your gateway/sip client, messages and the most recent incoming and outgoing call history, incoming and outgoing plans as well as account balance.
I didn't give a monthly cost because I'm on pay per minute and it various from next to nothing to several dollars depending on activity. I've only had to add funds very infrequently.
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
 Review by mb
member for 12.8 years, 6014 visits, last login: a few hours ago
updated 2.5 years ago
- Washington,Warren,NJ
- $28 per month
- about 1 days
- "Overall Reliability and Stability"
- "Rare Lingering anomalies involving call waiting and outbound carriers"
- "One of the best that I've used"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
11/01/2010 I've decided to port my number to yet another VOIP provider in search of that elusive perfect provider. Overall, I feel that CallCentric is one of the best providers that I've used, I still experienced lingering but rare anomalies with outgoing call quality and call waiting transfers. Off to voip.ms....
08/29/2010 CallCentric continues to be the sole provider of "telephone" service for my home. Due to rare lingering anomalies involving call waiting transfers and echo on local calls that I originate, I decided to swap ATAs from the PAP2T to a Zoom 5801. I can't say with certainty that either issue has been resolved, but considering the relative infrequency of these issues and the tedious nature of the technical support process involving these types of issues, I've decided to leave well enough alone. Again, I feel that CallCentric is the best of the several suppliers of this type of product that I've used.
05/09/2010 All considered, I feel that CallCentric has provided the best overall service of the several VOIP providers that I've tried over the past 3 years. That being said, I have experienced a handful of quality or reliability issues since the last update and have reported them via CallCentric's support system. I voiced frustration with the repetitive nature of trouble shooting process and received a rather terse response.
03/29/2010 CallCentric made some changes to call routing on their end which eliminated the echo that I was experiencing. Unfortunately, another call quality issue then began, it was what I described as voice peak clipping on incoming calls that created a periodic clicking sound. At about the same time CallCentric experienced what they described as a complete "back end" system failure, and after recovering from it, their usual good call quality returned.
03/22/2010 I am experiencing my voice echo back when I initiate a call to the PSTN. I have a high bandwidth, low latency, low jitter connection to the CallCentric server. I have requested an escalation of my issue via the only tech support system. Details to follow
9/7/09 I ported my long time telephone number over to Callcentric from Vonage. The porting process completed 2 days after the stated date. At this point all that I can say about the service is that it works as telephone service should. Initially I configured a Cisco ATA186 for the service and found that the voice mail message waiting indicator and stutter tone were not working. After some advanced trouble shooting with CallCentric tech support it was conclusively determined that the Cisco device was rejecting, as too long, the SIP CALL ID string that CallCentric was generating when communicating about the VMWI status with the ATA. I was never able to determine whether Cisco or CallCentric was non-compliant with the the appropriate SIP standard for CALL ID string length. I took the easy way out and replaced the aging Cisco device with a new Linksys PAP2T-NA that I purchased from a reputable vendor and it has been smooth sailing since. The monthly cost listed is for unlimited incoming calls and enhanced 911. I pay less than $.02/minute for my outgoing calls.
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by vip007
member for 9.2 years, 35 visits, last login: 2.2 years ago
updated 2.5 years ago
- Hightstown,Mercer,NJ
- $12 per month
- "Low cost, plenty of features"
- "Customer service"
- "You get what you pay for"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
I have been a Callcentric customer for over a year. At first I only used their PayPerCall service for long distance, which was coupled with my Verizon landline (via an Asterisk server). Then about a year ago I decided to go full VOIP and subscribed to their Pay Per Minute incoming service, and transferred my Verizon number to them (I now only use my Linksys PAP2).
We do not make that many calls, so we end up paying about $12/month. This includes international calls, which was one reason I chose Callcentric (their rates were competitive).
I pretty much had not issues with service and the quality is decent. So I was a happy customer---until last week.
Over the past two weeks we had many issues placing international calls. The calls appeared to go through, would ring but no one ever answered. It turned out the receiving parties did not get any indication of our calls. Overall, we placed many short calls in that period, only few of which were successful. But then I noticed we were being billed for all those unsuccessful calls---mind you, we never got any indication that calls went through. All calls were billed at 1-2min, over a week this amounted to about $9.
I filed a service request, which was promptly answered. They tested the numbers we called, found out they were not getting through, and determined this was a routing issue. They forwarded this to their routing department, whatever this really is. At the same time I filed a request to be reimbursed for the call that never went through but I was billed for. Soon thereafter, they responded that out of $9 they will refund me $1. The reason being: they can only refund calls made in the last three days. I, of course, complained. Even within those 3 days I was charged about $4. Their next answer was that some of those calls were to mobile numbers, and one did go through, so they will not issue refund for any unsuccessful mobile calls. They referred me to some paragraph in T&C that states that no refunds will ever be issued for international calls. (No mention of the 3 day rule.)
Overall, the amount of money is small. But I am rather upset that they would outright refuse to refund that tiny amount of charges, which arose from what was clearly an issue on their end.
In the end, the old story repeats itself: one finds out what the company is really like when things go bad. So I will be saying good bye to Callcentric as soon as I find a new provider.
Update, 10/23/2010.
As a consequence of my post here I was contacted by callcentric's support. They were very understanding and apologized for the way my problem with international calls was originally dealt with. In the process of trying to resolve my issue they provided very detailed explanations of what was technically going on behind the scenes, which I really appreciated (I guess I was always curious to learn how those international routings are done.) Last but not least, I they also issued me credit for all those calls that did not go through.
So I am quite impressed how they handled the problem in the end. I hope the technical issues that caused it in the first place will also permanently go away.
Comments:
IscreamPremium
join:2009-02-17
New York, NY
kudos:5 Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS
| Customer service I’m sorry for the problems that you experienced. It’s certainly our goal to provide good service for all of our customers to all of their desired destinations.
We have many different carriers, especially for overseas calls. We do continually test our carriers - but cannot test every carrier to every destination point. And even if we were able to, nothing is static, a carrier could develop a problem at any time.
This is why it is highly desirable that if there are problems with calls (especially with overseas calls), that we be notified right away. This not only helps us resolve a problem faster, but also lets us track it down much more easily. With multiple companies involved - the trail can go cold quickly.
And despite extensive tests, unless there is a sufficient number of calls to any particular FAILING destination (several dozen short calls within a short time to many different numbers) or unless a user opens a ticket with us - there is absolutely NO way for us to know that somewhere there is a problem. Moreover - the carrier failing the calls might themselves find a problem and have it fixed by the time our diagnostic system may issue an alert.
Once a call quality ticket is open, our guys look up the CDRs (call detail records) - to find the carrier who completed the call, test the numbers via different carriers and if the issue is repeatable and replicable they will suggest changing a carriers order to that destination or even removing completely a faulty carrier.
Most of our customers are honest such as yourself. But sadly we do have some minority of customers that want to do fraud. We have found that if a customer completes several overseas calls (each of more than one minutes duration), and does so over multiple days, but does not complain until later on, that it could be fraud and/or unwarranted refunds for properly completed calls. NO, I am not saying that in your case, but it is the reason why our support team is cautious. And it is also why it is best to report any problems as soon as they become apparent.
Yes, normally Verizon or AT&T will issue refund for one or a few calls made within last few days (or, if the customer has a 10 year history - perhaps within one week), but not calls lasting more than one minute going back for several weeks. But any PSTN provider charges much more for each call than we do while there is literally no possibility for fraud or abusive usage unlike the case with VoIP. Even a "normal" provider supplied equipment service already is much protected from abusive and/or fraudulent usage of some destinations. There are specific realities to being a BYOD provider's customer and we hope that our customers can understand that.
Please note, I am discussing the situation generally, not you in particular. I am sure that your comments are heartfelt.
If you wish to IM me the details of your account, I will be happy to look into the matter. It is certainly our desire to have (and keep) happy customers. Thank you. | |
|
| |
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by (hidden by request)
(review was emailed from domain gmail.com)
lodged 2.6 years ago
- Cedar City,Iron,UT
- $11 per month
- about 2 days
- "Good price, good quality, quick response time"
- "Takes some technical knowledge and/or research to set up."
- "Worth the effort to save the money and have good quality."
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
Comments:
| next review in page (previous review)
Review by bostonbill
member for 2.6 years, 10 visits, last login: 202 days ago
updated 2.6 years ago
- Cambridge,Middlesex,MA
- $7 per month
- (month by month)
- about 1 days
- "Good reputation; fast and easy to configure; low price; quick responses"
- "Caller ID blocking implementation not acceptable"
- "CallerID blocking implementation is not what I need"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
I need a VOIP phone service which gives me the ability to block my outgoing caller ID. (I currently have this with VoicePulse -- as well as my POTS line -- but I am looking for a second VOIP provider with a record for high quality connections that supports a BYOD ATA.) CallCentric implies that they offer the ability to block outgoing caller ID at their website where they say:
"Using the My Callcentric management page you can block sending your caller ID on outbound calls with just a few clicks."
What they don't tell you plainly is that if you do enable caller ID blocking, someone receiving a call from you doesn't see "Anonymous" or "Unknown" or "Out of Area" or "Private Caller". Instead, what shows up is "Glendora CA 1-626-771-0198". CallCentric's explanation of this was provided as follows:
"When blocking your caller ID the number we send out is (16267710198) because our system must pass a valid number to the PSTN (regular phone network). You will not be able to fully block the outbound caller ID as you are trying to."
OK, while I confess this is a deal killer for me, I had also observed in my trouble ticket that "Asterisk 67 is advertised to provide caller ID blocking on a per call basis if caller ID blocking is not enabled, but instead when I make a call after touching asterisk 67 the incoming caller ID shows my actual Callcentric number together with 'Private Caller'... Moreover, when caller ID blocking is enabled, it is advertised that touching asterisk 82 will deliver the actual number as the CID. Except when I touch asterisk 82 and then dial ahead, the incoming call still shows up as 626-771-0198 rather than my actual CallCentric number." Their tech support took a pass on this part of my question altogether.
(Please note that my ratings for "Call Quality" and "Call Reliability" are not meaningful given my very brief trial with this VOIP provider. If N/A had been an option, I would have selected N/A for each of these fields.)
Comments:
PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP
·Gizmo5
| Caller ID blocking It's unfortunate that CC did not meet your specific needs, but you appear to be right, CC and you do not make a good match.
My own experience has always been that when I press *67 the caller ID block always works reliably.
Yes, if you have a need to block the outbound CID, what should be displayed to the other party will be "Glendora CA 1-626-771-0198", as you said. That sounds to me like pretty good blocking.
You seem to prefer a system where what will be displayed to the other party is something like "Private Caller" or "Unknown". Actually, that scenario involves your own provider sending out your real phone #, but with a "privacy tag" attached. The PROBLEM is that the other party's phone company may not honor that "privacy tag" for one reason or another, and in THAT case the other party will see your name and phone #. That happens rather often.
CallCentric's system is better because it removes that problem.
AND everyone should keep in mind that NO call blocking will work with 800-type numbers.
--------------------------------------------
As you say, I think you and CC are not a good match. But please do let us know who meets your needs better to stay anonymous. I'd be quite curious.
PS: In this Voip field, "Asterisk" is a widely used technology. That's why when we want to say *67, we will SAY "*67" (star 67) rather than "Asterisk 67" as you did. | |
| | | |
4 edits | I am aware of the general policy that I have encountered with every other phone system I have used that, even with caller ID blocking enabled, my real number is in fact sent out as you describe to all numbers dialed with the privacy tag attached. Notwithstanding the privacy tag, I understand that my true caller ID is accessible to all 800 numbers dialed as well as certain other numbers. I am curious if you are saying that this in fact doesn't happen with CallCentric. If you are saying that CallCentric doesn't use the Privacy Tag but instead sends the Glendora CA number, that would seem to confirm your point that your privacy is in fact more protected, not less. (If, in on the other hand, CallCentric still sends out your real number on calls to 800 numbers and others, it begs the question of why they even bother to show the Glendora CA number rather than something like Anonymous or Unknown.)
There are a couple of (no doubt idiosyncratic) reasons why I prefer the phone company to send out my real number with a privacy tag attached that will make an incoming call from me show up as Anonymous or Unknown. First, I am looking to convince my wife to drop our one remaining POTS line (still our primary telephone line) and to replace it with a new VOIP provider (in addition to our backup VOIP service from VoicePulse whom I have used for about five years). My intent, if successful, is to run a four to six week test with a new VOIP provider (such as CallCentric) as our primary outgoing provider (with incoming calls to our POTS line all forwarded to that number as well). Since I don't want this test to be visible to the outside world and since our standing configuration has outgoing caller ID blocking enabled, showing either a mysterious Glendora CA number (or a temporary CallCentric number -- if the test were successful, I would end up porting over my POTS line to CallCentric) would be very confusing to our friends, especially my wife's older relations. Second, beyond the scope of the trial period, several of our friends use anonymous call rejection and we are invariably reminded of this when we forget to star 82 them (sorry about the "asterisk") on a call. My concern, quite bluntly, is that most of these people would simply not pick up a call coming from an unfamiliar number in Glendora CA and I wouldn't be reminded of the need to star 82 the call. | |
| | | PX EliezerPremium
join:2008-08-09
Hutt River
kudos:13 Reviews:
·callwithus
·voip.ms
·Optimum Voice
·Vitelity VOIP
·Gizmo5
1 edit | Re: Caller ID blocking Well, in my experience people (especially older people) are much more likely to pick up a call that says Glendora, CA, than to pick up a call that says "Private" or "Anonymous". Those latter calls will go to voicemail or machine.
Be that as it may.
This is a complex issue, also because multiple identities are involved such as ANI, CPN, and the caller ID. This is discussed here, in a very good (albeit somewhat dated) review: »www.oldskoolphreak.com/tfiles/vo···pani.txt
Regarding your need for secrecy during the trial period, I cannot grasp the reasoning behind it, nor can I purport to offer you any guarantees. I can only say that if you call the 1-800-444-4444 and also 1-800-437-7950 MCI test numbers from a CC line, and preface your call with *67 (star 67), the number that will be read back to you will indeed be the Glendora, CA number.
Another solution for your unique needs is that CC probably can arrange to have your current POTS number displayed as the outbound caller ID when you make calls from your CC line.
That is accomplished by opening a support ticket on CC. They will then have you use your POTS line to make a call to a particular number so that they can verify your POTS number. They then can arrange for the POTS number to be displayed as the outbound CID on the CC line, as I said.
A different approach would be to get a CallCentric DirtCheap number. These are available for 617 (Dorchester and East Boston) and cost $ 2.95 a month, unlimited inbound minutes, no setup fee. (You'll have the 911 fee but would have that anyway due to the outbound line). The advantage here is that you could then display THAT number as the outbound caller ID and of course people could call back on it.
(Do be aware that additional numbers cannot be ported in to a DirtCheap plan. That simply means that when you ported in your POTS number later on, you'd switch to one of the regular CC plans.)
Because you are currently with VoicePulse which has bi-directional flat-rate plans, it is important to emphasize that with CC (as with other PAYG providers) you have the freedom and the responsibility to choose your inbound plan and your outbound plan separately.
CallCentric is very versatile. While they may not be able to meet your very unusual specifications, they do a very fine job for most folks. | |
| | | |
1 edit | Re: Caller ID blocking Thanks very much... I appreciate the detail you have provided. I may come back to CallCentric after trying out some other providers. (The support ticket approach to changing the caller ID would solve half of my problem prior to porting my number over; porting my number over means shutting down my POTS line which I am not going to do until I am dead sure that the replacement VOIP service is highly reliable.)
I am not all that cost sensitive; I am however very quality sensitive. For two of the five years I have had VoicePulse, I used them almost every day in my consulting work. They were (and are) decent, but just unreliable enough that I wouldn't trust them to be my primary provider; I also know my wife-- whose standards are more rigid than mine-- wouldn't tolerate them as anything other than a back up provider. Finally, while I am not crazy about giving my number out to people I call (at least those people who lack the technology embedded in a program like TrapCall, which appears only to work for calls sent to cellphones), turning caller ID blocking off would be far preferable to confusing friends and acquaintances with a "new" number (the Glendora number) that has nothing to do with me. We have a lot of friends in their 60's and 70's who understand caller ID and anonymous call blocking who are also likely to be very confused by a Glendora CA number showing up on their caller ID display. This may be a generational thing but it's real! | |
|
| |
| next page (previous review)
Review by Momonishiki
member for 3.8 years, 55 visits, last login: 2.6 years ago
updated 2.6 years ago
- San Francisco,San Francisco,CA
- $38 per month
- (month by month)
- about 1 days
- "Logically arranged website; BYOD; unlimited international calling"
- "Instructions for configuring devices not comprehensive"
- "Astonished with improvement over POTS voice quality and features"
| Web-site:
Ease of Installation:
Call Quality:
Reliability:
Tech Support:
Value for money:
(ratings match consensus)
|
I'm new to VOIP in general and Callcentric specifically. However, I can say that in researching which VOIP service to try, Callcentric was the winner not only because of positive reviews I read from others but because they were one of the few VOIP providers who didn't have a website that is totally cheesy. What is it with VOIP providers who make their websites look like they should be selling fake jewelry on late night TV? More substantively, Callcentric has an unlimited international calling plan and they don't try to saddle you with their idea of the correct equipment to use. You get to buy whatever SIP phone you want.
When testing out the service I first used a cheap Grandstream adapter and my old analog phone. It worked perfectly, but the sound quality was noticeably lower than POTS. After getting my new Polycom IP phone working with Callcentric however, I was completely floored by how perfect the quality is. Much better than POTS and much better than the enterprise grade solution I have at work.
For the only real negative, I would say that the website instructions for configuring a Polycom phone were not comprehensive and required me to engage in several hours of trial and error and finally come to an intuitive solution to make it work. I succeeded in the end, but the missing steps from their tutorial could (and should) be easily remedied.
Perhaps I'll try to update this review once I have more user experience.
Update September 2010:
I've had a great service experience with Callcentric so far. There have been a couple of minor service interruptions. But, I wanted to note a particular instance of good response from Callcentric's support. I had a technical issue relating to a new router and opened a trouble ticket at nearly 1am and then went to sleep. When I woke up and checked my email at around 5:30am, I never expected any response from Callcentric so quickly, but there it was. They suggested some port configurations which solved my problem, so I'm obviously pleased with that sort of responsiveness!
Comments:
|
|
·
·
.)